From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon Apr 19 20:57:39 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA24272;
	Mon, 19 Apr 1999 20:57:39 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 20:57:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904200057.UAA24272@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #51

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 19 Apr 99 20:57:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 51

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Discontinues Easy Reach 500 Number Service (Jeffrey J. Carpenter)
    Re: 500 Update ... Bad News (Matt Cline)
    Re: 500 Update ... Bad News (William Hammack)
    Telecom Update (Canada) #179, April 19, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement)
    The Story of Antonio Meucci (Paul Wills)
    Re: Who Invented the Telephone? (Andrew Emmerson)
    Re: Who Invented the Telephone? (Sanjay Parekh)
    NPR "Quest for Sound" (Will Roberts)
    Another Privacy Hole in IE 5.0? (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 19 Apr 1999 18:11:12 -0400
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <jjc@pobox.com>
Subject: AT&T Discontinues Easy Reach 500 Number Service


AT&T has discontinued its Easy Reach 500 number service.  This service
allowed you to obtain a non-geographic phone number in the 500 area
code that served as a virtual phone number.  The FCC has classified
500 service as "PCS" (another overloaded use of that term).

A number of different service plans were available from simply
forwarding calls made to your 500 number to the number you want your
calls to go to (remotely programmable) to call sequencing (allowing
calls to your 500 number to cycle through a list of phone numbers to
ring to try to find you, such as ringing home, then office, then
cellular).  There were also provisions to allow you to give a PIN to
callers, allowing you to pick up the cost of the call rather than the
callers.

Other carriers offer similar services such as MCI:

http://www.mci.com/aboutus/products/glossary/home/textp500.shtml

The number of customers of AT&T's Easy Reach 500 service has declined
and they have decided that the cost to run the service exceeds the
revenues.  Existing customers are currently grandfathered and no new
customers are being accepted.

AT&T really did not promote this service very well, and did not
integrate the service with their other products, as is evidenced by
the fact that AT&T wireless phones have never been able to direct dial
AT&T Easy Reach 500 numbers (they claimed 5 years ago that they were
working on that problem, however repeated phone calls have yielded no
solution to this problem).

The original announcement of the AT&T Easy Reach 500 service sent to me
in 1994 had the following Q&A:

     Q: If I ever change my home number, will I have to change my
     500 number, too?

     A: No. Your 500 number will stay the same no matter how many
     times you move.

I was advised that if you move now, you will not be able to transfer
your 500 numbers to your new location.  This obviously breaks AT&T's
original promise and defeats one of the largest attractions of this
service: you can use one phone number regardless how how often you move
or are affected by area code splits.

Existing customers are being advised by AT&T to examine alternatives
including wireless phones and toll-free numbers.  None of the
alternatives offer all the advantages of the 500 service.

The service might be completely phased out as early as the end of the
year.


Jeffrey J. Carpenter

Phone: +1 500 488-4800 (while it lasts!)
Fax: +1 500 488-4802
Email: jjc@pobox.com
Web: http://pobox.com/~jjc/

------------------------------

From: Matt Cline <mc86@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: 500 Update ... Bad News
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:02:30 -0400


Gang -

I called MCI, out of curiosity about their services, and guess what:
MCI has cancelled their service as well.  When I asked for details the
rep told me: "those numbers were routed through an facility in Sacramento.  
We don't even have an office there anymore.  The service was grandfathered 
for existing clients."  So much for competition working to our advantage.


Matt

------------------------------

From: William Hammack <hammack@netbox.com>
Reply-To: hammack@netbox.com
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:14:15 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: RE: 500 update...bad news


I'm not sure competition was the problem. Speaking as the former owner
of THREE 500 numbers the problem was that they didn't work too
well. It was not possible (this is two years ago) for someone from a
University to dial a 500 number - this was also true certain
instutions and many companies.  (The only reason CMU people are able
to dial them is that I called CMU telecommunications and asked them to
change the software to all 500 numbers!)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 12:00:42 -0400
From: Angus TeleManagement <angus@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #179, April 19, 1999


************************************************************
*                                                          *
*                      TELECOM UPDATE                      *
*    Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin    *
*                  http://www.angustel.ca                  *
*               Number 179:   April 19, 1999               *
*                                                          *
*    Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by     *
*             generous financial support from:             *
*                                                          *
*  AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/   *
*  Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/         *
*  Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/       *
*  MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/     *
*  Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ *
*  Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/       *
*  TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/    *
*                                                          *
************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE: 

** Microcell Signs Third Wholesale Agreement
** Optel to Launch as CLEC
** Nortel, Cisco, Ericsson Announce Acquisitions
      Nortel
      Cisco
      Ericsson
** New CEO at Rogers Cable ... Again
** Fido Offers Two-Way E-Mail 
** Clearnet, Microcell Announce Subscriber Results
      Clearnet
      Microcell
** Netcom Lowers LD, Bundled Internet Rates
** CRTC Denies Bell Fiber Swap 
** Shaw@Home Reaches 100,000-Subscriber Mark
** Next Stage in Ledcor-Vancouver Dispute
** WIC Buys Out RegionalVision Minority Shareholders
** Profits Up at JDS Fitel
** CRTC Opens Regina Office
** MT&T Late Payment Charge Denied
** Bell Nexxia, Teleglobe Win Embassy Contract
** Acadia U Wins Smithsonian Award
** AirIQ Provides Fleet Inventory 
** CWTA Plans Wireless Safety Web Site
** MT&T to Provide NS Public Safety Net
** Telecom Seminars

============================================================

MICROCELL SIGNS THIRD WHOLESALE AGREEMENT: Microcell Connexions, which
operates the wireless network used for Fido service, has signed a
wholesale agreement with Navitar Communications Inc. (See Telecom
Update #139, 140)

** Navitar, a registered Competitive Local Exchange Carrier, 
   says it will roll out a full suite of telecommunications 
   services in major metropolitan areas across Canada later 
   this year.

OPTEL TO LAUNCH AS CLEC: Optel Communications, which has been a
Centrex and long distance reseller since 1995, says it will begin
operations as a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier in Toronto in June,
and in Montreal by the end of the summer, using Nortel DMS-500
switches. The company recently raised $30 Million in new equity
investment.

NORTEL, CISCO, ERICSSON ANNOUNCE ACQUISITIONS: 

** Nortel Networks is paying up to US$340 Million for 
   California-based Shasta Networks, which is developing 
   subscriber management systems for IP networks.

** Cisco Systems will buy Massachusetts-based GeoTel 
   Communications, which makes software for distributed call 
   centers, for US$2 Billion.

** Ericsson is buying Torrent Networking Technologies, which 
   makes routers, and TouchWave Inc., which makes IP-based 
   PBXs, for a total of about US$500 Million.

NEW CEO AT ROGERS CABLE ... AGAIN: Rogers Cablesystems has a new
President and CEO: John Tory, previously President and CEO of Rogers
Media and Maclean Hunter. He succeeds Trey Smith, who was appointed
last October. (See Telecom Update #156)

FIDO OFFERS TWO-WAY E-MAIL: Microcell Solutions has introduced Fido
E-Mail, a two-way e-mail service; and Performance Voice Messaging,
which sends a reply at the touch of a single key.  The new features
are packaged along with Call Display and Text Messaging in FidoPro at
$8/month.

CLEARNET, MICROCELL ANNOUNCE SUBSCRIBER RESULTS:

** Clearnet Communications recorded 38,457 net additions in 
   the first quarter (46,920 last year), bringing its digital 
   subscriber total to 346,930. Additions to Mike business 
   service rose 28% over last year; additions to PCS service 
   declined 35%. 

** Microcell Solutions added 62,169 subscribers in this 
   period (compared to 31,500 last year), bringing its 
   subscriber base to 344,343. Among new subscribers, 72% 
   are on the prepaid plan.

NETCOM LOWERS LD, BUNDLED INTERNET RATES: Customers of Netcom Canada's
Internet service who also use it for long distance will now receive
Internet access for $21.95/month (regular rate, $26.95). Netcom has
also reduced its U.S. and overseas rates. (See Telecom Update #175)

CRTC DENIES BELL FIBER SWAP: In Telecom Order 99-346, the CRTC rejects
an agreement under which Bell Canada and Bell Mobility would swap
optical cable facilities in parts of Ontario. The commission says Bell
must charge tariffed rates for its fiber.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0346.htm

SHAW@HOME REACHES 100,000-SUBSCRIBER MARK: Shaw Cablesystems says it
now has 100,000 subscribers for its Shaw@Home high-speed Internet
service.

** Shaw reports net income of $30.7 Million for the quarter 
   ended February 28, compared to a loss of $2.4 Million 
   last year. Revenues rose 19% to $216 Million

NEXT STAGE IN LEDCOR-VANCOUVER DISPUTE: The CRTC says it will deal
concurrently with applications by Ledcor and the City of Vancouver to
resolve their right-of-way dispute (see Telecom Update #176, 177). The
City is to file its reply to Ledcor, as well as its own application,
by May 18. The Commission will issue a Public Notice on these
questions later on.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8690/L8-01.htm

WIC BUYS OUT REGIONALVISION MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS: WIC Western
International Communications has bought the 49% stake of minority
shareholders in RegionalVision, a licensed LMCS provider. The other
51% is owned by Cancom, a WIC affiliate. WIC, which also owns LMCS
licensee WIC Connexus, says the minority shareholders were influenced
by delays in LMCS equipment availability.

PROFITS UP AT JDS FITEL: JDS Fitel has announced profits for the
quarter ended February 28 of $26.8 Million, up 25% over the previous
quarter and 119% over last year. Revenues of $123 Million were 25%
higher than the previous quarter.

CRTC OPENS REGINA OFFICE: The CRTC has opened a new documentation
center in Regina at 2125 11th Avenue, Suite 103. Call 306-780-3422.

MT&T LATE PAYMENT CHANGE DENIED: CRTC Telecom Order 99-353 denies as
excessive an MT&T request to increase the late-payment charge on
accounts exceeding $25 from $1.25 to $2.50.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0353.htm

BELL NEXXIA, TELEGLOBE WIN EMBASSY CONTRACT: Bell Nexxia and Teleglobe
have won a three-year, $40-Million contract for a global network
linking Canada's 144 diplomatic missions.

ACADIA U WINS SMITHSONIAN AWARD: Acadia University in Wolfville NS,
has won a Smithsonian Institute award for IT innovation for its
student computer access program.

AIRIQ PROVIDES FLEET INVENTORY: AirIQ, a Pickering, Ontario, provider
of vehicle tracking systems, now offers Automated Fleet Inventory,
which enables managers to automatically locate and count their
vehicles.

CWTA PLANS WIRELESS SAFETY WEB SITE: The Canadian Wireless
Telecommunications Association plans this summer to create an Internet
site, the Wireless Information Resource Centre, to take up
wireless-related health and safety issues.

MT&T TO PROVIDE NS PUBLIC SAFETY NET: MT&T has a contract to supply
the Nova Scotia government with a 68-site wireless network for public
safety and government organizations, using Motorola equipment.

TELECOM SEMINARS: Participants have lauded Angus Dortmans' private
seminars as "enlightening," "meaningful," "well- organized," and
"fun." Workshops are available on many topics of telecom management,
including:

** Fundamentals of Successful End-User Telecom Management

** Recent Telecom Regulatory Decisions and Key Industry 
   Trends

** How to Develop and Present Telecom Business Cases to     
   Senior Management

** Getting More for Less: How to Improve Telecom Supplier     
   Relations

** Cutting Costs Without Cutting Service 

For further information on Angus Dortmans seminars, go to
http://www.angustel.ca/angdort/adseminar.html. To discuss your
workshop needs, call Henry Dortmans at 1-800-263-4415, ext 300.

============================================================

HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE

E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca

FAX:    905-686-2655

MAIL:   TELECOM UPDATE 
        Angus TeleManagement Group
        8 Old Kingston Road
        Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7

===========================================================

HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE)

TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There 
are two formats available:

1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World 
   Wide Web on the first business day of the week at 
   http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html

2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of 
   charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to 
   majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should contain only the two words: subscribe update

   To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail 
   message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address]

===========================================================

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus 
TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further 
information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, 
please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 
225.

The information and data included has been obtained from 
sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus 
TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations 
whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. 
Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available 
information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on 
the subject matter is required, the services of a competent 
professional should be obtained.
============================================================

------------------------------

From: Paul Wills <pdwills@voicenet.com>
Subject: The Story of Antonio Meucci
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 12:08:59 -0400


Paul Pacini <PPACINI@email.msn.com> wrote:

> I read once that a man by te name of Antonio Meucci, who was born in
> Florence, Italy and moved to the USA had invented a telephone in
> 1857. Do you know anything about this claim?

A brief summary of Antonio Meucci (1808-1889):

The problem with any invention is that, although one person usually
gets the credit for it, and usually quite deservingly, there usually
others who are also close to the idea but either never got it to work
or just didn't have the right "promoter."

Phillip Reis (1834-1874) a German certainly was one of the first
people to come "close" to inventing the telephone.  His mistake was
trying to reduce the sound wave form to a series of "make and break"
signals that would carry pitch but not sound quality.  (Actually,
there are those who say that he may, indeed, have developed a variable
resistance point contact "microphone" by intent as Berliner did many
years later but I guess we'll never know.)

Elisha Gray (1835-1901) was very close to exploiting the undulating
currents of telephonic speech but his work on the more commercially
desirable harmonic telegraph kept him from developing a telephone
instrument.  (Bell, was also working on a harmonic telegraph but
fortuitiously got side tracked by the telephone.)  Ironically, Gray
and Enos Barton were the founders of the firm of Gray and Barton which
was eventually renamed Western Electric.  He didn't do too badly for
himself, telephone or not, and went on to earn huge sums of money for
his patents including the harmonic telegraph and teleautograph.  (When
Western Electric spun off it's non-telephone electrical products
division in 1927 they combined the names of the founders to form the
name "Graybar" which is still around today.)

One of the problems with the early telephone business is that if you
were not associated with the Bell interests, there was no way that you
could legally build and sell any device that used any of the
principles that Bell had patented.  This did not stop people from
trying to bypass the Bell patents and get into the telephone business.
Of course, Bell would then take the infringers to court.

The defence used by these "infringers" was to attempt to prove that
someone else had developed a working electric telephone before Bell
had patented it.  In other words, if you wanted to break into the
telephone business without contracting with "Ma Bell" - who was
probably just a maiden then - you would look for someone who had
claimed that they had already developed a telephone, hire them, and go
to court.

Two of the more well known persons were Daniel Drawbaugh (1827-1911)
from Eberly's Mills, Pennsylvania.  Drawbaugh was certainly an
accomplished mechanic and had a fair number of patents to his name.
He had claimed to have developed a variable resistance carbon
transmitter in 1867.  Unfortunately for him, he had few records and no
written proof that he had done it.  The court case was quite involved
and even required a railroad ticket agent to dig through his records
to see when they had received a pump that was installed about the time
that Drawbaugh was showing off his "talking machine" to some
locals... you get the idea.

Antonio Meucci was another person who had claimed to transmit speech
electrically.  He attended the School of Mechanics and Drawing of
Florence and worked in the mechanical departments of theatres in
different cities in Italy.  He eventually moved to Havana, Cuba and
then to New York in 1850.  He tinkered with electroplating and, thus,
was familiar with electricity.  (He roomed with Giuseppe Garibaldi on
Statin Island and ran a candle factory as a way of employing Italian
refugees.)

Meucci claimed to have developed a working telephone around 1870.  His
drawings show that it probably worked electro-magnetically as compared
to Drawbaughs variable resistance type.  He actually went as far as
filing a caveat in 1871 but never persued a patent.  Unfortunately, in
the Summer of 1871, Meucci suffered near fatal injury due to a boiler
explosion on the Staten Island Ferry. Confined to bed with little hope
for his recovery, his wife sold all of his equipment for scrap and,
thus, any proof of his invention was lost forever.

Does any of this downplay what Bell had done?  IMHO, I think not.
Even if everyone runs a good race there is usually only one winner.
Perhaps Bell's credit is as dependent on the people who he had around
him as his own skill.  Certainly, were it not for Gardner Hubbard,
Bell probably would have lost the rights to his invention and gone
back to teaching the deaf.  (The lesson to be learned is to always
seek out a good father-in-law!)

Interesting stuff!

To quote Elisha Gray, "The history of the telephone will never be
fully written.  It is partly hidden away in 20 or 30 thousand pages of
testimony and partly lying on the hearts oand consciences of a few
whose lips are Sealed, - Some in death and others by a golden clasp
whose grip is even tighter."

Several Books on the Subject:

Schiavo, Giovanni E., "Antonio Meucci, Inventor of the Telephone,"  New
York, The Vigo Press, 1958

Harder, Warren J., "Daniel Drawbaugh, The Edison of the Cumberland Valley,"
Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1960

Thompson, Silvanus P. "Phillipp Reis: Inventor of the Telephone,"  London,
E. &F. N. Spon, 1883

Current Books:

Coe, Lewis. "The Telephone and its Several Inventors," Jefferson, NC,
McFarland & Company, 1995

Adams, Stephen B. and Butler, Orville R. "Manufacturing the Future - A
History of Western Electric," Cambridge, The Cambridge University Press,
1999  (A nice tribute to Elisha Gray)

------------------------------

From: midshires@cix.co.uk (Andrew Emmerson)
Subject: Re: Who Invented the Telephone?
Date: 18 Apr 1999 09:46:59 GMT
Organization: CIX - Compulink Information eXchange
Reply-To: midshires@cix.co.uk


A good book to examine is WHO INVENTED THE TELEPHONE? by William Aitken
(Blackie & Son, 1939), which in nearly 200 closely printed pages details
the exploits of several dozen people who independently 'invented' the
telephone. Meucci, it says, started his work in 1849 and the drawings
given show a telephone functionally very similar to what we would
recognise today. But as you read the book and examine the diagrams, you
will see that many, many people came up with the basic principle of the
electromagnetic receiver (and hence transmitter).

To cite Bell as the sole inventor of the telephone is as stupid as
crediting Elvis Presley with inventing rock and roll, or Marconi for
radio, or Baird for television. We know that the basic principles of the
transistor were published in the late 1920s, then independently
rediscovered in the 1940s, and so it goes with so many other 'inventions'.

All credit to Meucci -- and to Reiss, Bourseuil, Gray and all the other
inventors of the telephone!


Andy Emmerson

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 13:16:06 -0400
From: Sanjay Parekh <firstname.lastname@arris-i.com>
Subject: Re: Who Invented the Telephone?


> I somehow remember the name 'Meucci' as a person who did make some 
> improvements in *telegraphy* around the late-middle of the 19th 
> century.  Any reader comments?    PAT]

        And as a random side note ... Michael Corleone (Al Pacino)
received the Antonio Meucci award from the American Italian
something-or-other group in Godfather III.  Michael also asks who
Meucci was in the movie.  Thats how I knew who he was.  I know, I
know.  It's sad that I've learned things like this from the movies.
Oh well ...


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|              Sanjay Parekh              |
|   <firstname>.<lastname>@arris-i.com    |
|             Systems Engineer            |
|          Acceleration Services          |
|            Arris Interactive            |
|               Atlanta, GA               |
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:24:56 -0400
From: Will Roberts <oldbear@arctos.com>
Subject: NPR "Quest for Sound"


Pat:

Yesterday afternoon (4/16) I heard National Public Radio's "All Things
Considered" broadcast its latest "Quest for Sound" feature which
consisted of many fascinating broadcast clips from the AT&T corporate
archivist: corporate image advertising of the 1930s and 1940s which
portrayed the AT&T monopoly in mythic proportions and was instrumental
in maintaining favorable public and legislative sentiment toward "Ma
Bell."

("Quest for Sound" is a project of National Public Radio to get its
listeners to send in their home recordings or other "lost" archival
material of the last one hundred years to be shaped into stories that
capture the rituals and sounds of everyday life.)

When I checked this morning, the AT&T program was not yet available 
on the NPR web site, but it should be there shortly for those 
who may be interested:

  http://www.npr.org/programs/lnfsound/onair

Among the "Quest for Sound" features which are currently available 
on the site is:

 March 19, 1999 - Mr. Watson, Come Here, I Want You! 
 ---------------------------------------------------
 In this week's feature "Lost and Found Sound" we'll hear the 
 voice of Thomas A. Watson, Alexander Graham Bell's assistant, 
 who received the first telephone call.  This sound came to us 
 from our quest for sound line, from the grandson of Watson in 
 Alabama. We hear in Watson's own words, the events surrounding 
 that first phone call. 

I suspect that many Telecom Digest readers will find these recordings 
as fascinating as I do.

Also there is a program which is "an exploration of the origin of the 
use of the word 'Hello' as a telephone greeting):

   http://www.npr.org/programs/lnfsound/onair/archive.html

Here is the description of the AT&T program:

   Remember the tender warm embrace of Ma Bell?  Up until the
   American Telephone and Telegraph's sanctioned monopoly was 
   shattered in 1984, there was really only one Telephone Company
   in the United States.  It's remnants include a grand archive 
   in Warren, New Jersey: the AT&T Archives.  NPR's Art Silverman, 
   the Lost & Found Sound coordinating producer, visited the site 
   and came away with dozens of soundtracks to the company's 
   in-house and public movies and radio shows.  His host was 
   archivist Sheldon Hochheiser, who helped shed light on what 
   motivated Ma Bell to pat herself on the back so often and so well. 


Regards,

Will Roberts
The Old Bear

------------------------------

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.COM>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.COM>
Subject: Another Privacy Hole in IE 5.0?
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:37:58 -0400


by Chris Oakes
3:00 a.m.  16.Apr.99.PDT

An obscure feature in Microsoft's Internet Explorer 5.0 Web browser
informs Web sites when users bookmark their pages.

The feature was discovered during an audit of Wired Digital server
logs by software development manager Kevin Cooke and confirmed
Thursday by Wired News.

A Microsoft spokesperson said that the company is investigating the issue.

http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/19160.html

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #51
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue Apr 20 04:06:26 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA08962;
	Tue, 20 Apr 1999 04:06:26 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 04:06:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904200806.EAA08962@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #52

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 20 Apr 99 04:06:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 52

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Should MIT Unplug Faceless Emailer? (Monty Solomon)
    Good Phone System For Answering Service Business (mft)
    UCLA Summer Short Courses in Communications Engineering (Bill Goodin)
    New Service Providers (Joseph Podemski)
    Book Review: Digital Capitalism, Schiller (Jud Wolfskill)
    Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC (Bill Levant)
    Re: Now Free Computers From an ISP! (John Mayson)
    European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented, if so (K Steinbrenner)
    Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines (Richard Taylor)
    Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines (Philip Decker)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Brett Frankenberger)
    Re: Hyprocisy - Telecommunications During Wars (Justa Lurker)
    Re: Hyprocisy - Telecommunications During Wars (Tom Betz)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 19 Apr 1999 22:06:33 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.COM>
Subject: Should MIT Unplug Faceless Emailer?


By Margaret Kane, ZDNN
April 13, 1999 4:50 PM PT

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. -- It's called the "re-mailer," a computer server
that allows you to send anonymous e-mail messages. And the big
question on Tuesday was whether the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology should pull the plug on it.

The question: Will its faceless missives allow even amateur crooks to
plot, steal and hide? Or would they serve to protect whistle-blowers
and human rights workers?

And so it was along that divide that re-mailer became the focus of a
spirited debate among government and technology experts participating
in a panel as part of the 35th anniversary celebration of the school's
pioneering Computer Science Lab.

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2241595,00.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor: Last week did mark the 35th anniversary of
what we call lcs.mit.edu, and heartiest congratulations are due 
the members of the staff there, especially those who have worked
with me over the years in providing the resources for this Digest and
the archives. The archives has always been at MIT except for a short
stay at Boston University in the middle 1980's, even though the Digest
itself was produced at various locations over the years including 
Boston University, Northwestern University, and, I believe for a while
at Stanford in the early 1980's. I've been back at lcs.mit.edu since
around 1994 or so, and in a sense sorry I did not just stay here
all along. The connectivity is superb, the technical assistance is
great, although I try not to bother the staff at LCS any more than
absolutely necessary. 

In some correspondence with Mary Ann Ladd, a sysadmin at LCS regarding
the 35th anniversary, I asked her if she ever wondered what things
would have been like if back in 1964 we had known then what we know
today regards networking, the internet, etc. Wow!  I know how much I
have always wished there were such things as computers when I was in
high school ... what a blast we would have had. And considering what
the past 35 years have brought us, what are we to expect in the next
35 years? Imagine life with computers even in 2010, let alone 2034. It
took years to develop computers that could be used on a telephone line
at a speed of 110 or 300 baud. My first BBS ran at 110/300. Then
someone developed a hardware mod for the Apple modem card which
allowed it to 'race along' at 450 baud. After a couple years, 1200
baud modems were available but quite expensive. Then 2400, 9600
 ... and today we have a closet full of old 9600 baud modems we cannot
give away. The jump from 300 to 9600 was only a few years, and now in
the past four or five years 28K and 56K are 'acceptable'. I will bet
you that by 2034 everyone -- and I mean everyone, 95 percent of the
population or more -- will be connected via cable or LAN or something
like that. Speeds of 115K will be the norm. Most people will simply
talk to the computer and listen to it; there will be little typing. 

People today with massive amounts of technical knowledge regards
computers will maybe know ten percent of what there is to know in
total. That's how I am with telecom now; years ago I *knew* the phone
company inside and out. Today I can barely keep up with it and know
very little about whole segments of the industry.

Perhaps I am better off having grown up as a child with no such thing
as a computer. Now I can really see and comprehend what it was that
I missed and appreciate it even more, not just taking it for granted.
And for the telecom object lesson out of all this, someone said to me
the other day, "NOW, can you appreciate the thrill that must have
surged through the souls of people like Alex Bell, Ted Vail and others
at the 35th anniversary celebration of AT&T back in the early years of
this century we are now departing? When *they* stopped to ponder the
question of where things were leading ... "  Yeah ... 

The Telephone Pioneers began around 1900 when a couple dozen of the
people who had been with AT&T since Day One decided they should have a
club for themselves. In later years as all the old people died, the
rule was changed to say that members had to have at least twenty years
of employment with Bell. I wonder if the time has come for an 'Internet
Pioneers' organization? If enough people send me some sort of valid
evidence that they were active on the net at least 15-20 years ago and
express an interest in an association among themselves and a web page
or mailing list, perhaps I will start such a thing. It might be purely
social,  or perhaps a mix of social and service to the net and the
newcomers who are arriving -- not quite at the rate people are fleeing
from Kosovo -- but pretty darn fast, to the net community daily. 

I got 'started in computers' -- in a personal way at home, having used
them since 1968 where I was employed -- in 1979, when Daniel Kritchevsky
brought me an Ohio Scientific C-1-P and then sat there patiently with
me day after day as I learned how to use it; how to find where the
'any' key I was supposed to press was located. The first night I had
it, he taught me how to program a simple print statement "I am a
computer programmer". And he said, having made the computer print that
statement out over and over on the screen, I *was* a programmer now,
" .. and don't you forget it .." Then someone else told me about Usenet
and Jon Solomon taught me how internet mailing lists operate. Before
that, I knew zilch about it. 

Shortly after that I got Bill Pfieffer started; he knew less about
computers when he started than I did a few years before that. And in
the time this Digest has been around, several mailing lists and newsgroups 
have started as offshoots from here including Computer Underground Digest,
Computer Privacy Digest, alt.dcom.telecom and comp.dcom.telecom.tech. 
Daniel Kritchevsky, if you are somewhere reading this, thank you!

A good way to show your gratitude for work that has been done at places 
like MIT is getting a neighbor or friend or family member 'started in 
computers'. Make a web page for someone; teach them how to use an online
service; sell or give them an older unused but still workable computer.
Share with people the *good news* of what's happened with computers in
the past 35 years; how we have no earthly idea where things will be at
35 years from now, but that *you* want *them* to be in on it. You never
know when your efforts might result in a new mailing list or newsgroup
twenty years from now; or maybe the person will discover and develop
a new technology to benefit the net. Don't worry if you do not have a
computer science degree; most of us don't. To LCS/MIT I say thanks for
all you have accomplished. To the rest of you I ask, who have you
gotten started in computers recently?  Thanks for reading!     PAT]

------------------------------

From: mft <tsaim@mft.com>
Subject: Good Phone System For Answering Service Business
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:34:40 -0400
Organization: Posted via RemarQ Communities, Inc.


I am looking for starting up a business as "Answering Service".
I need a good phone system that support following features.

(1) 2 DID trunk lines (I will order 200 telephone number w/ the
    2 DID lines from B.A.)

(2) An operator PC colsole w/ POPUP screen features that will show
    the (a) the phone number that the caller dialed (not caller ID number)
    (b) an associated TEXT message that will show below the dialed
    number , so the operator can read back the text message to the
    caller. Example:  if caller dialed "777-1234"  the operator will read
    back "Thank you for calling Sunrise Export". If caller dialed
    "888-1234" operator will read back "Thank you for calling WinWin
    Telcom".

Please do not hesitate to advise this poor guy.


Thanks,

Meng   tsaim@mft.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good luck with your new business. With
all the technological advances in telecom over the past twenty years
or so, manual answering services are almost entirely gone. They used
to be all over the place years ago, and there is still a limited need
for personalized handling by a human being of certain types of calls
such as to physicians, counselors, attornies, etc. But I remember
very well the owner of Annex Telephone Answering Service in Chicago,
where I had an account for several years in the 1960's complaining to
me one day that 'those new things on the market now, the automatic
machines which answer the phone and tape record the message are just
about to put me out of business.' Indeed, I quit his service myself
when I bought my first answering machine, a big clunky thing with an
acoustic coupler for the reciever in 1967. And people would complain
about how much they hated calling someone and 'getting their answering
machine', the way people complain about voicemail now. Now you wish
you could get an answering machine for a change instead of a demand to
press one key after another.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Bill Goodin <bgoodin@unex.ucla.edu>
Subject: UCLA Summer Short Courses in Communications Engineering
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 18:12:11 -0700


This summer, UCLA Extension will present the following communications 
engineering short courses on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles.

July 7-9, 1999, "Wavelength-Division Multiplexed Systems and 
Technologies".  The instructor is Alan E. Willner, PhD, Professor, 
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, 
$1195.

July 12-15, 1999, "Kalman Filtering".  The instructor is Joseph L. LeMay, 
PhD, President, St. Joseph Sciences, $1495.

July 12-16, 1999, "Digital Signal Processing: Theory, Algorithms, and 
Implementation".  The instructor is Robert W. Stewart, PhD, Faculty 
Member, Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University 
of Strathclyde, United Kingdom, $1695.

July 21-23, 1999, "Satellite Communications Design and Engineering".  
The instructors are Bruce R. Elbert, MSEE, MBA, Senior Vice President, 
Business Development, Hughes Space and Communications 
International; and Robert C. Perpall, MSEE, Satellite Engineer, Society 
Europenne des Satellites (SES), Luxembourg, $1195.

August 11-13, 1999, "Embedded and Real-time Systems".  The 
instructors are Miodrag Potkonjak, PhD, Associate Professor, 
Computer Science Department, UCLA; and Mani Srivastava, PhD, 
Associate Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA, $1195.

September 21-24, 1999, "Automatic Speech Recognition: Fundamentals 
and Applications".  The instructors are Abeer Alwan, PhD, Associate 
Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA; and Ananth 
Sankar, PhD, Senior Research Engineer, Speech Technology and 
Research (STAR) Laboratory, SRI International, $1495.

September 22-24, 1999, "Advanced Digital Communications: The 
Search for Efficient Signaling Methods".  The instructor is Bernard 
Sklar, PhD, President, Communications Engineering Services, $1195.

September 29-October 1, 1999, "Digital Signal Processing Applications 
in Wireless Communications".  The instructors are Zoran I. Kostic, PhD, 
Member of Technical Staff, AT&T Bell Laboratories; and Babak 
Daneshrad, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Electrical 
Engineering, UCLA, $1195.

For additional information and complete course descriptions, please
visit our web page, http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/,

or contact Marcus Hennessy at:
(310) 825-1047
(310) 206-2815  fax
mhenness@unex.ucla.edu

All of these courses may also be presented on-site at company
locations.

------------------------------

From: Joseph Podemski <josephp@imcs.co.il>
Subject: New Service Providers
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 16:32:04 +0300
Organization: IMCS


To whom it may concern,

Please direct me to a site or where I can find a survey of new service
providers.- Contact managers- Telephone & Fax Numbers & e-mail related
to billing issues. Thank You.


I remain,

Joseph Podemski
International Sales Manager
IMCS-International Management & Control Systems
Tel:	972-3-624-0737
Fax:	972-3-624-0739
Cell:	972-50-408-921
E-mail:	Josephp@imcs.co.il
Additional Information at: WWW.IMCS.Co.il

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 17:34:13 -0400
From: Jud Wolfskill <wolfskil@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Book Review: Digital Capitalism, Dan Schiller


The following is a book which readers of this list might find of
interest.  For more information please visit
http://mitpress.mit.edu/promotions/books/SCHBHS99


Digital Capitalism
Networking the Global Market System
Dan Schiller

Cyberspace not only exemplifies but spearheads the greater political
economy of which it has become such a critical part. The networks that
comprise cyberspace were originally created at the behest of
government agencies, military contractors, and allied educational
institutions.  However, over the past generation or so, a growing
number of these networks began to serve primarily corporate
users. Under the sway of an expansionary market logic, the Internet
began a political-economic transition toward what Dan Schiller calls
"digital capitalism."

Schiller traces these metamorphoses through three critically important
and interlinked realms. Parts I and II deal with the overwhelmingly
"neoliberal" or market-driven policies that influence and govern the
telecommunications system and their empowerment of transnational
corporations while at the same time exacerbating exisiting social
inequalities. Part III shows how cyberspace offers uniquely supple
instruments with which to cultivate and deepen consumerism on a
transnational scale, especially among privileged groups. Finally, Part
IV shows how digital capitalism has already overtaken education,
placing it at the mercy of a proprietary market logic.


Dan Schiller is Professor of Communication at the University of
California, San Diego.

6 x 9, 320 pp., cloth ISBN 0-262-19417-1


Jud Wolfskill                       
Associate Publicist                 Phone:  (617) 253-2079
MIT Press                           Fax:    (617) 253-1709
Five Cambridge Center               E-mail: wolfskil@mit.edu 
Cambridge, MA  02142-1493           http://mitpress.mit.edu                

------------------------------

From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:19:52 EDT
Subject: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC
Reply-To: Wlevant@aol.com


Calls from my home (610)275-xxxx to AOL's new local numbers
(610)234-0528 and (610)233-0511 are now being billed on my IXC's
invoice as INTRA-LATA calls !

(610)275 and (610)233 have the same "name-place", and are therefore
presumptively local calls; (610)234 is one town over, in a name-place
that is ALSO local from here.

(610)233 and (610)234 are provided by CLEC's.

I assume that someone at Bell screwed up the routing tables in the
(610)275 CO switch.

Again.

Interestingly, it only seems to happen if I dial as 10 digits (which
will be REQUIRED here in about three months).

Anyone else having this problem lately?  When I called WorldCom to
have the calls taken off the bill, they talked to me like I was nutz.


Bill

------------------------------

From: John Mayson <jmayson@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Now Free Computers From an ISP!
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 15:56:31 -0500
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises


On Thu, 1 Apr 1999 jkdejanews@my-dejanews.com wrote:

> Hi all there,

> I came across something really interesting after I read a news item in
> one of the mailing lists. I visited www.gobi.com. These people offer
> free computer systems for subscribing their Internet services. An
> interesting marketing strategy. Comments?

My company is partnered with Gobi and I have of course heard a lot
about this service.  They offer a fully blown multi-media PC, but it
runs a 300 MHz low-end Pentium (I forget the name of it ... Celestron?).

You have to sign up for 36 months of service which is around $30/month
if I remember correctly.

On the surface it looks like a good deal, especially to a first time
computer buyer.


John Mayson <jmayson@mindspring.com>

------------------------------

From: Kent K. Steinbrenner <kks@csi.com>
Subject: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented, if So?
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 02:28:42 GMT
Organization: @Home Network


A few days ago on the U.S. Metric Assn.'s listserv, a list member
asked the following:

> "While, looking up some information on telephone systems worldwide, I came
> across a website on country codes.  I know that each country has its own
> telephone code for calls originating outside to reach inside.  What was
> interesting, was that the website noted that Europe was (is) suppose to get
> a region wide code beginning in 1999.  The code number is +388."

He then wanted to know more about this code. A few European members of
the listserv didn't know about the code, either, and wanted to know
more. I recalled seeing something on this newsgroup last year or the
year before about +388, but don't recall when it was (otherwise I'd
have gone searching through the archives).

Has anyone heard more about +388? Would usage of it require national
renumbering of number plans (of course, Italy, France and Spain have
been doing that recently, if memory serves me correctly)?

Someone else on that listserv wondered why the EU would get a
three-digit number; after all, they reasoned, it ought to get a
one-digit number like the other "important" areas of the world (+1 for
NANPA, +7 for ex-Soviet Union, etc.) Good point! :)


Kent K. Steinbrenner
Irvine Typographers
Irvine, CA
949.262.9667 office

------------------------------

From: Richard Taylor <rstaylor@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 07:57:35 +0100
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Reply-To: rstaylor@mindspring.com


Norman L. Kleinberg wrote:
 
> I've got the contractor home-running CAT-5 lines to a patch panel in the
> basement. For phones he's running CAT-3 4-pair, daisy-chained in each
> room but in separate runs, meeting in the garage where the TELCO can get
> to it. The CAT-5 and phone lines are sharing a wall outlet. <whew>.

If you haven't finished the wiring yet, consider options. Run CAT 5
for everything.  Even though CAT-3 is okay for phones now, the CAT-5
wire has less cross talk and will carry you far into the futhre. Don't
run the cables you have designated for phone use to the garage. Put
everything on a punch block or patch panel in the basement.  That way
you have more flexibility.

Run 4 4-pairs from the basement patch panel, cross connect area to the
place where your OUTSIDE NID (Network Interface Device, also called
ONI (outside network interface and SNI (Standard Network Interface)
will be.  This will give you capability for 16 Telco lines.  If you
can, put these wires in 3/4 conduit, so you can re-pull them if
necessary.  Run a #10 THHN solid copper green wire from the electrical
ground in the electrical panel box to the NID location.  This will be
much neater than typical Telco ground on the outside of the wall. Have
the Telco plow-in at least two or three 5 or 6 pair Underground drop
cables.  This will give you the capacity of 10 to 18 Telco lines. Run
two quad-shield RG-6 cables from the outside to the basement for cable
TV.  Do the cable ground the same as Telco.

Consider using the Leviton Snap-Jack plates (available from Lowes or
wiring wholesaler).  They use 2,3,4 or 6 jacks.  You can put
EVERYTHING (up to 6 devices), including TV, in one plate and they
match electrical, which many wiring plates do not.)

The daisy-chaining per room is a good idea for phone wires, but you
might want to separately home run any room that may be used as an
office, and also maybe, the living room.

Email me directly if you need more advice.  I've been doing custom
low-voltage wiring for almost 30 years and I know all the tricks.  Good
luck.  


Richard Taylor
Carrboro, NC

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:15:51 -0400
From: Philip Decker <pandc.decker@netsrq.com>
Reply-To: pandc.decker@netsrq.com
Subject: Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines


Norman,

Assuming you're in the US, the telco's lines terminate at the
demarcation point ("demarc") which is a plastic box mounted on the
side of your house or garage.  Depending on how many lines you
request, they'll install a bigger demarc or multiple demarcs.  You own
the wires from there on through the house.  How you map their lines
into your pairs is only your business.

If it's not too late, I would recommend:

- Wire everyting with Cat5
- Home run the "phone jacks" to the basement also
- Install 110 blocks and/or patch-panels in the basement to terminate all
  your Cat5 wiring.
- Run a 25 pair or multiple 4 pair Cat5s  from the basement to the demarc
  area.

Now you can bring in as many telco lines as you want (analog,
ISDN-BRI, T1, ISDN-PRI, DSL, etc.).  They all go to the basement.
Since all your wall jacks are star wired to the basement they can be
assigned voice, data or whatever, based only on how you cross-connect
the 110 blocks and what ModJack you use.  If you want to install a
miniPBX (a la Panasonic keyswitch), an ISDN NT-2 (Siemens
OfficePoint?), or an ISDN NT-1, you stick it in the basement.  If you
do the latter don't forget a UPS, since the telco won't be powering
your phones.

Philip Decker

------------------------------

From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Organization: Netcom Online Services, Inc.
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:25:13 GMT


[ Pat wrote in a Moderator's Note ]

> Now let's get on with Mr. Haylock's problem. AT&T has been illegally
> redlining inner city neighborhoods for years. The only difference is,
> they teach their operators and supervisors to *lie about it* and make
> up some other excuse instead. 

If what you say is true, AT&T has not only been flouting the law for
years, they have been doing it in a manner that is trivial to detect,
trivial to prove, and with respect to a politically hot issue.

I simply don't think that none of the various minority-rights groups
have ever bothered to get two people to place simultaneous
calling-card calls to the same place from two different phones, one in
a "good" neighborhood and one in a "bad" neighborhood.  Repeat this
expperiment once a week for a month or two, and do it in several
cities.  If AT&T is behaving as you suggest, they should have a pretty
airtight case pretty quickly. And the financial resources needed to do
this test are minimal.  (In fact, wouldn't at least one of the Chicago
area TV stations be interested in performing this test with you and
airing the results?)

I simply don't think it would be this flagrant, this sensitive, and
this easy to detect, for so long.

> AT&T's approach is rather brilliant though, and works quite well con-
> sidering how little most people know about telco's inner workings.
> AT&T assumes most people will not argue with them -- after all, they
> are the telephone company -- and for those few who do want to argue,
> one of these excuses is given out:

> 1) The computer which processes AT&T calling cards is down right now.
> We do not know when it will be back in service. Why, it might be days.

> 2) The computer which processes VISA/MC cards is down right now. We
> do not know when it will be back in service. It might be a couple weeks.

> 3) (This one said with an astounded, almost embarassed tone of voice):
> The country where you are calling does not accept the AT&T calling
> card as a method of payment. 

Sure, these all get around unsophisticated end-users.  But these all
fall flat on their face in a controlled test.  So how about it.  Any
Chicago area readers willing to team up with Pat on this and go try two
phones simultaneously to the same place, with similar calling cards?


 - Brett  (brettf@netcom.com)

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not live in the Chicago area any 
longer or I would help on this. But you need to remember that the
large telcos are all major advertisers on television and in the papers.
Even a hint to CBS by AT&T or MCI that they were going to drop their
advertising if a story like that ran would be enough for CBS corporate
to order Channel 2 in Chicago to kill the story. 

Plus, you have to remember that toll fraud is a serious problem. While
I am not saying that should be sufficient reason for the redlining to
go on, I will suggest that the telcos could spin a good enough yarn
out of it to cloud the issue considerably. I am not certain it would
achieve the righteous indignation out of the public that other types
of redlining have caused in the past.

And in telco's defense, they insist it is not discrimination *based on
any certain race or nationality of person*, it is discrimination based
on geographic areas. Thus far, geographic areas are not a protected
category as is someone's race. Telco says, "we don't care if John
Rockefeller or Bill Gates wanted to make a credit card call to an
international point from a pay phone in Chicago-Kedzie (the central
office on Kedzie Avenue sometimes known as 'Kedzie Bell' in a very
poor, very minority, very third-world neighborhood on the west side of
Chicago) ... we would not honor their calling card either."

Telco insists anyone can get a calling card; anyone at all with a
reasonable credit history and a telephone in their name. Therefore, no
discrimination based on the *person*.  Its just that no calling card
can be used for international calls when placed from a pay phone in
certain areas of high fraud where telco has no recourse to the caller.
Go to a private dwelling place or a store right next to the same pay
phone and use the phone there, even charging it to the same calling
card which had been denied service from the payphone outside directly
in front on the street if desired. Telco says anyone can bill a call
however they wish, no questions asked, as long as there exists a
physical pair of wires leading to someone who can be held responsible
for the uses made of their instruments, as per tariff. 

Telco says bill the call however you wish, if you are happy we are
happy, but if the toll ticket later 'falls out in billing'; i.e. 
because of no such number and goes into suspense or the toll ticket is
later charged back to us as a dispute with the disputing customer
being credited and the suspense ledger being charged with yet one more
item for the investigators to deal with prior to their occassional
general write-off of what is left in suspense uncleared, who would
you like us to talk to to get our money? 

If, said the spokesperson I chatted with, we can use our technological
abilities and yank on a pair of wires leading to your premises and
legally hold you responsible and prove it to the Court's satisfaction
so that a bill collector can whisper sweet nothings in your ear while
he rummages around through your purse or your checking account or
garnishes your wages, then fine. You tell us how you want your call
billed. Who is the investigator supposed to talk to at a ringing pay
phone? Some drunk walking past who picks it up and answers?

Telco absolutely insists it is *places*  not *people*. Everyone can
call however they want in Winnetka or Skokie, no one can make an
international call from a payphone with a calling card in Chicago-
Kedzie. I asked why, with these technological advances that you
flout, that allow you to have recourse without question to a private
phone, you can't use technological advances to improve still again
on the calling card numbering scheme, like you had to do back in the
seventies when phreaks, anti-war protestors in their misguided way,
assorted other anarchists and dissidents, and outright con artists
ripped you for how many ever millions of dollars? Why not more card
reader phones where the physical card has to be actually inserted in
the phone the entire time the connection is up and the caller has to
punch in a pin number besides?

I did not devise the system said the spokesperson; I just deal with
it now. I did not make up the system and no one here tells the oper-
ators to lie. And therein lies the problem. No one seems to know who
is quite responsible for 'the system' or why it is many of the 
operators make up stories that are only thinly veiled in BS ... 

Maybe it is time for Judge Harold ("I hate AT&T") Greene to come out
of retirement and do something useful for a change. Said the spokes-
person, "maybe he could authorize the write off I was faced with last
year; a couple million dollars in the third quarter is a bit more than
the customer service reps are allowed to write off on their own. <grin>
It had to go way above my manager's head before it could be posted."

So who do you sympathize with? I think with some pressure, telcos
could do something about it. Pressure? ... hello ... Judge Greene, are
you reading this?    PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 00:36:19 -0500
From: Justa Lurker <jlurker@bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: Hyprocisy - Telecommunications During Wars


Spiro Dreamer <spiro_dreamer@hotmail.com> wrote:

> All telephony links within and outside of Yugoslavia are working
> perfectly.
 ...
> Further, the number of international lines to Yugoslavia has
> increased over the last two weeks, due to a ten-fold increase in
> the traffic.  It was never so easy to get a connection.
 ...
> The public telco system is more likely to be used by the military (for
> non-secure military communications) than the TV.

Television is more likely to be used by the military for 'propaganda',
for example the shooting down of the F-117 and the capture of the
three American troups.  Plus television can be used as a rallying
point for the people.  Show hundreds of people on a bridge having
a rock concert - show a Yugo factory where workers were being human
shields - show fellow Yugoslavians wearing the "TARGET" sign.

All of this public show of support for Yugoslavia can be translated
into support of the government and the military by *television*.

> So, why has the TV been targeted whilst the telephone system is
> working so well, and even better?????

It is harder for the military/government to call every Yugoslavian
in the middle of the night and tell them which buildings no longer
exist, and which bombs did not hit their targets.  *Television*
can be on the scene and showing everything *LIVE* as it happens
to anyone who cares to tune in.  (Including the international
community watching Serbian TV via CNN International.)

As long as the Serbians can continue to show that they are the
weaker party in this battle - through television - then strike out
and show that they are not powerless and that NATO is not
invunerable - through television - then show that NATO cannot
guarantee 0% collateral damage - through television - television
remains a target.

The turning point in the Gulf War was the video of the 'Baby Milk
Plant' that was destroyed.  The world began to see what colateral
damage was.  A second turning point was the caputure and torture
of "UN" troups in that battle.

The turning point in Vietnam was the television coverage of American
deaths and the televised 'murder of civilians' that showed how bad war
always was.  As long as the war is occuring in Yugoslavia and not in
our parlours NATO is happy.  THAT is why television is a much greater
enemy than the telephone system.

Besides with every family contact that is made by telephone people
in the west know that their relatives are fine and that NATO has
not killed them.  If the phone system went out then relatives in
the west would not know if the people of Yugoslavia were safe and
would assume the worst.

I support the troops.  My family has spent too many years in
the military not to support the troops.  But this battle is
not one that I support.  We are on a dangerous footing already,
and there seems to be no way out except to quit before Vietnam
*is* repeated.


"Justa Lurker"

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Justa, I think I agree with you,
and this once I'll let an anonymous message go though, but please
provide at least a reasonable sounding name in the future, okay?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz)
Subject: Re: Hyprocisy - Telecommunications During Wars
Date: 19 Apr 1999 14:52:16 -0400
Organization: Society for the Elimination of Junk Unsolicited Bulk Email
Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com


Quoth Spiro Dreamer <spiro_dreamer@hotmail.com> in <telecom19.47.12@telecom-digest.org>:

> NATO is currently destroying TV transmitters in Yugoslavia under the
> excuse that they are used for military purposes.

No, they aren't.  And the officer who floated the idea (surprising his
superiors) during a press briefing was summarily transferred to less
public duties.


|We have tried ignorance      |            Tom Betz, Generalist               |
|for a very long time, and    | Want to send me email? FIRST, READ THIS PAGE: |
|it's time we tried education.| <http://www.panix.com/~tbetz/mailterms.shtml> |
|<http://www.pobox.com/~tbetz>| YO! MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS HEAVILY SPAM-ARMORED! |

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #52
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat Apr 24 13:56:26 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA06308;
	Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:56:26 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 13:56:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904241756.NAA06308@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #53

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 24 Apr 99 13:46:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 53

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Q & A About Archives Changes (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: 500 Update ... Bad News (Linc Madison)
    Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented? (Linc Madison)
    Re: Should MIT Unplug Faceless Emailer? (John Eichler)
    New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability (Matthew Black)
    Suffolk County, Long Island, NY (Keith - Add the M in Com )
    Mark II Phone System Question (Dan Obrien)
    Court Ruling Could Prohibit Stealth Sites (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 24 Apr 1999 10:56:44 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Q & A About Archives Changes


I have received various comments from users of the Telecom Archives web
site since I finished some of the renovation and solicited comments.
A few of these are included below.

Question: What about continuing to use it with a Lynx browser now that
it has javascripting in it?

    That's fine. The only things the Lynx user will not see are those
    things he could not see before anyway, such as the icons. He will
    not be able to see the audio-visual presentation, nor use the chat
    room area. But I doubt a Lynx user would generally be interested
    in the chat feature anyway. He will not be able to see the new
    Y-2-K countdown clock. But he will see all he was able to see before. 
    Ditto with Mosaic. What you saw before is mostly what you will 
    see now. 

    But IE and Netscape users need to have java turned on in their
    own browser, or they will not see all the changes either.

Question: Speaking of the Y-2-K clock display, the results differ
based on the type of browser used.

    IE-4 and IE-5 browsers see a small table or form near the top of
    the screen with a constantly changing display of numbers which
    are, I feel certain, accurate. Some browsers see a display that
    has one hour *too many* in the answer. That's because of daylight
    savings time. Come the last Sunday in October and that extra hour
    will go away. 

    With Netscape browsers, the display is different, or I should say
    the display is similar but the results are different. With a new
    Netscape such as 4.5, the display is mostly correct, but a bug
    in the browser causes a situation of zero hours (such as after
    11 pm) or zero minutes (such as into the 59th minute of an hour)
    to display as 'NaN' only until the remaining minutes in the
    zeroeth hour or the remaining seconds in the zeroeth minute reach
    a single digit number. I have no idea why.

    For a good laugh, try a Netscape 4.05 browser, where the display
    shows NEGATIVE numbers in the answer and the display counts
    upward! The solution to this, we figured out, was instead of
    basing the countdown on 1/1/2000 00:00:00 to base it on one second
    less, starting with 12/31/99 11:59:59 and then adding one second
    at the very end just before the display is given. 

Question: Is there a bug in the front page display of the time/date 
and last visit date?

    Yep. For a new visitor (or one whose cookies have all been cleaned
    out or never turned on to start with) it does say you have been
    to the site zero times before, and 'your last visit was December
    31, 6:00 PM' .. If you are in the central time zone that is;
    if you are in London or otherwise have your clock set to GMT I
    think it will say your last visit was January 1, 00:00. Both IE-4
    and IE-5 as well as Netscape 4.5 handle it that way; I do not
    yet have a report on that 'feature' regards Netscape 4.05

Question: Is http://telecom-digest.org Year 2K compliant?  

    Well, grin, it all depends on your browser ... all flavors and
    styles of Netscape and IE presently think the year is '99'. So I 
    have a line in the script which says when you display the year, 
    make it the year + 1900. Great, now we get a display of '1999'. But
    IE-5 did something internally that fixes things on its own and
    it *will* consider next year to be '2000'. What they seem to have
    done in their code for the browser is say that after December 31,
    magically add 1900 years to the date. So they do not need my 1900
    years any longer. But Netscape says that after 99 comes 100, and
    they will continue to need the 1900 I added in order to display
    the correct year. Remember, the browsers do not display anything
    about their internals that you do not ask for, so it would be a
    moot point if a javascript did not ask for 'browserTime'. The
    math works out fine either way internally. 

    So by my adding 1900, next year according to IE will be the year
    3900, while Netscape says it will be 2000. If I do not use my
    'add 1900 to the year' then next year IE will say the year is
    2000 but Netscape will say the year is 100 when a call is made
    for browser.Time to be displayed on the user's screen. 

    What I finally wound up saying in the script was that if the
    year is greater than 98 and the year is less than 2000 then
    add 1900 to the year. This year both browsers say it is '99'
    which is greater than 98; next year IE will say it is 2000 which
    is not less than 2000, and Netscape will say it is 100, which
    is indeed less than 2000. So next year, IE which does not need
    the 1900 won't get it, but Netscape which does need the 1900 
    will get it. I think that would work for any situation where
    the current year is either (99 or 1999) and next year will be
    either (100 or 2000) and a display is expected. For those
    browsers that think next year will be zero -- if there are any
    out there that feel that way -- then *after* the line of code
    saying to add (or not) 1900, you would say that if year is less
    than 99, which would be false this year but true next year, then
    add 2000. 
    
    Or you could insert a version=navigator.appVersion test and
    if (version.indexOf("MSIE")) != 1 -- which means testing for the
    browser type to Internet Explorer returned false -- you are
    dealing with a Netscape browser and you would add 1900 to the 
    year regardless, otherwise quit doing it when the year was no
    longer less than 100.   

    Is that all clear as mud?  Good.  Thank you.

Question: What if I do not want the music or the background?

    Reload the page. The background and the music changes every time.

Question: What if I do not want music at all?

    Tell the popup as the page is loading that you want to Cancel the
    music. Or just ignore the popup and close out of it. The music
    will not play unless the popup returns true to the script, meaning
    you punch OK. The script says that music = (confirm(user response))
    and if music != 1 then bgsound is null. 

    Lynx users and Netscape users will not even be asked about it, the
    page will just load in silence. For the time being, only IE browsers
    will even see this popup. Netscape users will not see it, and this
    was a deliberate choice on my part since I cannot send music to
    Netscape browsers anyway, at least not from lcs.mit.edu at present.

Question: If the music is playing and I hate it, then what?

    Reload the page, and ignore or Cancel the popup. 

Question: I would like music. You said I cannot have it with a Netscape
browser. Is that true?

    That is correct at the present time. While IE is not picky at all
    about what it does, and happily renders whatever you give it,
    Netscape insists on following a standard which calls for MIME types
    to be given to it with 'embedded files'. Right now it is my
    belief that the MIME types are misconfigured at lcs.mit.edu since
    attempts to play music using Netscape's 'embed src' command result
    in Netscape squalling and screaming about "Danger! I found an
    embedded file! I am going to call notepad.exe and have him open
    this file so we can see what it is about. Never! Never! open an
    embedded file, why, you could get in big trouble and maybe even
    cause the imminent death of Usenet."

    Or something like that. And when you say yeah, let's open it and
    see what it is, you get a little broken icon on the screen and
    a few squibbles of nonsense text. I tried forcing Netscape to
    see things my way by adding to the 'embed src' command such
    additional stuff as type=audio/midi  and type=audio/x-mid saying
    to it get your plugins and do as I say. But no dice ... Netscape
    would not believe what I told it. *This only happens when the
    file is served from lcs.mit.edu*. The same files play fine on
    Netscape locally on my computer, and from other sites. I have
    asked a sysadmin at LCS to see what can be done. 

    In the meantime, no music for Netscape. As 'they' say -- and
    I am extremely reluctant to say it myself -- 'this page is best
    viewed using IE'. My thinking is 'this page is best viewed if
    you come to my office and look at my monitor'   <grin> .. and
    John Higdon noted, isn't that the truth these days with web sites.
    It seems the more we push HTML to its limits, the less likely we
    are to get the same view for everyone who calls the page. 

    I tried as nearly as possible to make the pages look the same on
    Netscape and IE. I spent much time deciding on fonts and sizes,
    etc. I do not want to dictate your browser type, I want to serve
    you with the choices you have made. In the meantime, come to my
    office and view my monitor if you want to see a beautiful web page.
    
    During testing as I wrote the pages, I had three browsers open
    at all times, or sometimes four. I would correct or change some
    item, then go to each browser and check the results. My browsers
    are IE-4, IE-5, Netscape 4.5, Opera 3 and Lynx. The pages come
    *very close* to identical on IE, Netscape and Opera. 

Question: Why are those two popups with the moderator's idea of
humor in there before I go look at the movie?  

    Well you see, the page with the movie takes a thousand ages of
    computer time to load. If I put you right in there you would look
    at a blank background and silence for twenty or thirty seconds
    before the movie started playing. By giving you a couple of
    popups you have to read and punch out of, I stall for time while
    the movie page is loading. After you have spent twenty seconds or 
    so reading and (hopefully) laughing at the popups and clicked out
    of them, the movie, which is on autostart will have loaded, and a 
    little black box in the center of the page will have appeared and 
    be waiting for your popup click so that it can autostart itself 
    with no delay. It will not start until you have have closed the 
    popups. It should time out about right.  

    If this proves to work pretty well after some testing, I will give
    some thought to a reader's suggestion that there be a regular
    'telecom internet TV show', meaning a once a week or so live, via
    the web audio-visual or multimedia presentation with guest speakers
    and that sort of thing. 

Question: The main page and the movie page do not just appear on the
screen like other sites. The other site I was viewing starts to
crumble up and fade away as the telecom site moves in, or sometimes a
large circle closes in on it and the telecom page starts filling in
around the edges. Sometimes it looks like a checkerboard; other times
the telecom page starts pushing the other page I was viewing off to
the side diagonally before starting.

    Yep.  To make your pages do the same thing, add this code after
    HEAD and before /HEAD:

    META http-equiv = "Page-Enter" content = "RevealTrans (Duration=4,
    Transition=23)"  Put the whole thing in the usual < and > and it
    only works with IE 5, not Netscape.  Transitions are from 0 to
    22 with 23 being a random one from the others. You can choose
    between boxes in/out, circles in/out, wipe up/down, checkerboard,
    vertical/horizontal blinds, random blurring of screen, etc. Dura-
    tion is how long you want the effect to last in seconds. 

    My personal favorite is when the telecom pages arrive, they start 
    pushing whatever you had been viewing off the screen to the right,
    a few pixels at a time, until telecom has moved in totally and 
    shoved the other site out of the way entirely.

    Trashy, isn't it?

                       ----------------------------

And that's it for now. More questions, just ask.  Remember, I love
Lynx users. You still get everything you always did get before if
not the newest changes, which I like to call improvements. Opera
tends to follow IE browsers, and in fact identifies itself as part
of the 'Mozilla' group. If you do have IE, please use it on the pages.

Anyone who wants the code to play around with on their own pages is
welcome to take it. Just dump the raw page to your end. 

I would especially appreciate hearing from persons with several
browsers who try them all and report back the (hopefully only) minor
differences they experience. 

You can also now read the latest issue of the Digest directly from
the top web page; you do not need to look in the back issues files.

PAT

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 03:34:23 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: 500 Update ... Bad News
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.51.2@telecom-digest.org>, Matt Cline
<mc86@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:

> Gang -

> I called MCI, out of curiosity about their services, and guess what:
> MCI has cancelled their service as well.  When I asked for details the
> rep told me: "those numbers were routed through an facility in Sacramento.  
> We don't even have an office there anymore.  The service was grandfathered 
> for existing clients."  So much for competition working to our advantage.

There are two reasons that 500 service never really caught on.  First
and foremost, the greed of the telesleaze industry.  They saw yet
another code that hadn't been sullied in the public mind and jumped on
it.  Second and more importantly, the stupidity and culpable
negligence of the industry folks who created 500 service in the first
place.

The fundamental problem is that you can (at least with some providers)
forward a 500 number outside the U.S., in which case the caller will
pay the additional charge for the international call.  There is a
recorded message that advises you that the call will be billed at a
higher rate, but that doesn't help the owner of a PBX or a payphone.
Therefore, you cannot dial a 500 number from any PBX or payphone with
a sensible owner, since there is no way to predict what the charge
will be for the call.

Of course, the other major question in all of this is, why on earth
was 533 opened up as an expansion of 500?  There are plenty of unused
prefixes in 500 and no great demand for them, so the decision to open
up 533 was clearly improper.  On the other hand, I've seen no evidence
of any assignments in 533, so it's a bit of a moot point.


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 04:10:00 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented, if So?
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.52.8@telecom-digest.org>, Kent K. Steinbrenner
<kks@csi.com> wrote:

> A few days ago on the U.S. Metric Assn.'s listserv, a list member
> asked the following:

>> "While, looking up some information on telephone systems worldwide, I came
>> across a website on country codes.  I know that each country has its own
>> telephone code for calls originating outside to reach inside.  What was
>> interesting, was that the website noted that Europe was (is) suppose to get
>> a region wide code beginning in 1999.  The code number is +388."

> He then wanted to know more about this code. A few European members of
> the listserv didn't know about the code, either, and wanted to know
> more. I recalled seeing something on this newsgroup last year or the
> year before about +388, but don't recall when it was (otherwise I'd
> have gone searching through the archives).

> Has anyone heard more about +388? Would usage of it require national
> renumbering of number plans (of course, Italy, France and Spain have
> been doing that recently, if memory serves me correctly)?

+388 was part of a doomed plan to renumber all of Europe under the
single country code +3.  All the three-digit codes in the EU are +3xx;
in fact, the only +4xx codes are +420, +421, and +423 for the Czech
Republic, Slovakia, and Liechtenstein, respectively; all very recent
assignments.  The plan called for all two-digit +3x and +4x codes to
migrate to +33x and +34x.  It would ultimately have been possible to
dial from any point in the +3 zone to any other point by dialing 1 +
the last two digits of the country code + national number.  For
instance, London numbers would be +344 20 nxxx.xxxx, so you could dial
1-44-20-nxxx.xxxx.  To call Dublin, you would dial 1-53-1-nxx.xxxx.
Pan-European toll-free numbers would be 1-888-nxx.xxx[x][x].  Premium
numbers would be on 1-900.  Pan-European carrier code assignments
would be made for prefix codes.  All very American looking; rather
surprising given the anti-American bent of most telecomms Eurocrats.

> Someone else on that listserv wondered why the EU would get a
> three-digit number; after all, they reasoned, it ought to get a
> one-digit number like the other "important" areas of the world (+1 for
> NANPA, +7 for ex-Soviet Union, etc.) Good point! :)

With the possible exception of +3 (which was envisioned to replace all
+3 and +4 codes), no more one- or two-digit codes will be allocated.
The Ukraine is certainly big enough that it would have deserved a
two-digit code (unlike +45 Denmark, +64 New Zealand, +65 Singapore,
and other existing assignments).  Unfortunately, the Ukraine's +380
stands right in the way of the obvious choice of 1-800 for the
pan-European freephone, but the plan is most likely utterly dead
anyway.

Of course, the biggest problem was the timetable on which they were
planning to implement this scheme.  In order to do it properly, you
would need to have a couple of years of permissive dialing (parallel
running) for each of the following steps:

(1) Migrate all numbers in +33 3 to some other range in +33.
(2) Route all calls to +33 3 to a recording informing you of the
    new number.
(3) Migrate all numbers in +33 to the new +333.
(4) Route all calls to +33X (other than +333) to a recording.
(5) Migrate all numbers in +34 to the new +334.
(6) Route all calls to +34 to a recording.
(7) Migrate all numbers in +3X and +4X to the new +33X and +34X.
(8) Figure out what to do with the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and
    Liechtenstein.
(9) Only now, allow 1-XX instead of +3XX dialing.

I would propose two years as a sensible minimum schedule for each of
those steps, following in strict sequence with no overlap (except
maybe step #8).  The original proposal from the EU was to do this
whole process in about a year and a half.

There was (and may still be) some information on the EU's web site,
giving all the gory details of their plan.  The vision was sweeping,
and the end result would be a much more unified European telephony
infrastructure, but the people who created the plan didn't adequately
think through the transition required to get there.

Perhaps Europe could become +0 when that range opens up for assignment
in the not-too-distant future ... according to the ITU, at least.  You
could assign all existing +3X and +4X codes to +03X and +04X, and all
existing +3XX and +42X codes to +0XX -- there are still no conflicts
in that transition scheme, as long as all the three-digit codes remain
in +35X, +37X, +38X, and +42X.  You could have full permissive dialing
(parallel running) of the old and new codes in a single step, both for
calls within Europe and for calls from outside Europe.  Any countries
in +3/+4 that didn't opt in at the start could keep the option to do
so later.


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

From: jeichl - John Eichler <jeichl@acxiom.com>
Subject: Re: Should MIT Unplug Faceless Emailer?
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 07:13:37 -0500


Pat,

You wrote ...

> ... and today we have a closet full of old 9600 baud modems we cannot
> give away. The jump from 300 to 9600 was only a few years, and now in
> the past four or five years 28K and 56K are 'acceptable'. I will bet
> you that by 2034 everyone -- and I mean everyone, 95 percent of the
> population or more -- will be connected via cable or LAN or something
> like that. Speeds of 115K will be the norm."

ROFLMAO ... Heck Pat, by 2034 I should think that fiber connections
for most people where ever they are will be more like 115 meg or more.
115K will seem old fashion by then except to us old men who will be
sitting around in our rockers discussing the leap from 300 to 1200..

John Eichler

------------------------------

From: black@csulb.NOSMAP.edu (Matthew Black)
Subject: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability
Date: 24 Apr 1999 14:16:42 GMT


GTE California has started billing this residential customer $0.38 for
local number portability.  I never requested any such service and am
curious if this is some new universal fee.


  [if you want to send me e-mail, remove an item from my address]

-------------------------------(c) 1999 Matthew Black, all rights reserved--
matthew black                   | Opinions expressed herein belong to me and
network & systems specialist    | may not reflect those of my employer
california state university     | 
network services SSA-180E       |             e-mail: black at csulb dot edu
1250 bellflower boulevard       |   PGP fingerprint: 6D 14 36 ED 5F 34 C4 B3
long beach, ca 90840            |                    E9 1E F3 CB E7 65 EE BC


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sprint Local Service is adding the
charge on starting this month. They are charging 48 cents. Sprint also
on local service adds on something called 'Minimum Billing Charge'
which is about six dollars per month. It seems they got an okay to
bill the customer for the expense involved in sending out the bills
each month.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: keith@knip.co (Keith - Add the M in Com )
Subject: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:07:32 GMT
Organization: I-2000 Inc., Internet Services


Does anyone know what the NEW " AREA CODE " will be ?

I suggest " 783 " for SUF

------------------------------

From: Dan Obrien <obconsultants@home.com>
Reply-To: obconsultants@home.com
Organization: @Home Network
Subject: Mark II Phone System Question
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:59:05 GMT


I have a Mark II phone system.  I have connected ananloq telephones to
the SLI card, they work but I was wondering how can I get them to ring
with the CO Line that they are setup for? 

Thanks,

Dan

------------------------------

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.COM>
From: "Monty Solomon" <monty@roscom.COM>
Subject: Court Ruling Could Prohibit Stealth Sites
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 18:33:56 -0400


InternetNews.com
Court Ruling Could Prohibit Stealth Sites

April 16, 1999

Brian McWilliams, InternetNews.com Correspondent
Business News Archives

It may be one of the cheapest ways to buy a little traffic to a Web
site, but now it's also on very shaky legal ground. The practice of
registering "stealth sites," or Internet addresses that are variations
on popular corporate names, was blasted by a Virginia federal court
this week.

A judge has ordered Network Solutions Inc. to freeze a Web site with
the address www.wwwpainewebber.com. The district court ruled that
owner of the site, a Miami, Florida man who was using the address to
feed traffic to a pornography site, was diluting the famous investment
firm's trademark.


http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article/0,1087,3_100051,00.html

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #53
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat Apr 24 15:25:30 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA09464;
	Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:25:30 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:25:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904241925.PAA09464@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #54

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 24 Apr 99 15:25:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 54

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Tops Comcast Bid for Media One (Monty Solomon)
    G&M: Dial 911, We're Running Out of Area Codes (Kent K. Steinbrenner)
    Historic Role of Government in Internet Development (Ronda Hauben)
    E-zine Review: "This is True", Randy Cassingham (Rob Slade)
    Dialtone in Different Countries (Lucio Maggioli)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Ed Kummel)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: AT&T Tops Comcast Bid for Media One
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 07:09:59 -0400


By Jessica Hall

NEW YORK (Reuters) - AT&T Corp. (NYSE:T - news), the No. 1
long-distance telephone company, launched another major foray into
cable TV Thursday by offering to buy MediaOne Group Inc. for $58
billion in cash and stock, in an attempt to break up MediaOne's
proposed merger with Comcast Corp.  (Nasdaq:CMCSA - news)

AT&T, which recently acquired Tele-Communications Inc. (Nasdaq:TCOMP -
news) for $55 billion, said its offer represents a premium of 17
percent, or $8.6 billion, over the current value of Comcast's offer
and 26 percent over MediaOne's current trading price.

AT&T has been searching for a way to bypass the regional phone
companies networks to find its own connection directly to customers'
homes and businesses.

"Together, AT&T and MediaOne will bring broadband video, voice and
data services to more communities, more quickly than we could
separately or, in MediaOne's case, with any other company," AT&T
Chairman C. Michael Armstrong said in a prepared statement.

The AT&T offer came on the heels of a record $81 billion merger
agreement between Deutsche Telekom AG (NYSE:DT - news), Europe's
biggest telecom group, and Telecom Italia SpA (NYSE:TI - news)
announced earlier Thursday, and prompted speculation of more
telecommunications mergers to come.

MediaOne in March agreed to be acquired by Comcast, the No. 4 cable
systems operator, in a deal currently valued at $44 billion, based on
Comcast's closing stock price Thursday.

Comcast is the majority owner of QVC and E! Entertainment cable
channels, and owns the Philadelphia Flyers hockey team and
Philadelphia 76ers basketball team.

Comcast and MediaOne, which was formerly part of Baby Bell U S West
Inc., could not be immediately reached for comment.

AT&T's proposed purchase of MediaOne, in addition to its recent
acquisition of TCI and its joint venture with Time Warner
Inc. (NYSE:TWX - news), would allow AT&T to provide phone and Internet
services directly to customers over the cable companies' networks.

MediaOne's stock soared in after-hours trading after AT&T's offer was
announced.  MediaOne traded at $82 in the post-session, up $12.50 from
the regular close.  AT&T traded at $57 on the Instinet broker system,
in line with the regular close.

"It's a huge, huge deal. It's all about bandwidth, it's all about
Internet access, (and) MediaOne certainly is the front-runner in
realizing bandwidth is important," said Arthur Hogan, chief market
analyst at Jefferies & Co.

Hogan predicted the bid would accelerate consolidation in the industry
and predicted other stocks would get a bounce, including Cox
Communications Inc., Cablevision Systems Corp. and Jones Intercable .

"These things tend to feed on themselves," Hogan said.

The offer for MediaOne is AT&T's second unsolicited takeover deal in
recent years, following its acquisition of computer company NCR Corp.,
which it has since spun-off. The offer follows a wave of hostile or
unsolicited offers in several industries in recent weeks.

AT&T plans to divest non-strategic MediaOne assets currently valued at
about $18 billion to $20 billion. AT&T also plans to continue its
aggressive efforts to reduce its operating expenses by an additional
$2 billion by the end of the 2000.

The majority of the expense reductions will apply to network costs,
general, and administrative expenses, lower access fees paid to local
exchange companies for handling long-distance calls, and more
streamlined operations and systems.

Additional savings in the range of at least $175 to $200 million will
result from saving in combining the former TCI and MediaOne cable
operations.

AT&T expects the deal to damp profits by about 30 cents in the first
full year of combined operation, resulting from additional shares
outstanding and the cost of financing.

After the purchase of MediaOne, cash earnings -- or net income per
share plus acquisition goodwill -- will decline by less than 10 cents
per share.

AT&T said the acquisition over time would accelerate earnings, cash
flow and revenue growth. It also will reduce the percentage of AT&T's
revenues that come from slower growth businesses such as consumer
long-distance service.

AT&T said it believed the deal could be completed by the end of
1999. AT&T said it anticipated no difficulty in arranging financing
for the cash portion of its offer and expected to have $30 billion of
financing in place by April 30.

Chase Manhattan Bank and Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. already
have each committed to provide $5 billion of the financing.

------------------------------

From: Kent K. Steinbrenner <kks@ehmail.com>
Subject: G&M: Dial 911, We're Running Out of Area Codes
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 02:14:32 -0700


Thursday, April 22, 1999 | The Globe and Mail | Canada's National Newspaper
(well, one of them, anyway <g>)

Dial 911, we're running out of area codes
Explosion of extra phone and data lines to blame

TYLER HAMILTON
Technology Reporter, The Globe and Mail

Internet lines, fax machines, wireless phones and increased
competition in the telephone industry are causing North America's pool
of area codes to dry up 23 years earlier than first anticipated.

Industry experts say the last of those three-digit numbers will be
used up some time in the next decade and that fixing the problem will
be a monumental task equivalent to the billions of dollars and hours
put into fixing the year 2000 computer bug.

"Clearly it's analogous [to the year 2000 problem]. It may even be
bigger because of the amount of systems that depend upon telephone
numbers," said Thomas McGarry, technical industry liaison at Bethesda,
Md.-based Lockheed Martin Corp., which operates the North American
Numbering Plan Administration (NANPA) in Washington.

NANPA is responsible for issuing area codes in Canada, the United
States and the Caribbean.

Currently, all numbers in North America include a three-digit area
code and a seven-digit phone number. When area codes run out, the
industry will need to move to either a four-digit area code or
eight-digit phone number, requiring all terminal equipment, network
switches, data bases, and call centre software to be reprogrammed to
accept at least 11 digits.

Many of these area codes are being used up by U.S. states such as
California, New York and Florida, densely populated regions with a
high level of business activity. The number of area codes in
California, for example, has doubled since 1990 to 28.

There are 792 area codes in existence, with each able to accommodate
7.2 million numbers.

In Canada, metropolitan areas such as Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and
Edmonton have all had to deal this decade with the addition of new
area codes. Toronto's 416 area code lasted 46 years before 905 was
introduced in 1993. Another code, 647, will likely be necessary by
2001, observers say.

"The use of phone numbers is increasing much more rapidly than anyone
had anticipated, driven by things like fax machines, second phone
lines and data lines," said Ian Angus, telephone industry consultant
and president of Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. of Ajax, Ont.

Mr. Angus said predictions vary as to when these area codes will run
out, adding that the earliest depletion estimate he's come across is
2002.

A committee of NANPA has spent months poring through data to confirm
its "very preliminary" prediction that the last area code will be used
up as early as 2007, compared with original estimates of 2030. The
committee will present a report today to the North American Numbering
Council (NANC), a division of the U.S. Federal Communications
Commission.

Alan Hasselwander, chairman of NANC, said the industry lacks
sufficient "microdata" to come up with an accurate date, but added
that the matter is serious and that the telecommunications industry
needs to act fast to delay what will ultimately become a major
undertaking.

"We're trying to get the industry to agree to a range that seems
rational based on the best information we can get," said
Mr. Hasselwander, adding that NANPA and NANC are exploring ways to
extend the life of existing area codes.

"I believe that if we take some of these measures, this exhaust can be
delayed significantly." he said. "For decades if we try."

One measure that will likely be taken is to reduce how many numbers a
telephone company can be assigned at one time. Today, phone companies
can get numbers in blocks of 10,000 or more, regardless of the size of
the company or if the requirement is much less.

Mr. Angus said more of these 10,000 blocks have been issued within the
past few years because deregulation of the telephone industry has
created more competitors. The problem, he said, is many of these
companies have numbers they aren't prepared to use.

Mr. Hasselwander said figuring out a way to free up those numbers and
extend the life of the current 10-digit system should be a priority.

"We have to think about these solutions very seriously," he said. "I
think we have to think about them now."

------------------------------

From: rh120@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Historic Role of Government in Internet Development
Date: 24 Apr 1999 16:57:56 GMT
Organization: Columbia University
Reply-To: rh120@watsun.cc.columbia.edu


Following is proposal for a paper I am planning to work on.
I welcome comments, suggestions of sources to consult, etc.
Ronda

                              ---------------

    The Role of Government in the Development of the Internet
                           Paper Proposal

                          by Ronda Hauben
                          rh120@columbia.edu

There are many myths about the role that government has played in the
history of the development of the Internet. The most prevalent myth is
that government has played no role, beyond funding the early research
to build the Internet.

This is a serious misrepresentation of the actual history and development. 

This misrepresentation also has important political consequences.
There is a need to determine how to solve a number of problems for the
continued development of the Internet and if the proper role for
government is not determined, then the problems become very difficult
or impossible to solve.

Also, the U.S. government is currently making an effort to change its
role in how it relates to Internet development.  However, if there is
a lack of knowledge of what the role of government has been, then
there are serious consequences that can result from the U.S. government 
changing that role without taking into account the problems that will
develop.

The Internet has basically developed under government and university
support and activity. However, the form of government and university
support is often not obvious nor well documented.

In 1945, Vannebar Bush, an MIT scholar, was invited to advise the
President of the United States on how to apply the lessons that had
been learned about wartime scientific research to solve the social and
technological problems for peacetime conditions. His work set a basis
for an important form of government structure that would nourish
scientific and technological development.

In my research, I plan to explore the influence of Bush's work on the
later creation and development of the Information Processing
Technology Office (IPTO) of the Advanced Research Projects Agency
(ARPA). This office was created in 1962 and existed until 1987. During
this period the work done by those working for this office made it
possible to create and develop the Internet.

The Internet was developed between 1972 and 1987 under the support and
actions of people, often working under conditions created by or more
directly working for the IPTO. After 1987, ARPA and the National
Science Foundation continued to play an important role in the
development of the Internet. So I plan to also touch on the role
played after 1987, but will focus my paper on the role of government
between 1972 and 1987.

ARPA was created as a civilian agency in the U.S. Department of
Defense. Those who were part of ARPA worked hard to provide a
supportative environment that made it possible for the initial
research creating the Internet to be done and also provided support
for the actual development of the Internet. I want to study how this
was done, and how various pressures that would have interferred with
research and development were constrained.

Also I plan to examine how Usenet was helpful in the development of
the Internet during the 1981-83 period and to explore if there are
lessons to be learned from the linking up of Usenet and the ARPANET
during that period which can be helpful in solving the problems that
the Internet is facing now.

The process of building the Internet involved a number of procedures
that made it possible for the grassroots to participate in the design
and development of important aspects of the Internet. However, this
was possible because there was a line of responsibility and accounta-
bility provided by the government processes involved in building the
Internet. Once this line of responsibility and accountability has
been taken away by the U.S.  government, as in the privatization of
the domain name system (DNS) and other essential functions of the
Internet, it has become similarly impossible for there to be any
grassroots processes available to those online. Instead, those who are
most powerful are active trying to seize control of the public
functions and powers so that they will control the Internet.

In 1996 the U.S. government announced that it was planning to
privatize certain key functions of the Internet. This announcement was
made at a meeting of the Federal Networking Council Advisory
Committee.

Then in 1997-1998 there was a Report of the Office of the
Inspector General of the National Science Foundation (OIG of the NSF)
which opposed the privatization of the DNS. And there were hearings in
the U.S. House of Representatives about the plans to carry out the
privatization of these key functions.

The Office of the Inspector General Report did focus on determining
what would be an appropriate government role in the continued
development of the Internet. The hearings in Congress, however, in
general did not raise or examine this key question.

In the 1970's there were conferences and books about the need to
prepare to deal with the developing computer network as a public
utility. These articles and books stressed the need for a social focus
for the developing network. And they described how the U.S. government
would be unprepared to deal with the needed social problems that the
developing network would create if such issues were not treated
seriously by government support for needed research and study.

Also one of the writers pointed out that the power struggle that would
go on behind the scenes would be very fierce, but that those who hoped
for a democratic development of the communications network might be
blinded by that hope from recognizing and properly dealing with the
fierce power battle. 

And most recently a similar concern was raised by a political
scientist from the Kennedy School of Government about the need to have
a government regulatory structure rather than a private nonprofit
corporation as a model for the operation and protection of the
essential and controlling functions of the Internet. She also pointed
out that there were procedures in government like doing an FBI check
on someone being appointed to a regulatory commission position and
holding them responsible for honest activity or else subjecting them
to criminal charges. These kinds of structures were created to protect
those whose economic livelihood is dependent upon the regulators who
have great power. 

Thus she noted that the kind of situation being created with regard to
the Internet will give great power to those who have no means of
oversight to stop their abuse of such power. The kind of private
nonprofit corporation now being created to regulate the Names and
Numbers functions of the Internet (ICANN) will make it possible for
certain individuals to exercise great economic power over people
around the world while there are none of the historically developed
protections that governments have been created to provide.

The research I am proposing will be to examine the role played by
government (especially the U.S. government, but if possible other
governments as well) in the development of the Internet. And there
will be an effort to identify the role needed to continue that
development. Also I will try to examine the kind of political forces
at play which are either trying to determine the proper government
role or to thwart these efforts.

Other draft papers about the development of the Net and of UNIX are
online at
               http://www.umcc.ais.edu/~ronda
 
    For NSF Office of Inspector General Report, see:

              http://www.bna.com/e-law/docs/nsfnsi.html

           Netizens: On the History and Impact
                of Usenet and the Internet
         http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/
        and in print edition ISBN # 0-8186-7706-6

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 08:29:17 -0800
Subject: E-zine Review: "This is True", Randy Cassingham
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


MLTRUE.RVW   990314

"This is True", Randy Cassingham, 1999, ,
%A   Randy Cassingham arcie@thisistrue.com
%C   PO Box 17326, Boulder CO 80308-0326 
%D   1999
%I   Freelance Communications
%O   TrueInfo@thisistrue.com http://www.thisistrue.com
%P   ~5 stories weekly
%T   "This is True"

As with "News of the Weird" (cf. MLNOTW.RVW) and "Maddog News" (cf.
MLMADDOG.RVW), "This is True" relies on real news stories that touch
on the bizarre.  Like NOTW, True is syndicated, and available for use
as a column by newspapers.

The free version of True runs weekly, and is a slightly reduced
version of the full weekly column available by email as a paid
subscription mailing list.  The free version carries references to
stories in the other edition.

The free edition of True carries one ad per issue, and it must get
pretty good coverage.  At the top of every column is listed a rough
count of the subscriber base, and an exact count of the number of
countries.  As of February, 1999, that was 150,000 subscribers in 164
countries.

Another of Cassingham's trademarks is a one line editorial comment on
the story, generally facetious.  Each item is about a paragraph long,
and contains a reference to the source.  These items generally come
from wire services.

A lengthy report on Cassingham's life and doings, as well as responses
to reader mail, accompanies each issue.  These are well written and
amusing, and it is almost possible to forget that they are basically
ads for the "premium" version of the mailing list, and the various
books Cassingham has written.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   MLTRUE.RVW   990314

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
And then we have P. D. Eastman's great tragic classic, `Are You
My Mother?'  Our protagonist struggles greatly with the issues of
his own identity, and the identity of those around him.
Abandoned before birth, alone in a hostile world, his first
independent action almost fatal, he searches desperately,
receiving no help from anyone he encounters.  Eventually his
relationships become completely mechanical.  At the end of the
tale he has accomplished nothing, having returned to precisely
the point at which he started.  And yet there is something
poignant, and, perhaps, even noble, in the dogged determination
captured in the one famous line of the book,
                                      `And the baby bird went *on*.'
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

From: lucio1974@my-dejanews.com (Lucio Maggioli)
Subject: Dialtone in Different Countries
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 10:54:06 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


Hello, in Italy the dialtone isn't a continuous tone, like the one
you're likely to hear in the United States. Actually we have a
"stuttering" dialtone. In Italy, you get a continuous dialtone only
when you have the call forwarding service turned on, or when you dial
the code to place an anonymous call (so the person you're calling
won't be shown your phone number). I was wondering what kind of
dialtone (continuous or stuttering) is used in different countries of
the world. Does anyone have information about this subject? 


Thanks,

Lucio Maggioli
nyork@tin.it

------------------------------

From: Ed Kummel <intouchusa@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 01:59:14 -0100


I think that this lawsuit is a load of CRAP! It's just another way for
lawyers to buy that new yacht they always wanted! Look at it from the
carriers perspective. You have 100 lines in a rural ho-hum town. and
you have 100 lines in Anacostia Washington DC (a really bad part of
town) you notice that there is fraud in both areas, but the fraud in
the "bad" town is usually to internation areas like Saudi Arabia,
Turkestan, Russia and the like. So what do you do? you restrict
calling patterns based on the amount of fraud you receive! Nothing
wrong with that!

Hey, if you feel that you are wrongly restricted becaus of a fraud
restriction, then talk with the carrier, they will usually take a
$1000 bond from you as guarantee that the phone you are using will not
be used for fraud! (cellular or landline) And if YOU can't guarantee
that you will be responsible for all fraud that occurs on your phone
(yeah cell phone users, you want to be responsible for fraud? Someone
clones your phone, stands on a street corner and starts selling
international calls at $.50/minute to anyone who wants. 

You calling card users, you think you're safe? There are people in
airports with binoculars looking at you while you dial your "secret"
number and PIN. They get you. There are all kinds of tricks out
there).  So yes, tell the carrier that you will be responsible for all
calls from your phone and then see what happens (they will send you a
release form that requires that you sign it and send it back!) I side
with the carrier, sorry!  

ed

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #54
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat Apr 24 17:00:05 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA13327;
	Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:00:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:00:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904242100.RAA13327@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #55

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 24 Apr 99 17:00:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 55

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (Eric Morson)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (Jeffrey J. Carpenter)
    Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God (Ed Kummel)
    Graybar Electric (Mike O'Dorney)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Walter Dnes)
    Re: Who Invented the Telephone? (Adam H. Kerman)
    Re: Local Calls Being Billed by IXC - Update (Bill Levant)
    Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC (Stanley Cline)
    Re: AT&T Discontinues Easy Reach 500 Number Service (J.R. Light)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric B. Morson)
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 18:50:03 -0400
Subject: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA


Looks like the first REAL steps have been taken to evaluate just how
SOON the NANP will be in SERIOUS jeopardy as a whole.

The NANP Exhaust Study has been published....

http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

VERY informative ... they now project total exhaustion between 2006
and 2012, with their best guess being 2007... 8 1/2 years to go! NO
FCC action recommended regarding 10-D or 11-D dialing yet. No timetable 
for expansion yet. No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing 
patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

When the projected total exhaustion of the NANP was 2025-2030, it was
reasonable to think that yet-uninvented technologies that would reduce
the amount of phone numbers needed would save us before we ran out of
NPA-NXX resources. Now it seems much less likely, with an ever shrinking
8 1/2 years to go, that technology will save the NANP from disaster.

How can planning wait any longer, considering how much hardware,
software, education, politics, and regulation needs to be completed, and
only 8.5 years to go? Not to mention, it's not JUST the United States!
It's not just an American problem! Add international relations, tariffs,
and politics to the mix when you include Canada and the Caribbean
nations.

(That's my diatribe for the day)


Eric B. Morson
Co-Webmaster
AreaCode-Info.com
(203) 348-3258

mailto:Eric@AreaCode-Info.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  But a very good diatribe it was, and
one that should give us all something to think about. Aren't things
starting to get a little ridiculous here?   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 19:43:40 -0400
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <jjc@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA


Eric@areacode-info.com wrote:

> Looks like the first REAL steps have been taken to evaluate just how
> SOON the NANP will be in SERIOUS jeopardy as a whole.

> The NANP Exhaust Study has been published ...

This is obviously going to generate a lot of discussion in the
industry.  The CTIA has already submitted a letter to the NANC
questioning the methodology the NANPA used.  Their submission is
available at:

     http://www.wow-com.com/lawpol/filing/pdf/ctialtr042299.pdf


Jeffrey J. Carpenter
P.O. Box 471
Glenshaw, PA 15116-0471

Phone: +1 500 488-4800
Fax: +1 500 488-4802
Email: jjc@pobox.com
Web: http://pobox.com/~jjc/

------------------------------

From: Ed Kummel <intouchusa@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 01:32:23 -0100


An Israel company has developed a small device that sets up a small
area (about 500 square feet) that will block all radio signals in the
800-1000 and the 1900 MHz bands. There is talk of these devices making
it into the US and being used in places like movie houses, churches
and being deployed at golf tournaments.

A cell phone, even if it is not on a call, periodically polls the
system to see what power output it will need to make a call (the phone
will vary the power output up to .6 watts on handhelds and upto 3
watts on transportables). Most analog phones will try and "contact" a
nearby system once every 5 to 15 minutes depending on the last
contact. If it cannot make a connection, it ups the power and tries
again (to prove this, keep your phone on and check how long the
battery lasts. 

Then shield the phone (usually by placing it in a microwave ... no
don't cook it, just leave it there) and the battery will last 2-3
times longer) Because of this stepped power increase, the chance of
freq harmonics, triple beats and third harmonics *MAY* potentially
create a frequency (by interacting with other neighboring frequencies,
a third different freq can occur) that may interfere with navigation
systems (which usually operate in the 2GHz and 1 GHz range. So, yes,
it is a possibility.

> We've been through discussion about such devices on airplanes,
> regarding possible interference with the aircraft communication
> system.  Even with such devices turned off, do the wireless signals
> (for *incoming* pages and cellular calls) still make it into the
> aircraft?  A turned-on cellu- lar phone can make outgoing calls and I
> can understand concern about unfamiliar devices causing said
> interference, but if *incoming* signals make it into the aircraft, is
> any interference caused by connection to said devices?  (I'm thinking
> it might be seen as harder to enforce "incoming allowed but no
> outgoing", and the atmosphere for such an inquiry might be poisoned by

Remember the law of squares. The power disapates proportional to the
distance. So a .6 watt phone next to a wall can penetrate it easier
than a 6 watt signal can at several miles away!

> recent incidents like those people trapped in airplanes on the tarmac
> for several hours in Detroit?)  You do see phones being available on
> some aircraft, and presumably they have been cleared of any
> interference (does the airline make money on such calls?).

> (I remembered seeing something -- not in the Digest? -- long ago about
> the President of the U.S. being able to respond, from 30,000 feet up,
> to a breaking development.  And we just heard of the plane carrying
> the Russian premier turning around in flight.)

The phone system on a plane is completly different than the wireless
systems we use here on the ground. The call coming into the airplane
is transmitted to the specific aircraft based on it's transponder. An
array of antennas are specifially installed to collect these phone
calls and then send them to the individual seats on the airplane using
what is basically a standard PBX type system!

Also, it is possible that using the new Iridium satellite phone (near
a window of course) you could make a phone call while on a flying
aircraft, and two way paging is possible with their new satellite
(truely satellite, no ground stations involved!... like with regular
pagers) pagers.

>A pager, on an airplane or anywhere else, cannot send outgoing signals.

Uh ... hate to shatter this myth, I have my Skytel 2way pager with me
right now. At work I use a RIM two way. Check out the RIM 950. An
awsome pager with a keyboard that is barely larger than a standard text
pager.  www.goamerica.com.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know if the Chicago Symphony
> Orchestra has ever addressed the question of 'vibrator mode' on
> pagers. I am sure they would be reasonable about it. Their main
> problem for a long time was cell phones which rang and pagers which
> beeped throughout concerts. They rightfully put a stop to that with
> their insistence to either turn the device off or leave it behind.

It comes down to, show a little restraint and respect for others. I
mean, if someone's phone goes off, refrain from flaming that individual. 
(Who knows, they may be packing.) And also, remember that if you are
going to be in a "quiet" area (you know where they are) then put your
phone on vibrate mode (if your phone doesn't have a vibrate mode, you
can get vibrating batteries for most model phones. I've even seen a
vibrating pen that clips in your shirt pocket and will vibrate
silently whenever your phone should ring!)


Ed

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some disruptions cannot be helped, and
are even a little humorous. Back in the 1960's, long before cellular
phones were invented, and pagers were relatively rare, I was at Symphony
one evening when such a thing happened. The conductor at the time was
a fellow named Fritz Reiner. Fritz was a very stern-looking, no-nonsense
sort of fellow. He had just finished greeting the audience, and turned
his back facing the orchestra to begin the performance. The audience
was silent, he raised his baton, but in the instant before the music
began, someone in the audience sneezed. Not just a quiet, dainty little
sneeze mind you, but a huge, very loud, snorting noise, the kind that
invariably wrenches your neck out of shape and sometimes sprains your
back if you are not careful. The kind that reverberates all over an
acoustically well built auditorium, bouncing off the walls and back
at you, etc. 

Poor Dr. Reiner ... he lowered his baton, and turned around and faced
the audience once again, and after looking around the hall, he said,
"you know, those things usually come in twos or threes; should I wait
a minute or so longer for the rest of it?" He continued, "I am looking
now at the person who did it; he is appropriatly mortified and I will
not identify him. I know it could not be helped." At which point he
broke his usual stern look and tried to keep from laughing but he 
could not help it. "Now be quiet for the next 37 minutes, would you
please?" ... and he turned once again to the orchestra and started
the performance. The next day's {Chicago Tribune} reviewed the program
as usual, and mentioned the incident. 

Years later, when the 'no cell phones or pagers' rule was implemented,
the sneezing incident was recalled in the little printed notice given
out to the audience as part of the evening's program: "The Trustees
of the Orchestral Association realize that bodily functions such as
sneezing and coughing cannot be easily controlled. However a cellular
phone or pager left in operating mode is inexcusable, and a reason
that a patron with same would be asked to excuse others present as 
they remained in his absence to enjoy the presentation. Please turn
off such devices before you enter the Hall to avoid a possible con-
frontation with Staff and the resulting embarassment to yourself and
others present."   Makes sense to me! :)    PAT]  

------------------------------

Date: 24 Apr 1999 04:21:16 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
From: modorney@aol.com (Mike O'Dorney)
Subject: Graybar Electric


> Ironically, Gray and Enos Barton were the founders of the firm of
> Gray and Barton which was eventually renamed Western Electric.  He
> didn't do too badly for himself, telephone or not, and went on to earn
> huge sums of money for his patents including the harmonic telegraph
> and teleautograph.  (When Western Electric spun off it's non-telephone
> electrical products division in 1927 they combined the names of the
> founders to form the name "Graybar" which is still around today.)

I seem to remember a Barr being a financier of Gray's efforts, but I
lack any details.  The Barr family was an old-line finance family of
the day and were involved in many tecnology endeavors.


Mike O'Dorney

------------------------------

From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:08:12 -0400


In article <telecom19.52.11@telecom-digest.org> by brettf@netcom.com:

(TELECOM Digest Editor noted)

>> Now let's get on with Mr. Haylock's problem. AT&T has been illegally
>> redlining inner city neighborhoods for years. The only difference is,
>> they teach their operators and supervisors to *lie about it* and make
>> up some other excuse instead. 

> If what you say is true, AT&T has not only been flouting the law for
> years, they have been doing it in a manner that is trivial to detect,
> trivial to prove, and with respect to a politically hot issue.

No, it's arrogant and snotty, and I wrote about it in this digest when
AT&T did it to me in an urban Detroit neighborhood, a few years ago.

> I simply don't think that none of the various minority-rights groups
> have ever bothered to get two people to place simultaneous
> calling-card calls to the same place from two different phones, one in
> a "good" neighborhood and one in a "bad" neighborhood.  Repeat this
> expperiment once a week for a month or two, and do it in several
> cities.  If AT&T is behaving as you suggest, they should have a pretty
> airtight case pretty quickly. And the financial resources needed to do
> this test are minimal. (In fact, wouldn't at least one of the Chicago
> area TV stations be interested in performing this test with you and
> airing the results?)

You'd be surprised how little modern broadcast journalists can
comprehend on the subject of consumer fraud if they can't experience
it in the context of an AOL chat room.  The carriers who are redlining
neighborhoods assume that you're probably not going to file a
complaint, and hoping that (in the event you actually do file one) a
regulatory agency may find the issue too trivial to pursue.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Journalists do not understand telco
inner workings any better than any other member of the public. For 
example, in the May, 1988 fire at the Illinois Bell central office in
Hinsdale, the next day's (Monday) {Chicago Tribune} and {Sun-Times}
devoted a paragraph or two each to the story, a sort of 'oh, by the
way, there was a fire yesterday at the phone company office in
Hinsdale' ... they had no idea -- no understanding at all -- of the
magnitude and seriousness of the situation. It was only after none of
*their* cellular phones and *their* pagers would operate that day as
a result that they caught on that a fire in a telco central office is
not quite the same as a fire in an old shack on the side of town
somewhere. In the Tuesday papers, they were screaming about it when
the realization finally sank in that a terrible, terrible thing had
happened. Lots of luck getting them to understand telco billing
practices. They still have not figured out the internet very well. PAT]

------------------------------

From: waltdnes@interlog.com (Walter Dnes)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 05:46:30 GMT


On Tue, 20 Apr 1999 01:25:13 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom TELECOM Digest
Editor noted:

> Maybe it is time for Judge Harold ("I hate AT&T") Greene to
> come out of retirement and do something useful for a change.
> Said the spokes-person, "maybe he could authorize the write
> off I was faced with last year; a couple million dollars in
> the third quarter is a bit more than the customer service
> reps are allowed to write off on their own. <grin> It had to
> go way above my manager's head before it could be posted."

> So who do you sympathize with? I think with some pressure,
> telcos could do something about it. Pressure? ... hello ...
> Judge Greene, are you reading this?    PAT]

The politically easy response is "make the big bad telco pay".  But
the "big bad telco" simply racks up an expense on its balance sheet
and raises its rates correspondingly, to stay at the top of its
allowed profit margin range.  Forcing cards to be accepted from all
districts is effectively a tax on all telephone users.

Even if you still believe it's fair, it shouldn't be ordered by a
bunch of political appointees in a public utilities commission.  It
rightfully belongs in a tax bill.  At least be upfront and honest
about it.  You're advocating a tax on all telephone users to pay for
higher write-offs.  Fine, let's see a bunch of politicians vote for
that tax.


Walter Dnes <waltdnes@interlog.com> procmail spamfilter
http://www.interlog.com/~waltdnes/spamdunk/spamdunk.htm

------------------------------

From: Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.chinet.com>
Subject: Re: Who Invented the Telephone?
Organization: Chinet - Public Access since 1982
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:27:41 GMT


In article <telecom19.51.6@telecom-digest.org>, Andrew Emmerson
<midshires@cix.co.uk> wrote:

> All credit to Meucci -- and to Reiss, Bourseuil, Gray and all the other
> inventors of the telephone!

Thank goodness for intellectual property law to help keep history straight.

------------------------------

From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:50:07 EDT
Subject: Re :  Local Calls Being Billed by IXC - Update
Reply-To: Wlevant@aol.com


Thanks to all who wrote about this one.

I had a fascinating conversation with a customer service rep at Bell
Atlantic a few days ago.  She thought I was hallucinating the entire
thing until (a) she looked up the calls and found out that they are
ABSOLUTELY supposed to be rated local, (b) I told her, in explicit
detail -- thanks, TELECOM Digest -- what they had done wrong in the
switch, why that caused this particular problem, and what needed to be
done to fix it, and (c) when she put me on hold to talk to "toll
investigations", she found out that someone else had just called to
report the EXACT same problem.

I would have been first to report it, but I was stuck in traffic, and
didn't get to make the call until about 8:30 AM.  :(

The upshot -- to date -- is that someone who can actually fix the
problem is supposed to call me tomorrow morning.  If the *right*
person calls me, it should be a five-minute fix.

Allegedly, BA will eat the charges for the mis-routed calls, though I
may have to pay MCI/Worldcom (whose fault it *isn't*) and get credit
back from BA (my IXC calls are not billed on my BA bill).

And, yes, until I started tossing around terms like "CO trunk
routing", they tried to blame my modem.

Interestingly, though, during this chat, I came to understand why
telco people blame modems for misrouting/misbilling problems, even
though -- as the BA rep finally conceded -- the CO switch can't tell
the difference between me dialing and my modem dialing.

It's actually kinda obvious, once you think about it :

    -- Once you program a modem to dial 10 digits, it will do so EVERY time;
    -- Until 10-digit dialing is mandatory, people generally don't dial 10 
digits;
    -- ISP's and other incoming-data-call customers tend to be served by 
CLEC's, because of how the reimbursements work;
    -- Presumably, Bell forgets to update its translations more often for 
CLEC-served central office codes than for their own;
    -- If a problem exists ONLY when dialing 10 digits, and ONLY when calling 
a CLEC-served number, it will appear MOST FREQUENTLY on modem-dialed calls, 
since(manually) dialing up a modem from the bedroom phone just to listen to 
the tones is NOT how most people have fun.


Q.E.D.

More on this later.

Bill

------------------------------

From: roamer1@pobox.com (Stanley Cline)
Subject: Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 02:18:06 GMT
Organization: how, with all the spam?
Reply-To: roamer1@pobox.com


On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:19:52 EDT, Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant) wrote:

> Calls from my home (610)275-xxxx to AOL's new local numbers
> (610)234-0528 and (610)233-0511 are now being billed on my IXC's
> invoice as INTRA-LATA calls !

> (610)275 and (610)233 have the same "name-place", and are therefore
> presumptively local calls; (610)234 is one town over, in a name-place
> that is ALSO local from here.

> (610)233 and (610)234 are provided by CLEC's.

> I assume that someone at Bell screwed up the routing tables in the
> (610)275 CO switch.

This seems to be happening quite a bit lately -- with more and more
CLECs coming into the market, intraLATA PIC, NPA splits, etc.

Example #1:

Tennessee recently ordered BellSouth to provide intraLATA PIC.  Right
after intraLATA PIC went into effect, my parents (who are physically
in Georgia, but are so close to Chattanooga that they are covered by
the Tennessee tariff under a long-standing agreement between GA and
TN) chose Qwest as their intraLATA carrier (they were already using
them for interLATA) and on the next phone bill, there were a large
number of of calls to their Powertel PCS phone -- whose number is a
local call from their house (706-866 home, 423-314 Powertel) -- in the
Qwest section of the bill.

I did some testing and it appeared there were only three prefixes
affected:  two of Powertel's three Chattanooga prefixes, and Sprint
PCS's one.  (Curiously, ChaseTel/Cricket Communications and AT&T/TCG
prefixes were *not* affected.)

Since then Bell appears to have fixed the local/1+ translations but
still has the 0+ ones wrong (0+ calls to the three prefixes go to
Qwest instead of BellSouth as all other local calls do.)

Example #2:

I work for a major ISP; we regularly receive reports from customers
who were billed toll to call our POPs, most of which are served by
CLECs.  Sometimes this is the customer's fault:

* customer dials a number that is not truly local
* customer forgets to reconfigure dialer after traveling
* etc.

Other times it is a telco's fault:

* bad translations (most often, call routed over a LD trunk group when
  the call should be routed over a local trunk group; in other cases,
  problems caused by recent NPA splits, intraLATA PIC, etc.)
* lack of interconnection agreement between independent LECs and our
  CLECs, such that calls to ILEC and wireless numbers in local rate
  centers are local but calls to a CLEC number in the same rate center
  are not (this seems to be especially common in the Carolinas for
  some odd reason)
* etc.

Our customer support folks *always* advise customers to check with
their LEC to make sure the call is in fact local, but some appear to
be getting bad or no information from ILEC operators, business office,
phone books, etc.  We do license a database of local calling areas,
but it is far from perfect (many independents do not show up at all,
Chicago/NYC metro/Boston/etc. local calling areas are not represented
correctly, etc.)


SC ("long time no post to c.d.t")

------------------------------

From: jlt@ihgp4.ih.lucent.com (-Light,J.R.)
Subject: Re: AT&T Discontinues Easy Reach 500 Number Service
Date: 24 Apr 1999 00:51:28 GMT
Organization: Lucent Technologies


R.I.P. 500 Service.  It is a shame that this service is ending.  I
had found the service to be great in the beginning, certainly since I
had picked my own seven digit home number to be my 500 number, my family 
never had to remember anything more than the 500 prefix.  Calls were 
forwarded to anywhere I travelled and rerouted promptly.

Last year it became obvious that AT&T did not want to keep the service.  
The fees and rates went skyward so ... I reduced my service to the
basic plan, waited to see what AT&T planned and finally dropped it
completely last month.

The rates are no longer reasonable, 50 cents a minute from payphones
vs 25 cents on the one rate calling card plan.  International rates
are NONSENSE.  Guess it is true, price it right and people will come,
price it wrong and people will leave.  (Unless thats what you want).

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #55
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat Apr 24 20:45:11 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA23665;
	Sat, 24 Apr 1999 20:45:11 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 20:45:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904250045.UAA23665@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #56

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 24 Apr 99 20:45:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 56

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC (rugeeky2)
    Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC (Eli Mantel)
    Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC (Thor L. Simon)
    Re: Who Invented the Telephone? (Marone Giuseppe)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (Jeffrey J. Carpenter)
    Broadband Access Conference (Bob Larribeau)
    Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Ed Kummel)
    Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn,OH (E Kummel)
    Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented, if So? (D McMahon)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (John David Galt)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Lisa Hancock)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: "rugeeky2?" <rugeeky2@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:21:34 -0400
Organization: up.net


The Michigan Public Service Commission just recently fined Century
Telephone for what would appear to be a similar problem.  Customer was
dialing an ISP in an exchange that was supposedly (I say that because
I don't know the details) a local call per tariff.  Century charged
Intralata toll rates.  Customer filed complaint, Century ordered to
pay fine.

You might want to check the particulars on the MPSC web site.  I'm
pretty sure the order's posted in the Communications division, and
easily found with a web search.


Cheers!

Joe

------------------------------

From: Eli Mantel <mantel@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 07:21:56 GMT


Bill Levant wrote:

> Anyone else having this problem lately? When I called WorldCom
> to have the calls taken off the bill, they talked to me like I
> was nutz.

It does sound like you're nutz, but Worldcom has encountered this
problem before.  Your situation appears to be identical to the one
I've posted on my web page at

http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/5395/pacbell2.html

In short, you are right that the problem is caused by some erroneous
tables.  But getting your bill fixed is another issue.

I would suggest telling your local phone company that you're disputing
the Worldcom portion of the bill and notifying Worldcom in writing
that, although you made the calls in question, your computer was
not set up to dial the Worldcom carrier access code and you were not
PIC'd to Worldcom for intralata calls, that their charges are invalid,
and that you demand that they credit your account for the amount in
dispute.  Perhaps someone else has a better suggestion.


Eli Mantel

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC
Date: 24 Apr 1999 16:38:08 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.52.6@telecom-digest.org>, Bill Levant
<Wlevant@aol.com> wrote:

> Calls from my home (610)275-xxxx to AOL's new local numbers
> (610)234-0528 and (610)233-0511 are now being billed on my IXC's
> invoice as INTRA-LATA calls !

> (610)275 and (610)233 have the same "name-place", and are therefore
> presumptively local calls; (610)234 is one town over, in a name-place
> that is ALSO local from here.

> (610)233 and (610)234 are provided by CLEC's.

> I assume that someone at Bell screwed up the routing tables in the
> (610)275 CO switch.

> Again.

> Interestingly, it only seems to happen if I dial as 10 digits (which
> will be REQUIRED here in about three months).

> Anyone else having this problem lately?  When I called WorldCom to
> have the calls taken off the bill, they talked to me like I was nutz.

It's not their fault, it's your LEC ("Bell")'s fault.  Worldcom can't
even tell that there's anything wrong.

One time I was billed for thousands of hours of such calls first as
LEC intra-LATA and then as AT&T intra-LATA.  In AT&T's case, they
weren't even selling intra-LATA in that LATA, so I got a bill but when
I tried to dispute it they couldn't find the records -- it was a
multi-thousand-dollar "lost toll" headache for me and them and pretty
much everyone involved.

Ultimately, it took a formal complaint to the Illinois Commerce
Commission to get everything resolved -- though a quick phone call and
an informal complaint did break the logjam and at least get the LEC
intra-LATA toll problem fixed, and the money I'd overpaid refunded.
The formal complaint was required to get Ameritech to admit responsibility 
to AT&T so they'd refund me the money _they_ had overbilled ... 
Ameritech's routing mistake, Ameritech's problem.  Not mine.

Be sure to write _everything_ down when you interact with your LEC on
this issue, particularly refusal to fix the problem or commit to a
date by which the problem will be fixed.  Then be sure to read or fax
your notes to the local regulatory authiry when you contact them to
have the matter resolved.

Thor Lancelot Simon	                              tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:45:41 +0200
From: Marone Giuseppe <Giuseppe.Marone@CSELT.IT>
Subject: Re: Who Invented the Telephone?


I could add one further name to the growing list of telephone inventors:
Innocenzo Manzetti(Aosta, Italy, 1826-1877).

Innocenzo Manzetti was an ingenuous character whose interests ranged
from astronomy to hydraulics.

He is particularly renowned for his robots playing musical
instruments.  Reportedly, he started his experiments with the
"speaking telegraph" at the age of 18 and the first working prototype
of a telephone dates back to ~1850. Although his activity was
considered with interest by Meucci himself and it seems that
A. G. Bell had payed a visit to his lab, Manzetti didn't patent his
invention partly because he lacked financial means and partly because
of his shy and humble character.

You can find (little!) more at: 
http://space.tin.it/scienza/macanigg/index.htm

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:48:29 -0400
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <jjc@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to go Says NANPA


> VERY informative.. they now project total exhaustion between 2006 and
> 2012, with their best guess being 2007..... 8 1/2 years to go! NO FCC
> action recommended regarding 10-D or 11-D dialing yet. No timetable for
> expansion yet. No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing
> patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about deciding
> IF 4+8 will be the solution?

I read the full report this morning.  I think the most important point
to be taken from it is that number pooling has to be implemented, and
it should be implemented as soon as possible. As many carriers as
possible must participate including donating blocks from their
existing pools of numbers.  The FCC needs to step this up and quit
letting this issue continue to drag on.  The longer this is delayed,
the more likely of exhaust at an early date.

If it is not implemented, and we exhaust in 2007, we are looking at a
problem that could be worse than Y2K in terms of effort needed to
convert phone number sizes.


Jeffrey J. Carpenter
P.O. Box 471
Glenshaw, PA 15116-0471

Phone: +1 500 488-4800
Fax: +1 500 488-4802
Email: jjc@pobox.com
Web: http://pobox.com/~jjc/

------------------------------

From: Bob Larribeau <bob@larribeau.com>
Subject: Broadband Access Conference
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 12:57:11 -0700
Organization: InterNex Information Services 1-800-595-3333


CalBUG, the California Broadband Users' Group, formerly the California
ISDN Users' Group, is holding a conference on Broadband Access
Technologies that will cover ISDN, DSL, cable modems, and broadband
wireless. Keynote speaker will be Reggie Best, VP of Business Products
at 3Com.

Tuesday June 15 will have 8 tutorials on these 4 technologies, PPP,
L2TP, and IPSec. Wednesday June 16 will have the keynote sessions an 6
other sessions on these technologies, Internet options, voice over
broadband, and VPNs.

The price is $250 for both days or $150 for one day. Audio tapes will
be available.

Go to http://www.ciug.org or call (800)823-9402 for more information and a
registration form.


Bob Larribeau
Chairman

------------------------------

From: Ed Kummel <intouchusa@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ...
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 01:07:37 -0100


Personally, having experience in European GSM (900MHz), US GSM (also
known as PCS, 1900MHZ) US digital, both TDMA (AT&T) and CDMA (LEC) and
analog, I personally prefer the voice quality of the analog
system. The advantage is that it is FULLY deployed throughout the USA
(I mean even in remote areas, and the US government has just opened up
territories inside national parks for cellular coverage).

My main problem with US PCS digital services is the familiar "robot"
voice as you leave coverage. Also, the absolute lack of data on some
networks (western wireless anyone?) and their incompatibility
(Ericsson switches as opposed to Nortel switches) between systems (try
roaming with your Nokia 9000! What works in Atlanta, won't work in
Oshkosh).  It seems that the digital networks that are prevalent
(Powertel, Sprint, AT&T, Pactel, Western Wireless) is looking more and
more like the way the analog cellular system was 5-8 years ago. (no
roaming between carriers, and if so, no calls could be received...we
still have the problem of no international dialing on analog systems).

But all in all, give me a good ol' analog phone with a modem
connection and my Newton 2000 and I'll connect at 14.4 every time (all
GSM systems restrict data to 9600...that's if they even offer
it! ... <yeah Sprint ... I'm talking to you!>) Well, just my RANT!  


Ed

------------------------------

From: Ed Kummel <intouchusa@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, Ohio
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 01:48:42 -0100


A simple phrase. Speed dial and hands free! Come on! I want to call a
friend, he/she's in the speed dial. Hit the "abc" button and the first
letter of their name, then the up/down till I get their name then
send.  There's a mic near my visor that I talk into. So is a police
officer going to pull me over because he sees me talking? How is he to
know that I'm on a phone call or just singing to my radio! And while
he's looking at me trying to figure out what the heck I'm doing, how's
he driving? He certainly isn't looking where HE's going, he's looking
at me! 

Ed

------------------------------

From: denis@pickaxe.demon.co.uk (Denis McMahon)
Subject: Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented, if So?
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 01:02:20 GMT
Organization: E-Menu Ltd
Reply-To: denis@pickaxe.demon.co.uk


On Tue, 20 Apr 1999 02:28:42 GMT, Kent K. Steinbrenner <kks@csi.com> wrote:

> A few days ago on the U.S. Metric Assn.'s listserv, a list member
> asked the following:

>> "While, looking up some information on telephone systems worldwide, I came
>> across a website on country codes.  I know that each country has its own
>> telephone code for calls originating outside to reach inside.  What was
>> interesting, was that the website noted that Europe was (is) suppose to get
>> a region wide code beginning in 1999.  The code number is +388."

There's some info about this at:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/8818/wtng-reg.html#Europewide


Rgds,

Denis McMahon denis@pickaxe.demon.co.uk  | All mail from some domains is 
Mob+44 802 468949 Tel/Fax+44 1705 698221 | deleted due to high UCE levels
AXE-10 Engineer / Switch Tech? Join the AXE-10 Technical Mailing List. 
mailto:denis@pickaxe.demon.co.uk for invite. No Agencies / Advertising.

------------------------------

From: John David Galt <jdg@rahul.net>
Reply-To: jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 18:06:41 GMT


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> Telco insists anyone can get a calling card; anyone at all with a
> reasonable credit history and a telephone in their name. Therefore, no
> discrimination based on the *person*.  Its just that no calling card
> can be used for international calls when placed from a pay phone in
> certain areas of high fraud where telco has no recourse to the caller.
> Go to a private dwelling place or a store right next to the same pay
> phone and use the phone there, even charging it to the same calling
> card which had been denied service from the payphone outside directly
> in front on the street if desired. Telco says anyone can bill a call
> however they wish, no questions asked, as long as there exists a
> physical pair of wires leading to someone who can be held responsible
> for the uses made of their instruments, as per tariff.

So what's the problem?  Someone owns that pay phone.  Bill them, and I
bet they become more careful where they put pay phones, or simply ban
the calling cards themselves.  If there's a law that keeps telco from
billing them, then that law is the problem.

> Maybe it is time for Judge Harold ("I hate AT&T") Greene to come out
> of retirement and do something useful for a change. Said the spokes-
> person, "maybe he could authorize the write off I was faced with last
> year; a couple million dollars in the third quarter is a bit more than
> the customer service reps are allowed to write off on their own. <grin>
> It had to go way above my manager's head before it could be posted."

> So who do you sympathize with? I think with some pressure, telcos
> could do something about it. Pressure? ... hello ... Judge Greene, are
> you reading this?    PAT]

I would be very surprised if "redlining" wasn't common WAY before the
breakup of the Bell System on 1/1/84.


John David Galt


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have two responses to make here. Despite
the large number of private pay phones -- COCOTS -- seen everywhere
these days, the majority of payphones located in totally public places
such as street corners, parks, the beach, etc are still 'owned' by telco
itself. That is, the 'subscriber' to the service at that location is
telco, and the commissions payable go back to telco. Should telco
have to sue itself to get its money transferred from one account to
another?  :)  If a payphone is located in a place of business, or a
lodging house or similar, it may be 'public' meaning telco does not
charge to have it there and in fact pays commissions for it being
there (assuming the location is a very good one in telco's opinion)
or it may be 'semi-public' meaning the owner of the premises pays a
smaller than usual fee for service, with telco collecting and keeping
the coins in the box. With 'semi-public' or 'public' telephones, there
is no tariff I am aware of which allows telco to hold the entity or
person on whose premises the phone is located responsible for abuse.

If the phone is a COCOT, then the COCOT owner can be held responsible
however any smart person in that business would have his phones set
up in the telco central office switch as 'coin service', and he would
have an AOS -- alternate operator service -- responding to zero-plus
calls, to screen as much fraud as possible. So John, there is not 
always an 'owner' to be held responsible. 

My second point regards the history of redlining, and did it exist
prior to Judge Greene's reign of terror. Probably it was going on at
least a few years, starting in the middle or late seventies. The
kindly judge certainly did not create the social conditions in the USA
of the past twenty years which caused redlining to be so prevalent.
My thinking is it started about the same time that AT&T had its 
overall general crackdown on toll fraud during that era. Recall please
that through the 1950-60 era, some of the most dismal places to be
*now* were absolute heavens back then. The west side of Chicago in
the Chicago-Kedzie service area was a wonderful place to live. All
the major department stores in Chicago including Fields, Carsons, 
and others had branches on the west side. There were banks, movie
theatres, restaurants, grocery stores, hospitals; anything you could
want along with very well kept homes and apartments, etc. There was
a large Jewish community on the west side of Chicago with several
synagogues. 

Then in the 1960's in rapid succession we had the assasination of
President Kennedy, followed by a very rapid escalation of the war in
Kosovo -- err, excuse me, Vietnam -- the assasination of M.L. King 
and three days of hideous rioting all over Chicago with most of the
west side totally burned down, more riots in August at the Democratic
convention with those west side merchants who had not taken the hint
and closed their shops for good the prior April finally deciding to
split the scene, and more. Today the west side of Chicago consists
of cut-rate liquor stores, '7/Eleven type' convenience food stores
with very high prices, and currency exchanges. Of course there is a
payphone or two in the parking lot of every cut-rate liquor store,
how else would the drug dealers be able transact business? No, Greene
did not cause the redlining ... not at all.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: 24 Apr 1999 20:21:40 GMT
Organization: Net Access BBS


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> And in telco's defense, they insist it is not discrimination *based on
> any certain race or nationality of person*, it is discrimination based
> on geographic areas. Thus far, geographic areas are not a protected
> category as is someone's race. 

Many court decisions have indeed held that geographic areas ARE a
protected category in terms of racial discrimination.

Many racial discrimination lawsuits have been successfully won on
implied evidence, not actual evidence.  Thus, if someone could prove
AT&T discriminated against a certain urban neighborhood, and that
neighborhood happened to be all black, then AT&T is guilty of racial
discrimination.  It's irrelevent whether it was crime, lousy business,
high costs of doing business, whatever.

I sure don't agree with this, but over the years this is what the
courts have been deciding.  I don't like racial discrimination and
want it stopped, but I don't want legitimate forms of business to
be curtailed as a result either.

In more recent years, the courts have been a little more demanding of
actual direct proof of racial discrimination, not just implied proof.
(However, look at the recent NBA ruling and the SATs -- they claimed
the SATs were racially discriminatory and thus not allowed to be
used as a factor in recruitment eligibility.)

In Philadelphia, realtors are greatly restricted in the kinds of
questions they may answer prospective buyers lest there'd be any
inference of racism or racial "steering" in the answer.

Actually, when it comes to toll fraud, I don't think the neighborhood
is as much of an issue as where the phone happens to be located.
Phones in busy locations, unsupervised locations, or places like an
airport could be more vulnerable.

I would think with today's computers, it'd be easy to identify narrow
pockets of fraud vulnerability.  For example, if a certain phone in a
candy store is often used for fraud attempts, kill service to that phone
and phones near it.  Easy enough to do.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know why card reader type
phones never really caught on?  I think that type of phone would be
most useful in combatting fraud. If the caller had to insert the
actual pastic card in the phone -- as one does at a cash machine --
and then punch in a pin as well, that would defeat the people with the
binoculars completely wouldn't it, as well as the eavesdroppers. No
physical plastic, no call. If you have the plastic, you stil have to
know the pin, and three or four random attempts to find out the pin 
by trial and error would result in the card being cancelled. Look at
cash machines: if the machine finds you to be a disagreeable person
or suspects you are a charlatan, it just swallows your card and
won't give it back at all, telling you to go see your customer service
rep at the bank instead if you have something to complain about. 

You see lots of cash machines in busy public places like airports, and
I would think the prospect of walking away with a handful of cash since
the smallest denomination given out is usually $5 or $10 and worth 
more than some lousy phone call to PrimativeTown, ThirdWorld. Why
aren't cash machines in those areas victimized by more fraud?   PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #56
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sun Apr 25 01:27:34 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA05182;
	Sun, 25 Apr 1999 01:27:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 01:27:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904250527.BAA05182@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #57

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 25 Apr 99 01:27:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 57

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Use of Cellular Phones in Schools (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing for the House of God (Arthur Ross)
    Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC (Joshua Thompson)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (L. Winsom)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (John R. Levine)
    Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Ryan Tucker)
    Re: Local Calls Billed by IXC -- FIXED, it Seems ! (Bill Levant)
    Hearing on Viruses Becomes Debate on Privacy (Monty Solomon)
    CA Legislative Info Wanted (Rich Andrews)
    Please, Help (Derek Sekala)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 25 Apr 1999 00:12:43 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools


After the horrible incident this past week at Columbine High School in
Littleton, CO, many school administrators are now rethinking the ban
in place in many schools on the possession of cell phones on school
grounds.

It appears that at the the height of the incident at Columbine, while
much of the shooting was going on, local police received numerous
calls from students at the school to report the incident. Police say
that part of the reason for their early response at the scene were the
numerous calls to 911 which 'piled in on top of each other' in a
matter of a minute or two not only from landline phones in the
building but also from students using cell phones who actually had the
killers in their sight and were able to describe them and narrate
their actions to police as the massacre was going on.

In an emergency conference call between administrators of large school
districts in the United States on Wednesday, in the aftermath of the
Columbine affair, the question came up, 'would the situation have
been worse than it was -- if that is conceivable -- if the students
who aided police by using their cellular phones inside the school to
talk to police officers who were gathering outside the school had
been unable to do so.'

No consensus was reached, however one point that brought agreement
between several of the conferees was that while cellular phones are
certainly no substitute for school safety and security, a student who
is able to report an incident immediatly rather than have to go to 
a teacher or the school office to use the phone -- with a few minutes
wasted in the process -- should be encouraged to do so. I think I
would agree.

              =====================================

Some personal thoughts -- this being Sunday, my sermon for this week:

How much worse are things going to become in the USA?  We have a
president who tells parents they have to be careful about keeping
their children from seeing a lot of violent images; meanwhile he
continues throwing bombs with abandon at Yugoslavia. Does he not
understand that children see that also? Maybe the Yugoslavians and
their friends the Russians will get enough of it one of these days
and start throwing some bombs in our direction. My oh my, wouldn't
Dollar Bill be the righteous and offended one. "Of all the nerve,"
he would probably say. 

This past week the press reports that there have been dozens of
arrests all over the United States of teenagers who not only made mock
of the events in Littleton, which they are free to do I guess under
the First Amendment no matter how much it hurts others, but in
addition were making plans to act out the same scenario in their own
school. Now suddenly this past week, wearing a black trench coat has
become fashionable. What *is* going on in our society? Will someone
please tell me and help me to understand?

We used to have years between major tragedies that shook our concious-
ness; then at least a few months; now in the past couple years it 
seems we are bombarded with one ugly incident after another, never a
break in stride, never a pause. An incident similar to Littleton
occurred a couple years ago in Scotland; in the little town where the
man went in the school and shot at all the children. But like prisons
in the United States these days, where the crowds waiting to get in 
the front door force the early release of those waiting at the exit
door, we will have forgotten about Littleton by next week because of
some new, still more shocking, still more hideous event ... just as
none of the commentators this past week made any mention of Scotland
in their reports. I suppose they have all forgotten about it. In the
past year we have had several church arsons, abortion clinic bombings,
an innocent young man in Wyoming viciously beaten to death because
he was different than the other guys, and now this latest thing.
What *is* happening in America? 

Saturday morning the Jehovah Witness people came around. I refuse to
be rude to them. I stood there talking to them for awhile. I think
they mean well, but are very misguided. So they stood there witnessing
to me, while I witnessed to them. I asked them why, according to their
understanding of the Scriptures, are we are getting the almost constant
emotional pounding we have been taking the past couple years. One said
it was because we are living in 'the End Times' ... I had to excuse
myself to get ready to go to the library, but I told the man, don't
let the why-too-kay millenium bug bite you on the ass on your way to
heaven or wherever. And a good time was had by all.

               =================================

So, now after the massacre at Columbine, school administrators are
thinking cell phones in school are not such a bad thing after all. 

Thanks for reading this!


Patrick Townson

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:39:00 -0700
From: Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing for the House of God


Ed Kummel <intouchusa@erols.com> wrote: (a couple hundred lines deleted)

Pat -

I agree with the "turn off your phone in the theater/symphony" view,
based on simple etiquette. But much of the remainder of what this guy
says is utter nonsense.

Cellular phones DO wake up and transmit occasionally for the purpose of
making their presence known so calls can be delivered to the right
geographical neighborhood (paging). This is called registration. It
has nothing whatsoever to do with controlling the transmitter
power. That IS done, but only when you're talking, or, to be more
precise, when the phone is "on a traffic channel."

The business about the battery lasting longer if you put the phone in
a microwave might be true, but not because of transmitting but rather
RECEIVING. There is no point to trying to monitor a paging channel if
there is no system signal to listen to. Receiving costs battery power
too!

The seatback phone systems are specifically designed and, I would
hope, tested for mutual non-interference with A/C systems. They are
indeed completely different than the cellular and PCS service (and, I
have always observed, exhorbitantly expensive!).

As to "stepped power increase" causing harmonic distortion products,
that too is nonsense. Intermodulation and nonlinear distortion
products ARE the potential hazard in A/C, but the power control steps
are largely unrelated to it.

I have no idea what might be behind the statement "The power disapates
[sic] proportional to the distance. So a .6 watt phone next to a wall
can penetrate it easier than a 6 watt signal can at several miles
away!"  Maxwell's equations are linear. Given a particular impinging
field pattern, the amount penetrating is proportional to the incident
flux level. Where the "easier" notion comes from is a mystery to
me. And, BTW, the wavelengths of the cellular and PCS services are
short enough, i.e. smaller than the size of the windows, that they
penetrate the interior of A/C very well. 

If you ingore the rote orders of the crew about not using your phone
and go ahead and do it anyway (on the ground, that is), you will find,
as a general rule, that it works fine, assuming the local carrier has
adequate coverage of the neighborhood of the airport. Cellular runs in
the band 824-894 MHz, making the wavelength about 35 cm. PCS runs in
the band 1850-1990 MHz, making the wavelength about 15 cm. EM
radiation will penetrate conducting structures well if the openings
are larger than the wavelength, as a general rule.

Everyday example:

FM broadcast signals can often be heard through tunnels, while AM
cannot. The wavelength of the former is about 3 meters, while the
latter is about 100 times greater or 0.3 km. The short wavelength
propagates freely, more or less, in the tunnel, while the longer
wavelength sees it as a waveguide below cutoff.

I have had conversations about this with some pilots. There seems to
be a belief that there is some potential for non-obvious problems,
like interference with braking systems when taxiing. I'm inclined to
not believe that, as the transmit power from the hand-held portable
phones is limited to about 1/4 Watt, which is pretty small. But given
the general level of concern about passenger safety under all
circumstances, I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt on
that one.

Using them in the air is a) NOT a good idea, for precisely the reasons
that the airline worry about -- interference with radio aides to
navigation and communication, and b) in most cases would not work
because of very high Doppler shifts, for which the equipment is not
designed, and c) the altitude will make, generally, a very large
number of cells "visible," causing untold levels of confusion among
the devices attempting to talk to one another. Although most people
probably don't realize it, cellular DOES NOT WORK in a true free space
propagation environment due to excessive interference levels. It is
the ugly, non-free-space propagation that prevails in the ground
clutter that makes it viable, believe it or not.  Putting one of the
stations at very high altitude puts you into the free space regime,
pretty much, getting back to the "seeing too many cells" situation.

Getting back to the original topic, you might be interested to know
that the Euros are considering a modification of the GSM air interface
standard that will prevent, via messaging, the phones from operating
in certain areas such as theaters and concert halls because of just
this problem.

Doing this by overt jamming is most definitely unwise, to say nothing
of flat-out illegal, if that is what this purported product
does. Federal regulations govern what can be transmitted in what
spectral bands, and at what power level. Deliberate jamming of an
otherwise permitted service has NEVER, to my knowledge, been
permitted, at least not in the United States.


Best regards,

Dr. Arthur Ross
2325 East Orangewood Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730
Phone: 602-371-9708
Fax  : 602-336-7074

------------------------------

From: fgoldstein@wn.DOnotSPAM.net (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC
Date: 25 Apr 1999 01:51:36 GMT
Organization: CENTnet


In article <telecom19.52.6@telecom-digest.org>, Wlevant@aol.com says:

> Calls from my home (610)275-xxxx to AOL's new local numbers
>(610)234-0528 and (610)233-0511 are now being billed on my IXC's
> invoice as INTRA-LATA calls !

> (610)275 and (610)233 have the same "name-place", and are therefore
> presumptively local calls; (610)234 is one town over, in a name-place
> that is ALSO local from here.

> (610)233 and (610)234 are provided by CLEC's.

> I assume that someone at Bell screwed up the routing tables in the
> (610)275 CO switch.

> Again.

I double checked myself -- the prefix code updates are available from
trainfo.com -- and indeed, those prefix codes are in PHSZ 30 and 31,
while 275 is in 30.  The CLEC is Worldcom (ex-MFS).

It's worth checking, though, because AOL and other ISPs sometimes get
the place names wrong.  Worldcom's UUNET provides rent-a-modem service
to lots of ISPs, including AOL, and they have a bunch of errors.  The
caller is responsible, and it's not easy to find out what's really
where -- ILEC phone books often don't list CLEC prefix codes, and they
proliferate too fast for phone books anyway.

But in this case, Bell just mistakenly treated the new local code as
toll and misbilled.  Not the first time, not the last.


Fred R. Goldstein   k1io   fgoldstein"at" wn.net 
These are my own opinions. You expect anyone else to agree?

------------------------------

From: Joshua M. Thompson <om@server1.mich.com>
Subject: Re: Local Calls Being Billed as Intra-LATA Through IXC
Date: 25 Apr 1999 01:47:29 GMT
Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com


rugeeky2? <rugeeky2@aol.com> wrote:

> The Michigan Public Service Commission just recently fined Century
> Telephone for what would appear to be a similar problem.  Customer was
> dialing an ISP in an exchange that was supposedly (I say that because
> I don't know the details) a local call per tariff.  Century charged
> Intralata toll rates.  Customer filed complaint, Century ordered to
> pay fine.

At least one of our customers was involved in that lawsuit. I'm a bit
hazy on the details too but I believe that the end result was the MPSC
ruling that CLECs could not bill toll or long distance rates to
NPA-NXXs owned by other LECs if both the source and destination
NPA-NXX are in the same rate center. (Century was arguing that it did
not have local calling agreements with the other LEC in the area and
thus was not going to make the calls local.)

Century has a history of pulling stunts like this, I seem to recall
that in another area of Michigan thehy started changing the tariffs
(ie, making what used to be local calls into long distance) without
telling customers.  The customers basically found out when they got
their bill. We got lots of tech support calls from that one too.


Network Administrator        | FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC.
mich.com, Inc.               |   -- The motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
248-442-1000 x212            |      (Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!)

------------------------------

From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: 25 Apr 1999 02:06:56 GMT
Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know why card reader type
> phones never really caught on?   [good points snipped]

Damn good question.  I myself would rather have the security of
inserting a card and entering just my pin number rather than entering
(and remembering) a whole series of numbers.

Plus, it would seem to me that a card reader public phone is a lot
cheaper to build than the traditional coin acceptor with the
associated armor plate and mechanisms (and the need for someone to
pick up the coins).

Do they even have non-coin public phones anymore in airports and train
stations?  I don't recall seeing any lately.

And after all, one needs a bank card to get cash or a transit card
to ride the bus or train.

> Why aren't cash machines in those areas victimized by more fraud?  

There are some fraud attempts, bank naturally try to keep those things
quiet.  Some thieves have gone to very great lengths to _physically_
steal an entire cash machine from a bank or convenience store using
heavy equipment (like a fork-lift truck or backhoe.)

Holdups of users while at or just after using a cash machine are a
problem.

There was one interesting fraud case.  Thieves set up a phony cash
machine in a public location (a mall IIRC).  It had a working mag card
reader.  When customers put in their card for a withdrawal, the
transaction was rejected, but the phony machine recorded what was on
the card and the customers' PIN.  A few days later the thieves removed
the fake cash machine.  They then took the information gathered and
made withdrawals from the accounts.

------------------------------

Date: 24 Apr 1999 23:24:44 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> The NANP Exhaust Study has been published ...

> http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

> VERY informative ... they now project total exhaustion between 2006
> and 2012, with their best guess being 2007... 8 1/2 years to go! NO
> FCC action recommended regarding 10-D or 11-D dialing yet. No timetable 
> for expansion yet. No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing 
> patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
> deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

Of course it won't be the solution.  There are plenty of unused ten
digit phone numbers.  Unfortunately, insane amounts of them are locked
up in 10,000 number blocks that CLECs have reserved so every CLEC has
a prefix in every rate center in which they might ever offer service.
(I don't blame the CLECs for this, the way the system is set up, a
CLEC puts itself at a significant disadvantage if it doesn't hoard
numbers like this.)

The solution is number pooling and accelerated local number
portability.  Once you have true LNP, you no longer need a prefix per
carrier, and the CLECs can give back all those hoarded prefixes.
Indeed, the faster LNP arrives, the better since it's easier to give
back a prefix that's completely unused than one where they've started
to issue numbers in it.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: rtucker+from+199904@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker)
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ...
Date: 25 Apr 1999 03:30:42 GMT
Organization: TTGCITN Communications, Des Moines IA and Rochester NY
Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+199904@katan.ttgcitn.com


In <telecom19.56.7@telecom-digest.org>, Ed Kummel
<intouchusa@erols.com> spewed:

> My main problem with US PCS digital services is the familiar "robot"
> voice as you leave coverage. Also, the absolute lack of data on some
> networks (western wireless anyone?) and their incompatibility

Obviously, you're not talking about VoiceStream (which is owned by WW)
 ... data is alive and well.  Slightly pricey for casual users (at $30,
flat rate), but it works.

IS-95 (aka CDMA) is the only other digital wireless system commonly
deployed in North America that supports data.  However, try asking
Sprint PCS (the major IS-95 carrier) ...

However, on May 5, Frontier (B-side 800MHz carrier in Rochester NY) will
be launching data (as well as the Nokia 6185).  We'll see.

> It seems that the digital networks that are prevalent
> (Powertel, Sprint, AT&T, Pactel, Western Wireless) is looking more and
> more like the way the analog cellular system was 5-8 years ago. (no
> roaming between carriers, and if so, no calls could be received...we
> still have the problem of no international dialing on analog systems).

Bah, GSM roaming beats anything AMPS any day.  Data is still rather
fragmented within North America, but for voice calls and incoming/outgoing 
SMS, it's fine.

'course, then there's the big coverage holes (namely, Rochester NY).
Chicago shouldn't be a problem much longer, and that's the only other
one that annoys me (being between Des Moines [home] and Rochester
[where I live]).

And, of course, by the time this post hits the Digest, the entire
industry may be completely changed.  Such is the wireless industry.  :-)


Ryan Tucker <rtucker+16@ttgcitn.com>  http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/
President, TTGCITN Communications   Box 92425, Rochester NY 14692-0425
Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored.

------------------------------

From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 20:20:15 EDT
Subject: Re: Local Calls Billed by IXC -- FIXED, it Seems !
Reply-To: Wlevant@aol.com


Well, here's the latest.

BA did indeed call me back today.  Not an engineer, but a somewhat 
higher-level customer-service person.

Said " ... it could be a translations problem ... HEY, how do you 
know about translations ?"

She then called translations, and called me back.  Sez it's fixed, and
gave me a $20.00 credit for my trouble, since BA can't charge back
calls to an IXC unless they bill through BA (and Worldcom, at least in
my case, doesn't).  That should fairly well offset the toll charges in
question.

I can't verify the fix, but I *can* now reach my cell phone with 10
digits; that didn't used to work, either, until I told them about it
this morning.

All in all, BA gets 10 out of a possible 10 on this one.  

Unless the problem persists.


Bill

------------------------------

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.COM>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.COM>
Subject: Hearing on Viruses Becomes Debate on Privacy
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 13:54:57 -0400


By JERI CLAUSING

WASHINGTON - A congressional hearing called to explore potential
solutions to computer viruses like the fast-spreading Melissa strain
on Thursday turned into a debate about online privacy and the
investigative methods used to track the computer programmer accused of
writing it.

"While I am a little bit concerned about the pernicious effect of
viruses, I am more than a little bit disquieted about the way this
investigation was pursued," Representative Anthony Weiner, a New York
Democrat, said during the two-hour hearing of the House Science
Committee's technology subcommittee.

http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/04/cyber/articles/16virus.html

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 07:41:35 -0700
From: Rich Andrews <randrews@mail.arc.nasa.gov>
Subject: CA Legislation Info Wanted


Hello,

Can you point me to California legislation on Unbundled Services/CLECs?

Thank-you,

Rich Andrews
650-604-6519

------------------------------

From: Derek Sekala <dsekala@polbox.com>
Subject: Please, Help
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 20:47:41 +0200


	Hello Patrick. How are you? My name is Derek Sekala and I'm
Polish. I'm student and I write my diploma of my Bachelor Degree. I
was serfing in internet and looking for informations to my diploma so
I found your WWW. I need informations about telecomunication
especially phone banking (history of home banking ) Do you know any
web sides where I can find information about this? It's very important
for me.  I'll become your slave ( smile ) if you'll help me.

This is my e-mail:  dsekala@polbox.com
					See Ya

P.S. Sorry for my mistakes I don't know English fluently.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone need a new slave? I do not
need one presently. <g> Perhaps someone with familiarity on the 
subject of phone banking can help Derek. I have no need to go to the
bank that often <sniff ..> the bank ... hmmm ... <thinking> ... well,
let's see ... I had the sermon earlier in this issue, so now it is
time to pass the offering plate. Readers: if you have not yet made
your annual contribution to the Digest for this year, would you 
please consider doing so at this time. Your financial support is very
helpful in keeping the Digest and web site alive. The suggested
donation is twenty dollars per reader/year, but you are the person
to best decide what is appropriate. Your smallest gifts really do
help a lot.  To those of you who have already responded for this
year, I extend my grateful thanks.  

   Patrick Townson, PO Box 765, Junction City, KS 66441-0765 

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #57
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon Apr 26 15:41:09 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA28725;
	Mon, 26 Apr 1999 15:41:09 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 15:41:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904261941.PAA28725@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #58

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 99 15:41:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 58

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #180, April 26, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Book Review: "Communications Standard Dictionary", Martin Weik (Rob Slade)
    Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles (Randal L. Schwartz)
    Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't they? (Ralph Hyre)
    Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY (W.D.A. Geary)
    Local Access Alert (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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 Apr 1999 10:31:07 -0400
From: Angus TeleManagement <angus@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #180, April 26, 1999


************************************************************
*                                                          *
*                      TELECOM UPDATE                      *
*    Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin    *
*                  http://www.angustel.ca                  *
*               Number 180:   April 26, 1999               *
*                                                          *
*    Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by     *
*             generous financial support from:             *
*                                                          *
*  AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/   *
*  Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/         *
*  Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/       *
*  MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/     *
*  Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ *
*  Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/       *
*  TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/    *
*                                                          *
************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE: 

** Area Code Crisis in 2007?
** Ontario Independents Must Raise Local Rates
** Europeans Plan Biggest Telecom Merger
** Cableco Allows Third-Party Internet Access
** Canadian Companies to Register Domain Names
** BCT.Telus Buys Ontario Phone Book Publisher
** Rogers Communications in the Black
** Call-Net Revenue Up, Earnings Down
** Entourage Workers Laid Off
** Strikers Will Attend BCE Meeting
** Cantel Grows by 62,700
** NBTel to Expand VideoActive Network
** Bell Satellite Gets Relay, Pay-TV Licenses
** Iridium CEO Quits
** Sprint Cuts Overseas Rates
** Cogeco Net Up 17%
** MT&T Drops Ampersand
** Call Center Seminars in Your Office

============================================================

AREA CODE CRISIS IN 2007? North America will run out of three-digit
area codes between 2006 and 2012 -- most likely in 2007. The exact
date depends on demand and on conservation measures. The North
American Numbering Plan Administration reaches that conclusion in a
report released April 22.

** The U.S. Cellular Telephone Industry Association has 
   challenged the report's assumptions. They believe the 
   exhaust date will be up to 10 years later.

http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf
http://www.wow-com.com/lawpol/filing/pdf/ctialtr042299.pdf

ONTARIO INDEPENDENTS MUST RAISE LOCAL RATES: CRTC Decision 99-5 orders
35 independent telcos in Ontario and Quebec to raise residential rates
to $19.85 and business rates to $45.45, effective July 1. The change
will reduce the amount of subsidy required from long distance.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/02/d99-05.htm

EUROPEANS PLAN BIGGEST TELECOM MERGER: Deutsche Telekom and Telecom
Italia are in final negotiations for the largest telecom merger
yet. The deal, designed to thwart Olivetti's bid to acquire Telecom
Italia, will create the world's second-largest telecom company.

CABLECO ALLOWS THIRD-PARTY INTERNET ACCESS: Regional Cablesystems in
Timmins, Ontario, has become the first cable company in North America
to provide high-speed access to independent Internet Service
Providers. Two ISPs now offer service on the cableco's facilities.

CANADIAN COMPANIES TO REGISTER DOMAIN NAMES: Three Canadian companies
will be allowed to register Internet domain names and addresses when
the Network Solutions Inc. monopoly ends later this year. The Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers has approved 34 applications 
to compete with NSI, including: Domain Direct, a division of Tucows
Interactive Ltd. of Toronto; Internet Domain Registrars, a division of
Internet Gateway Corp. of Vancouver; and A Technology Co. of Toronto.

BCT.TELUS BUYS ONTARIO PHONE BOOK PUBLISHER: BCT.Telus has acquired
the Ontario assets of Locator Group Inc, an Orangeville-based phone
book publisher that went into receivership in March. BCT.Telus says it
plans to publish 20 to 30 directories in Southern Ontario.

ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS IN THE BLACK: Rogers Communications had net
revenues of $46.9 Million in the first quarter of 1999, compared with
a loss of $18.9 Million last year. The improvement resulted from
Rogers' sale of shares in @Home and Bid.Com: if those items are
omitted, Rogers lost $69.2 Million in the quarter.

** Speaking at the company's annual meeting, CEO Ted Rogers 
   said the company hopes to conclude at least one strategic 
   alliance in cable or wireless by May 2000.

CALL-NET REVENUE UP, EARNINGS DOWN: Call-Net revenues for the first
quarter of 1999 were $341 Million, up 32% over last year. EBITDA was
$10 Million, down from $23 Million.

** Moody's Investor Services has downgraded Call-Net senior 
   notes, citing intense price competition in long distance 
   and higher-than-expected capital costs in the local 
   telephone market.

ENTOURAGE WORKERS LAID OFF: Entourage Technology Solutions, which
subcontracts most of Bell Canada's outside and inside cabling, has
laid off 350 full-time and 750 part-time workers as a result of a
strike by Bell operators and technicians.  (See Telecom Update #178)

STRIKERS WILL ATTEND BCE MEETING: Striking Bell Canada workers say
they will be "out in force" at BCE's annual meeting in Hull, Quebec,
this Wednesday. Union leaders say they will hold BCE officers
responsible for forcing the strike.

CANTEL GROWS BY 62,700: Rogers Cantel added 147,700 new subscribers in
the first quarter of 1999; net growth was 62,700. Although total
subscribers grew by 13.5% over last year, average revenue per user
fell 11.7%, reflecting reduced rates and the impact of prepaid
cellular plans.

NBTEL TO EXPAND VIDEOACTIVE NETWORK: NBTel will spend $4.5 Million to
expand its VideoActive network to seven additional communities in
1999, and eight more by the spring of 2000, using ADSL technology. The
network supports NBTel's Vibe multimedia residential service and
Advantage Business Extreme-Speed Internet.

BELL SATELLITE GETS RELAY, PAY-TV LICENSES: CRTC Broadcasting Decision
98-87 grants Bell Satellite Services Inc. a license to offer a
satellite relay service, competing with Star Choice and Cancom.
Broadcasting Decision 98-88 approves a plan by BSSI's Bell ExpressVu
to introduce a direct-to-home pay-per-view service with 22 channels in
English and eight in French.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/bcasting/decision/1999/d9987_0.txt
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/bcasting/decision/1999/d9987_0.txt

IRIDIUM CEO QUITS: Satellite phone company Iridium LLC says its CEO,
Edward Staiano, resigned last week over disagreements on strategy with
the Board. Iridium's Chief Financial Officer resigned earlier this
month. (See Telecom Update #177.)

SPRINT CUTS OVERSEAS RATES: Sprint Canada says its new The Most
International Savings Plan offers reduced residential calling rates to
more than 240 countries. The plan includes a $4.95/month subscription
fee.

COGECO NET UP 17%: Excluding unusual gains from issuing shares and
selling two cable TV systems, Cogeco Inc. had net income of $2.7
Million in the first quarter of 1999, up 17% from 1998.

MT&T DROPS AMPERSAND: Nova Scotia's telephone company has changed its
name and logo from MT&T to MTT.

CALL CENTER SEMINARS IN YOUR OFFICE: Need to get your team up to date
on tested techniques in call center management?  Experts from Angus
Dortmans Associates will bring their top-rated seminars to your
site. Topics available include:

** Essential Skills and Knowledge for Effective Incoming Call 
   Center Management 

** What Senior Managers Must Know About Incoming Call Centers

** What Agents and Team Leaders Must Know About Incoming Call 
   Centers

** What Suppliers Must Know About Incoming Call Centers

** Planning a New Call Center: Tips Before You Start 

For further information go to the Angus Dortmans seminars Web page. To
discuss your specific education needs, contact Henry Dortmans at
1-800-263-4415 ext. 300 or at dortmans@angustel.ca.

http://www.angustel.ca/angdort/adseminar.html

============================================================

HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE

E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca

FAX:    905-686-2655

MAIL:   TELECOM UPDATE 
        Angus TeleManagement Group
        8 Old Kingston Road
        Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7

===========================================================

HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE)

TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There 
are two formats available:

1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World 
   Wide Web on the first business day of the week at 
   http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html

2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of 
   charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to 
   majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should contain only the two words: subscribe update

   To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail 
   message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address]

===========================================================

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus 
TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further 
information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, 
please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 
225.

The information and data included has been obtained from 
sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus 
TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations 
whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. 
Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available 
information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on 
the subject matter is required, the services of a competent 
professional should be obtained.
============================================================

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 08:46:59 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Communications Standard Dictionary", Martin H. Weik
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKCMSTDC.RVW   990317

"Communications Standard Dictionary", Martin H. Weik, 1996,
0-412-08391-4, U$152.00/UK#85.95/NLG311.00
%A   Martin H. Weik
%C   115 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY   10003
%D   1996
%G   0-412-08391-4
%I   Chapman & Hall
%O   U$152.00/UK#85.95/NLG311.00 606-525-6600 800-842-3636
%O   fax: 606-525-7778 +1-212-254-9499 order@chaphall.com
%P   1192 p.
%T   "Communications Standard Dictionary"

Neither the preface nor the introduction give much definition about
the specific fields of communications being defined.  Video,
television, commercial broadcast, movie, telephony, and Internet terms
do not get much coverage.  (The lavaliere microphone, ubiquitous due
to its inclusion in IBM dictionaries, is absent.)  Military and
engineering vocabulary predominates.

Spaces are ignored in ordering definitions, which may create some
slight confusion for those more familiar with library ordering.  For
example, "C language" is not listed with "c" (the designation for
light speed), but follows "clamping circuit."  Cross references are
extensive.  Prepositional phrases, such as "index of refraction," are
reduced to modified nouns, in this case "refractive index."  Thus, the
definition may not be immediately found under the more commonly used
phrase, but, again, the one is cross referenced to the other.

Even given the enormous size, the work is not exhaustive.  Public and
private key encryption systems are defined (and rather well) but the
more accurate symmetric and asymmetric terms for the two systems are
not mentioned.  I would have been very interested to see what the
derivation of BNC (as in "BNC connector) was, except that it isn't
included.  The more mundane aspects of networks don't get much ink:
neither sniffer nor the more formal network protocol analyzer were
mentioned.  On the other hand, five variant abbreviations for "bits
per second" were defined in the table of acronyms.

The range of topics included does focus on communications, but not
exclusively.  Much material covers physics, where related to
communications technologies, and electronics.  Fiber optics provides a
great deal of the material for the book: in fact, "time domain
reflectometry" is defined merely as a synonym for "optical time domain
reflectometry," disregarding the use in coaxial and other non-optical
cable systems.  Fiber optics coverage is extensive, including a number
of relatively little known technologies such as "air-supported optical
fiber."  Digital electronics, including a number of gate level figures
and diagrams (I was a little sorry that flip-flops didn't make it),
gets fairly significant coverage.  Some items have a very tenuous
connection to technical communication, such as physiological elements
like the "accommodation" of the human eye.  The entries are fairly
heavily weighted towards terms used by official standards bodies.  (I
found it amusing that a note was included to the effect that neither
in the technical literature nor in standards and protocols was there
any consistency in the use of communication versus communications, or
telecommunication versus telecommunications.  Weik is absolutely
correct on this point.)  

Some details, and also the general tone, reflect the author's
background with the military.  The Internet, for example, is defined
in correct, but very formal terms, with no discussion of the social or
cultural aspects.  (I wondered if the book was getting a bit Dick
Tracy-esque for a second before I realized what was meant by a "radio
watch.")  While data communications now play a major role in
communications overall, they are not, by any means, the only
components.  Radio technology is well represented in this volume.

(The material is generally formal and even turgid, but is there any
subversive humour?  I am not sure what to make of an illustration that
shows a "fiber optic cable that outshines a copper cable."  Another
such item is the definition for "spacecraft," and the discussion of
satellite.)

A number of the definitions included relate solely to computer use. 
For example, "absolute cell addressing" is defined only in terms of
personal computer spreadsheet software.  (Though less common,
spreadsheet software is also found on larger systems.)  On the other
hand, while "access control" is included and defined, access control
list is not and ACL doesn't make the acronym list.  Personal computers
have heavily influenced these entries, as is evidenced by the fact
that "backspace" refers only to the destructive backspace which is the
commonly understood meaning of the term in that environment.  

Others are simply odd, such as the assertion that on a "computer
standard keyboard" the symbol for British currency (pounds) moves the
"pointer" left by one screen or page.  (Note the trouble I had even
specifying the character: to the best of my recollection it has
appeared on only "genuine" VT 100 keyboards among those I have worked
with, and I'm quite certain it did not have any cursor movement
function.)  Occasionally it would be nice to have some kind of
citation for obscure usages, such as "rigid diskette."

Slang terms are not prevalent, but are not excluded, either.  There
are entries for both "cracker" and "hacker" (the latter unfortunately
defined for the dark side only), as well as "cybercop."  (There is no
listing for forensic computing and "free net" refers to radio networks
while there is no listing for Free-Net.)  "Worm" is poorly defined as
a type of computer virus, which is not defined at all.

Errors are very hard to find, and then tend to be subject to
interpretation, such as the difference in definition between
"cartridge" and "cassette" or the rather non-technical explanation for
"gel."  ("Refractive index matching gel" does a lot better.)  In
specialized realms there are more questionable entries.  A "firewall,"
for example, is said to provide "trusted network security for a
distributed computing and communications environment" where most
experts would say that it provides limited security for a confined
network.  In addition, the firewall entry seems to relate only to
selective routing and doesn't mention proxy service.  "Internet
Assistant" is not written in HyperText Markup Language, but helps to
produce a file properly encoded with it.  (The definition for
"HyperText Markup Language" is also a bit odd.)  And I hesitate to
contradict Dr. Weik, but everything I have ever read seems to indicate
that the 53 byte cell size for Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) is
fixed.

In those areas it does cover extensively, the work is generally both
authoritative and helpful.  As the author implies, at times it
functions more like an encyclopedia than a glossary, with extensive
discussions rather than simple definitions.  For the average user or
manager, however, the areas of specialization are pretty esoteric, and
the gaps in common topics may be frustrating.  For the engineer,
particularly if dealing with the military, the text could be very
useful indeed.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKCMSTDC.RVW   990317

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
                On the other hand, you have different fingers.
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade


------------------------------

Subject: Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, Ohio
From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA
Date: 26 Apr 1999 07:33:03 -0700


Gail M Hall <gmhall@apk.net> writes:

> We are told here that Brooklyn is the first city in the US to pass
> such a law.  Many people hope it will not be the last.  I think the
> law says that if they do use a cell phone in a moving vehicle, they
> must have both hands on the steering wheel.

This is class envy.

If you outlaw cell phones, please also outlaw:

	drive through restaurants
	babies on board
	children in the back seat ("Don't make me pull over!")
	doing makeup in the rearview mirror
	reading a book
	using a map

etc etc.

Some people drive inattentively, and the cell phone makes that worse.
But let's be fair here.  Let's outlaw EVERYTHING that could be a
distraction to the driver.

<hmph>


Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
Keywords: Perl training, UNIX[tm] consulting, video production, skiing, flying
Email: <merlyn@stonehenge.com> Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger merlyn@teleport.com)
Web: <A HREF="http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/">My Home Page!</A>
Quote: "I'm telling you, if I could have five lines in my .sig, I would!" -- me

------------------------------

From: rhyre@medplus.com (Ralph Hyre)
Subject: Portable Local Numbers: Why aren't they?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 11:03:47 -0400


What's the real issue with Local Number portability?

800 Number portability was achieved years ago (1993?), and the
technology and operational issues are basically the same, with some
minor scaling issues.

The originating LEC has to do a database lookup to find the carrier
handling the 800 call, so the appropriate call setup messages can be
exchanged with the proper parties, and a voice circuit from the
caller's LEC (A) to the destination LEC B (via carrier C) can be
established.

Why can't the same process be adopted for local calls?  In Ohio, I'm 
already being assessed a 'Local Number Portability charge' to make this 
happen.  Presumably this pays for administration of the as-yet-nonexistent
database.

Why was LEC competition permitted before Local Numbers were mandated
to be portable?  Did the FCC fall asleep here?

------------------------------

From: wdag@my-dejanews.com (W.D.A. Geary)
Subject: Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:42:46 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


In article <telecom19.53.6@telecom-digest.org>, keith@knip.co (Keith -
Add the M in Com ) wrote:

> Does anyone know what the NEW " AREA CODE " will be ?
> I suggest " 783 " for SUF

Pace to 1-800-FLOWERS, codes that actually had alphabetical meaning
went out with hula hoops. I think the new Suffolk area code will be
680, based on: 1) Reserved exchange codes reserved in 516 area
(i.e. "nxx" _immediately_ responded to with "<reorder tone> ... please
dial 1 first... ", without waiting for more digits) 2) Existing area
codes 3) Published lists of "reserved (by-state)" area codes

I also think that we will _soon_ have to go to either 8-digit local
numbers or _variable length_ numbers (terminating dialing sequence
with # key, just like SEND on cellphone). This would certainly
simplify telephone-number entries in address books and business cards/
advertisements, and allow something like:

1-680-555-1212# (base number for Wardenclyffe Microtechnology; voice phone)
1-680-555-1212-1# (fax machine)
1-680-555-1212-2# (pager)
1-680-555-1212-3# (cellphone)
1-680-555-1212-41# (data line 1)
1-680-555-1212-42# (data line 2)
ISDN already supports a "subaddress" that could be used for this.

As far as "how do you dial # on a rotary phone", give a $50 bounty for
every "rotary" phone turned in, regardless of condition; it will be
cheaper than trying to accomodate it in a modern phone system. The
Norwegians got rid of all such "pulse dialers", why can't we?


W.D.A.Geary  Wardenclyffe Microtechnology
Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 11:52:51 -0400
From: Tara D. Mahon <tara@insight-corp.com>
Reply-To: tara@insight-corp.com
Organization: The Insight Research Corporation
Subject: Local Access Alert


Pat,

A new service that may interest DIGEST readers.  Please note there is
a free subscription offer available.

Regards,
Tara D. Mahon

Local Access Information Finds a Home

A new continuous information service focusing on local access issues
premiered last week by Insight Research, a leading provider of
telecommunications market research reports.  The service, Local Access
Alert, features weekly news analysis, monthly analyst papers, an
annual report, and telephone inquiry support, designed to provide
telecom professionals with the strategic intelligence crucial to
success in the local access market.

In addition to performing in-depth examinations of major industry
announcements, Local Access Alert will also go behind the news to
probe these key industry issues:

	- What is the consumer and business demand for broadband
access?  What applications (e.g., telemedicine, distance learning,
streaming video) are most likely to be used?

	- How and where will Competitive Local Exchange Carriers
(CLECs) deploy flavors of digital subscriber lines (xDSL)?  Will they
be able to do it fast enough to compete with the CATV companies, who
are rapidly chalking up cable modem subscribers?

	- Will the lines finally begin to blur between Internet
Service Providers (ISPs), voice CLECs, and data CLECs, or will they
each retain their separate functions?

	- What will be the response of the incumbent carriers
(regional Bells, independent LECs) to all this action?  Will they
innovate and stay ahead of the curve, or will they become lumbering
dinosaurs, one step shy of extinction?

Philip C. Richards, Vice President of Insight and 30-year telecom
industry veteran heads the innovative new service.

Local Access Alert is offered annually at $11,900 for up to five
registered subscribers.  Complete service details and a free
subscription offer are online at:

http://www.insight-corp.com/local.html.  For further information,
please contact:

Tara D. Mahon
tara@insight-corp.com
The Insight Research Corporation
973/605-1400


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Eleven-thousand-nine-hundred dollars, 
and presumably zero cents for a one year subscription. But you 
graciously allow up to five people to read it at no additional cost.
What happens when a sixth person comes along? Does he have to buy
his own subscription for another eleven-thousand-nine-hundred dollars
and presumably zero cents for one year? It seems to me your service
may be a bit expensive, but perhaps the telcos will subscribe and then
offset it by simply adding still another line item in the 'Other
Charges and Credits' portion of the monthly bill, let's say 38 cents
per month from now until 2010 to pay for newsletter subscriptions for
their executives.

One thing we have in common though, is that I offer free subscriptions
also. You can read about my free subscription offer by going to the
URL http://telecom-digest.org where, alas, there are no Make Spam Fast
proposals, no nude teens, no warez, no double-crossing webmasters with
their double-clicks, no advertising windows that keep re-opening no
matter how many time you click them shut; none of the traditional
Internet fare: just all you ever wanted to know about telephones and
telecommunications in soon to be eighteen years' worth of archived
back issues of this journal you are reading now, and numerous links
(with more to come soon) to other people who know a lot about phones
and telecommunications.  No doubt Mr. Richards will have a lot more
to offer readers, which is why he can charge a little more than I do.
I am sure readers who are excited about your new service will be in
touch soon to provide you with their credit card or checking account
information.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #58
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon Apr 26 16:53:16 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA04246;
	Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:53:16 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:53:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904262053.QAA04246@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #59

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 99 16:53:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 59

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Adaptive Echo Canceler (Electronics) (Bruce Henderson)
    Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability (Will Roberts)
    Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God (Chris Gettings)
    4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go) (John David Galt)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (Craig Macbride)
    Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented (Peter Corlett)
    Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented (Richard D G Cox)
    Rate Rationalization, was: Re: NANP Has 8+ Years to Go (Danny Burstein)
    Spammer's 800 Number Has Fake SIT Tones? (Ray Normandeau)
    Pac Bell Plan For National 41l Calls OKd (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Dialtone in Different Countries (Craig Macbride)
    ADC/MIND CTI Press Release (Andrea Dray)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Bruce Henderson <exnoop@email.msn.com>
Subject: Adaptive Echo Canceler (Electronics)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 07:43:01 -0700
Organization: BH & Assoc CTE


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not certain if the diagram below
came out exactly as the author intended or not. Email delivery does
strange things now and then. I also added the 'pre' and '/pre'
commands for the benefit of those people who get the Digest in HTML
format, such as at http://telecom-digest.org/TELECOM_Digest_Online   PAT]

<pre>
Hi,

I am experimenting with the following telecommunications circuit:

Symbols:
-[[]]- <- resistor       ---o--- connection

  /|+---
(  |  <- op amp
  \| - --

Echo canceller circuit - Ampliflies input, Mixes output, attenuates output
feedback "Echo" (used in electronic analog telephone sets):

                      -------------------[[]]-------------
                     |                100K                   |
                     |                        1k                |
                     |        /|+---------[[]]------------o--------------
Input  --------o-----( |            Inp Gain                          |
(-Output)               \|- ------------o-------                        |
                      OP1                    |         |    51K            |
                                         51K  |         ----[[]] ----
o -------  Output + Input (Tel co)
                                     ----[[]]---                         |
|
               600              |  Echo                          \/        |
Output --[[]] --- -|\        |
|       900K

             | )----o---[[]]-------------------------------o-----[[]]-------
                    ---+|/           Source Z
load ZL   |
                   |                   600
\/
                  \/    OP2

Could someone e-mail me the circuit that maintains the Echo attenuation
while the load impedence (ZL) is independantly varied?

Thanks,

exnoop@msn.com
</pre>

------------------------------

From: oldbear@arctos.com (Will Roberts)
Subject: Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 00:15:23 -0500
Organization: The Arctos Group - http://www.arctos.com/arctos


black@csulb.NOSMAP.edu (Matthew Black) writes:

> GTE California has started billing this residential customer $0.38 for
> local number portability.  I never requested any such service and am
> curious if this is some new universal fee.

Local Number Portability (LNP) is the FCC-mandated ability to keep your 
same telephone number even if you switch Local Exchange Carriers.  The 
idea is that no one would leave the incumbent RBOC if they had to 
change to a new phone number.

I'd guess that this charge is a result of GTE attempting to recover 
the cost of providing LNP.  I'd be curious if this is an across-the-board 
charge on all customers or something related to your having taken your 
phone number to a different local telco.

If it's an assessment to keep your phone number when changing carriers, 
it sure seems like a dis-incentive to make a change unless your new 
phone company charges that much less.  What is also nasty about what you 
describe is that making an LNP change is really a one time cost of 
reprogramming the database and not something that should result in a 
monthly charge forever and ever.


Regards,

Will Roberts
The Old Bear

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 00:04:39 -0400
From: Chris Gettings <gettings@smartconnect.net>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing for the House of God


I am a pilot and have used a cell phone in light aircraft and I can
assure readers that they are a serious safety hazard.  I can't
understand how they could interfere with brakes which are hydraulic,
except perhaps if they were computer controlled anti-lock brakes --
common on bigger planes -- and even these are designed such that if the
computer fails, they revert to normal brake actuation.

In flight, however, even while just powered on and not transmitting, I
watched a handheld analog cell phone cause erroneous indications on
the directional gyro of greater than 90 degrees.  I learned this while
attempting to land in instrument conditions, the worst possible time
to conduct these experiments.  I wondered why the radio and vacuum
driven flight and navigation instruments did not agree and found my cell
phone on in my pocket.  Switching it off caused the gyro to return to
the proper indication.  The hair on the back of my neck is *still*
standing up ... 


Chris

------------------------------

From: John David Galt <jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com>
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society
Subject: 4+8? (was The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 02:05:54 GMT


Quoth John R. Levine:

>> http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

>> VERY informative ... they now project total exhaustion between 2006
>> and 2012, with their best guess being 2007... 8 1/2 years to go! NO
>> FCC action recommended regarding 10-D or 11-D dialing yet. No timetable
>> for expansion yet. No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing
>> patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
>> deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

> Of course it won't be the solution.  There are plenty of unused ten
> digit phone numbers. 

I like the idea of a 12 digit total length, but it seems to me it
would make sense to make each of the parts variable-length.  If we
allow (for example) either 2+10, 3+9, or 4+8, then major cities can go
2+10, allowing everyone to keep their existing 10-digit numbers (while
still having all _kinds_ of room for expansion).

Here is one way the process could go (all at once, no waiting needed).

1)  Assign area code 99 as a "helper code."  Dialing 1 + 99 + an old
10-digit number would get you instructions on the new way to call
that number.  (This could also be used as the temporary area code for
areas which haven't yet been updated to the new system, but if such
areas exist it will be for political reasons.)

2)  Assign 29, 39, ..., 89 to the seven biggest cities going 2+10.
(If 37x, 52x, and 96x aren't used by then, we can use those codes
this way also.)  Each of these new codes would include an entire
metro area, except possibly across state/national lines (that's a
political decision).

3)  Areas going 3+9 would simply suffix two digits onto all existing
numbers (I suggest 00).

4)  Areas going 4+8 would simply append a zero onto the old area code
and another onto the number.  Similarly, areas going 5+7 would append
00 onto the area code.

5)  800 and 900 services would change to 80 and 90 + ten digits.  In
these cases I would convert all existing numbers as if they were
going 3+9 (keeping the zero in third position!), but allow holders of
vanity numbers to choose the two digits that get added at the end.
The same goes for 500 and 700 numbers if they still exist.

We could expand 888, 877, 866, etc. the same way, but I think it
would be cleaner to make those subscribers move into the "80 + ten
digits" space, perhaps as 80 + the old 10-digit number.

6)  Once the cutover is made, dialing a number by any of the old
methods (7 digits, 10 digits, 1+10 digits, or 0+10 digits) CANNOT go
through to the wrong place.  It will do the following:

   You dialed (and    The area you are dialing changed over to:
   it was correct     2+10        3+9         4+8         5+7
   before the cut):

   7 digits           dead [1]    dead [1]    dead [1]    success!

   10 digits          success!    intercept   intercept   intercept
                                  [2]         [2]         [2]

   1 + 10 digits      dead [1]    dead [1]    dead [1]    dead [1]
        or
   0 + 10 digits

   [1]  Switch will expect more digits.
   [2]  I assume the old area code wasn't assigned as a prefix within
        itself.  If it was, it should be changed before cutover.

John David Galt

------------------------------

From: craig@rmit.EDU.AU (Craig Macbride)
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA
Date: 26 Apr 1999 13:35:31 GMT
Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.


Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric B. Morson) writes:

> No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing 
> patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
> deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

How about cutting loose the non-US members (possibly not Canada, but
at least the Caribbean countries) of the NANP at the same time, thus
giving more numbering space to the US and stopping all the fraud
schemes based on confusing people into calling numbers they believe
are in the US which are in fact in other countries?

(For any legitimate businesses in these countries, a 4+8 NANP number
will be about as long as international-prefix + country-code +
local-code number and require hardware changes at their end that would
be unnecessary if they kept their current local numbers and just moved
to having their own country code.)

> How can planning wait any longer, considering how much hardware,
> software, education, politics, and regulation needs to be completed, and
> only 8.5 years to go?

The system here is far less messy in its structure, due to much
greater regulation and far fewer competitors for domestic calls, but
the changeover to 8 digit numbers took the better part of 2 years. All
of the planning and most of the hardware needs to be in place at least
a couple of years before the deadline. The education, politics and
regulation part needs to be completed even sooner.


Craig Macbride	<craig@rmit.edu.au>	URL: http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~craigm

	"It's a sense of humour like mine, Carla, that makes me proud
		to be ashamed of myself." - Captain Kremmen

------------------------------

From: abuse@verrine.demon.co.uk (Peter Corlett)
Subject: Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388: How Implemented, if So?
Date: 26 Apr 1999 13:28:35 GMT
Organization: B13 C*b*l


Linc Madison <Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM> wrote:

> For instance, London numbers would be +344 20 nxxx.xxxx, so you could dial
> 1-44-20-nxxx.xxxx. To call Dublin, you would dial 1-53-1-nxx.xxxx.
> Pan-European toll-free numbers would be 1-888-nxx.xxx[x][x]. Premium
> numbers would be on 1-900.

This would take some doing. The UK uses 1xx and 1xxx codes for a lot
of things. They're commonly used for Indirect Access (carrier
selection like 10xxx) codes, as well as being contact numbers for the
operator, directory enquiries and emergency services. Where would
these numbers go to?

Your example codes are already partly used: 144 is for BT
Chargecard. 153 is International Directory Enquiries. 1888 is
currently free, but is clearly reserved for Indirect Access (it's
surrounded by others that are allocated) and 190 is used for the
Telemessage service.

I fail to see what is wrong with +800 for EU-wide freephone anyway,
since it's already used for this purpose.

[...]
> Perhaps Europe could become +0 when that range opens up for assignment
> in the not-too-distant future

"000" is used as a special code by BT to show an agreement to the
higher charge than for a standard (but not guaranteed 64k end-to-end)
"00" call.


http://www.verrine.demon.co.uk/
B13 Cabal Member                      Cuius rei demonstrationem mirabilem sane
                                    detexi hanc marginis exiguitas non caperet

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 13:31:00 BST
From: Richard@office.mandarin.com (Richard D G Cox)
Subject: Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388
Reply-To: Richard@office.mandarin.com


In Telecom Digest V19, #53 <199904241756.NAA06308@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Linc Madison said:

> +388 was part of a doomed plan to renumber all of Europe under the
> single country code +3.

It may have been that at one time, but the current proposals are quite
different.  +388 is now intended to be an overlay, which would provide
users with "European" phone numbers instead of numbers based out of the
country where the user is actually located.  Some might think of +388
as being more a form of "politically-correct" number!

+388 would include Pan-European numbers for response to TV advertising,
as well as for a European 900 service.  The original plan to use +3 800
was indeed squashed by the allocation by ITU-T of country code +380 to
the Ukraine, and I recall there was heated correspondence at the time
between the various parties involved over that allocation.  The present
view seems to be that +800 is much easier to "sell" as a Freefone concept
than +3 800 or +388 800, so it seems there will be no European Freefone.

> All very American looking; rather surprising given the anti-American
> bent of most telecomms Eurocrats.

Not really; there were no proposals to change to 011 for international!

> The Ukraine is certainly big enough that it would have deserved a
> two-digit code (unlike +45 Denmark, +64 New Zealand, +65 Singapore,

ITU-T policy is that all new country code assignments will be three-digit.

> but the people who created the plan didn't adequately think through the
> transition required to get there.

More that they didn't realise the level of opposition there would be
 from the "member states" to being required to change their phone
numbers just to please Brussels.  Ironically, most of those "member
states" have gone through (at least) one major renumbering since then
of their own volition.

Their plan wasn't particularly sound, partly because the balance of
the numbering density/utilisation through Europe would have become
even worse than it was before, and partly because it failed to look to
the future of how each country wanted to develop its own numbering
scheme.  But it was *their* plan, and that was why it went forward.
Suggestions of how the plan might be improved, both to make it more
politically acceptable - and also to make it more sound from a
numbering standpoint - were rejected with the standard error cause
code of "NIH" - "Not Invented Here".

> Perhaps Europe could become +0 when that range opens up for assignment

That could certainly be attractive, and providing it was implemented
in an organised way should return two decades (+3 and +4) to the ITU-T
for reassignment -- in other words giving them a "two for one" deal.
However it would not be enough to just migrate the existing codes in
the way you described; there would have to be some additional
restructuring as well taking into account all the numbering
developments within each country.  Also, since the political borders
of "Europe" are changing all the time, a decision would have to be
taken about countries which have "come out" of "+7" - as Latvia has -
or might do so in the (un)foreseeable future.

But I do still doubt whether the "member states" would accept any plan
imposed by the Commission, unless they were effectively forced to so
do.

Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology PO Box 111 PENARTH CF64 3YG, UK: Tel: +44 29 2031 1131
Senders of genuine e-mail should omit the word "office" from our address.

------------------------------

From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein)
Subject: Rate Rationalization, was: Re: NANP Has 8+ Years to Go
Date: 26 Apr 1999 11:22:14 -0400


In <telecom19.57.6@telecom-digest.org> johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
writes:

> NANP Exhaust Study..published  www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

> Of course it won't be the solution.  There are plenty of unused ten
> digit phone numbers.  Unfortunately, insane amounts of them are locked
> up in 10,000 number blocks that CLECs have reserved so every CLEC has
> a prefix in every rate center in which they might ever offer service.
> (I don't blame the CLECs for this, the way the system is set up, a
> CLEC puts itself at a significant disadvantage if it doesn't hoard
> numbers like this.)

Which brings up the simpler solution, but one, alas, which the ILECS
won't like, namely a rationalization, and _reduction_, of the rate
structures. (Has anyone else noticed that while long distance phone
rates are significantly lower than 15 years ago, there hasn't been any
similar drop in the local ones?)

Take the NYC area, for example. While the city itself is kind of sensibly
arranged (all calls within the five boroughs - very roughly 4 million
numbers) are considered 'local' [1], that's not the case in the suburbs.

[1] In this part of the world, local means that residential calls are
charged a nominal 10 cents/call, but that they are otherwise untimed.
Calls outside your local area are charged per minute, with the exact
amount determined by distance.

Business customers all pay roughly 1.5 cents/minute. And isdn, err...

In the eastern suburbs of Nassau and Suffolk Counties (currently area
code 516), there are three separate rate zones. So anyone wishing to
set up a 'local' number for customers must get at least three separate
exchanges.

Additionally, the ILEC has set up a kind-of 'unlimited' (no charge/call) 
offering for very, very, local calls (although, to no one's surprise,
not in NYC itself). These districts are much smaller than the main
ones I mentioned in the above paragraph, so if your ILEC wanted to set
up 'local' numbers for all _these_ people, you'd be talking something
like two dozen separate exchanges.

If the ILECS would get rid of this mindset and expand 'local' calling
to include the entire district, then a _huge_ amount of the pressure
for additional exchanges would disappear overnight.

(I'm hoping that this will happen without them ... I suspect we're
well on the way.  Thanks to two-way cable modems, *dsl connectivity,
and simple plug-in voice-over-ip 'phones', I'm hoping that within a
year we'll see [in effect] unlimited 'on-net' calls, anywhere in the
nation, for $50/month or so, completely bypassing the ILEC local
loop. You heard it here first ... "you give us $50/month, we give you
the nation")


Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

------------------------------

From: Ray Normandeau <fraznor@my-dejanews.com>
Subject: Spammer's 800 Number Has Fake SIT Tones?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:04:30 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


Benchmark Print Supply, a big time spammer previously had an 800
number in his ads. This can be ascertained by searching the
Dejanews archives of OLD messages.

   Search for:    "800-391-4677"

His current spam has 770 area codes. An attempt to call his
800-391-4677 number for removal from his list produces a very
interesting response. 800-391-4677 is answered by what appears to be
an answering machine giving SIT tones and telling the caller to try
again. Could this be to discourage callers from pay phones? Any
opinions? Is it really an answering machine?
 

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 04:08:15 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Pac Bell Plan For National 41l Calls OKd


Deborah Solomon, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, April 23, 1999 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1999/04/23/BU64726.DTL 

------------------------------

From: craig@rmit.EDU.AU (Craig Macbride)
Subject: Re: Dialtone in Different Countries
Date: 26 Apr 1999 13:14:24 GMT
Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.


lucio1974@my-dejanews.com (Lucio Maggioli) writes:

> I was wondering what kind of dialtone (continuous or stuttering) is
> used in different countries of the world. Does anyone have information
> about this subject?

The telephone books here list the different dial and busy tones for
each country along with their country codes and area codes. Surely
this list is available elsewhere too? (One would hope phone books
would generally list this, as the tones vary a great deal from place
to place.)


Craig Macbride	<craig@rmit.edu.au>	URL: http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~craigm

	"It's a sense of humour like mine, Carla, that makes me proud
		to be ashamed of myself." - Captain Kremmen

------------------------------

From: Andrea Dray <andrea@mindcti.com>
Subject: ADC/MIND CTI Press Release
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:19:24 +0300


ADC Telecommunications and MIND CTI Join to Provide Operations Support
Systems (OSS) for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) Solutions

April 26, 1999

Minneapolis, MN and Yoqneam, Israel - ADC Telecommunications, Inc.,
(NASDAQ: ADCT; www.adc.com) and MIND CTI Ltd., Yoqneam, Israel, have
signed an agreement by which ADC will offer operational support system
(OSS) for voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) solutions for telephony
providers and enterprises.  ADC will supply MIND-iPhonEX* IP telephony
billing & customer care and associated professional services which
will complement ADC's ability to deliver full VoIP solutions to the
marketplace.  To remain competitive, it is critical that
telecommunications providers are able to migrate to and offer VoIP to
their customers.

"This agreement is yet another positive step in the growing relationship
between ADC and MIND," said Lior Salansky, vice president of business
development for MIND CTI.  "MIND is enthusiastic about working with ADC
on VoIP Billing.  We are convinced that our position in the US market
will be strengthened by  this relationship and that our customers will
benefit from the enhanced installation and integrated services ADC will
supply nationwide."

Jay Swearingen, president of ADC's Complex Solutions division within the
Integrated Solutions Group,  said "As a premier supplier of OSS
solutions to telecommunications service providers, ADC is excited to add
billing & customer care solutions built with the MIND-iPhonEX product to
the ADC OSS offerings.  Until now, a process to bill customers for
making internet calls was not available.  This solution will generate
greater revenues for our customers through its ability to bill and keep
records.  By supplying solutions including the MIND-iPhonEX product we
enable our customers to quickly enter the VoIP market."

MIND-iPhonEX is a carrier grade, real time billing & customer care
system for the emerging VoIP industry.  With one of the largest
installed bases worldwide, MIND-iPhonEX has rapidly become the billing
and customer care system of choice for leading telecommunications
companies like Deutsche Telekom, France Telecom, Telia Light of Sweden,
Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Internet Telephony Service
Providers (ITSPs).  MIND-iPhonEX is integrated and installed with
leading gateway/gatekeeper vendors such as Ascend, Cisco, Lucent,
Netspeak, Nokia, VocalTec, and others.

The award winning MIND-iPhonEX (1998 Product of the Year in Computer
Telephony, CTI and Internet Telepony magazines) provides a fully
redundant solution including a fail-over mechanism, database replication
and no single point of failure to insure highly reliable service to
millions of customers.  The system handles both prepaid and post-paid
billing, creation and management of prepaid calling cards, real-time
cut-off of calls, individualized customer rate tables, and flexible fax
charge options.  MIND-iPhonEX support systems provide call management
reports, traffic analysis (monitoring  the load on each gateway and
line) and keeping track of excessive use, including fraud alarms.
Web-based customer care and subscriber verification of real-time balance
and call details are also available. 

ADC Telecommunications, Inc. is a leading global supplier of voice,
video and data systems for telephone, cable television, Internet,
broadcast, wireless and private communications networks. ADC's systems
enable local access and high-speed transmission of communications
services from providers to consumers and businesses over fiber-optic,
copper, coaxial and wireless media. Headquartered in Minneapolis,
Minnesota, ADC has approximately 8,900 employees around the world and
annual sales of $1.5 billion. For additional information, visit the
company web site at www.adc.com.

MIND CTI Ltd., is a private company registered in Israel with an office
in Englewood Cliffs, NJ.  Owned by key MIND personnel, founders and ADC
Telecommunications Inc., MIND supplies the telecom industry with
software for billing and management.  MIND's call management and billing
products are installed in 20 countries.  For more information on MIND
and its products, visit the company web site at www.mindcti.com.


Contact:	Lynne High-Marketing Communications
	ADC Telecommunications
	(612) 946-3136
	Lynne_High@adc.com

		Steve Gordon-Marketing Director
		ADC Telecommunications
		(410) 872-3749
		Steve_Gordon@adc.com

		Barbara Frank - IP Telephony Billing Marketing Manager
		MIND CTI
		(201) 569-6967 or 972-4-993-6632

		Barbara@mindcti.com
		
Best regards,

Andrea Dray
Sales Secretary

MIND C.T.I. Ltd.

Computer Telephony Software

POB 144, Yokneam Illit 20692, ISRAEL
Tel: +972-4-993-6688
Fax: +972-4-993-7776
Mail To: sales@mindcti.com <mailto:sales@mindcti.com> 

Visit our site: http://www.mindcti.com <http://www.mindcti.com> 
============================
              Keep us in mind!
============================

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #59
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon Apr 26 21:58:24 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA21004;
	Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:58:24 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:58:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904270158.VAA21004@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #60

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Apr 99 21:58:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 60

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools (Ryan Tucker)
    Columbine and Cell Phones (was Re: Cell Phones in Schools) (Jeremy Beal)
    Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools (Andy McFadden)
    Seeking Name/Place Database (Jim Weiss)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Telcomine: Who's Who of Cost Saving Billing Systems (Seema Dhawan)
    Re: Who or What is Bell America? (William Brownlow)
    VOIP Switchboard Applications? (Anders)
    "Internet Pioneers" (David B. Horvath, CCP)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: rtucker+from+199904@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker)
Subject: Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools
Date: 26 Apr 1999 06:39:00 GMT
Organization: TTGCITN Communications, Des Moines IA and Rochester NY
Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+199904@katan.ttgcitn.com


In <telecom19.57.1@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@telecom-digest.org> spewed:

> In an emergency conference call between administrators of large school
> districts in the United States on Wednesday, in the aftermath of the
> Columbine affair, the question came up, 'would the situation have
> been worse than it was -- if that is conceivable -- if the students
> who aided police by using their cellular phones inside the school to
> talk to police officers who were gathering outside the school had
> been unable to do so.' 

Do we need knee-jerk reactions?

Suddenly changing laws without thinking them completely through,
especially at times of high emotion like this, is dangerous.  While
adjusting cellular phone policy may not be that bad, there's some
things which will most definately be proposed:

- Metal detectors, locker searches, etc;
- Increased gun control;
- Restrictions on letting children buy certain music/see certain movies,
  etc;

While I really don't want to drift too far off topic by explaining my
views on the situation, I remind all of you -- there's lessons to be
learned here, but they may not be the ones that are obvious right now.
Furthermore, trying to do band-aid fixes in the name of "protecting
the children" has been historically bad.

It's not music's fault.  It's not Hollywood's fault.  It's not the
Internet's fault.  Those are merely information sources -- what one
does with that information is where the fault lies.

We'll never truely know exactly what they were thinking, but certainly,
the fault lies there.


Ryan Tucker <rtucker+16@ttgcitn.com>  http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/
President, TTGCITN Communications   Box 92425, Rochester NY 14692-0425
Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There probably should be restrictions
on allowing children to watch or listen to President Clinton. After
all, they may get the impression that it is okay to throw bombs when
you do not agree with the way things are happening somewhere. I thought
it was amazing that last week Wednesday in the aftermath of Columbine
he was on television with a grim face telling parents to keep their
children from seeing violent images. Uh, excuse me while I go throw
another bomb at Yugoslavia, then I will be back and finish my speech.

Police in Colorado now say that they found a large amount of explosives
in the school and that after interviews with hundreds of students,
many of whom said yeah, they had heard about 'some sort of plan by
those guys', that apparently the intention was to kill at least 500
people. A spokesperson for the police said, 'quite of few of the kids
knew what those guys had planned ... the adults sure did not know.'

Wasn't it a few years ago the papers reported a study by some research
institute saying that 'over the next decade, there will be a huge
increase in *violent, and senseless* crime by very young children (at
that time) as they went through their teenage years' (a few years
later, meaning about now) ... I wish I could remember the source of that. 

In the past, crimes, although wrong, were 'reasonable' in the sense
that there was some object in it. Someone was cheated, someone had a
grudge, a romantic encounter which failed; you needed money very
desparately and pointed a gun at the 7/Eleven cashier, or whatever.
But, said the report, watch the next decade. Mass killings with no
rhyme nor reason; extremly destructive vandalism (and we have seen
that already; one elementary school in Chicago got a million dollars
in damage over a weekend from two twelve year old vandals); other
stuff. Each one planning to do 'better' than the ones before. Police
in Colorado say that interviews with students have told them that the
fellows involved laughed and made mock of other school violence in the
USA over the past couple years, saying 'what a waste of time that
was, we could surely do better.'  Well, I guess they did do 'better'.
 
In a particularly sad aftermath to Columbine, last Wednesday a fourteen
year old boy used a hatchet to severely damage a neighbor's car. When
the neighbor came out to stop him, the lad used his hatchet to chop
off the head of a cat the neighbor was holding. Then it occurred to
him to take the same hatchet and use it on his mother, but about that
time the police arrived and restrained him. Says the kid, "when me 
and my friends get older, we are gonna do the same thing they did out
there in Colorado." Good to know, isn't it ... 

NO, we do not need any more gun laws; NO we do not need any knee-jerk
reactions as hard as they may be to control; NO, we do not need any
more filters for internet web sites; NO, we do not need at least
sixteen more supermax prisons in every state. But something, some
evil that has been slowly gaining ground in the USA for a number of
years has begun to accelerate. Translate 'evil' according to your own
philosophical or religious beliefs. Things are going to get worse before
they get better; much worse. In a few years we will view Columbine as
a senior class prank in the last month of school. Thanks for reading! PAT]

------------------------------

From: Jeremy Beal <jbeal@bmsc.com>
Subject: Columbine and Cell Phones (was Re: Cell Phones in Schools)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:20:00 -0600


I live in Denver and feel deeply affected by the tragedy at Columbine.

One note regarding the issue of cell phones in dangerous situations.
I think generally that having the ability to communicate information
quickly has the potential to save lives with quick thought and action.

However, it might have potentially hurt the situation in this case. At
one point fairly early in the situation, a local NBC television
affiliate which was broadcasting the events from near the school gave
out a telephone number for anybody trapped inside to call. A student
called, and the station proceeded to place the caller on the air while
talking with them. The student gave the television station information
regarding where they were hiding and where they thought the attackers
were located. The television station put it all on the air.

It was only about 10 minutes later that they realized that there were
televisions located in every classroom, and that there was a very good
chance that the attackers had heard the information from the phone
call.  The station promptly asked anybody trapped to call 911 rather
than the station. An unintended consequence to the rapid sharing of
information ...


Take care,

Jeremy

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:08:13 PDT
From: Andy McFadden <fadden@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools
Organization: Lipless Rattling Crankbait


In article <telecom19.57.1@telecom-digest.org> you write:

> This past week the press reports that there have been dozens of
> arrests all over the United States of teenagers who not only made mock
> of the events in Littleton, which they are free to do I guess under
> the First Amendment no matter how much it hurts others, but in
> addition were making plans to act out the same scenario in their own
> school. Now suddenly this past week, wearing a black trench coat has
> become fashionable. What *is* going on in our society? Will someone
> please tell me and help me to understand?

Ever read Brunner's Stand on Zanzibar?  One of the major themes is the
effect of increasing population pressure on society.  Brunner suggests
that violent outbreaks are a natural outcome of the future society he
envisions.  "Muckers" (from "amok") attack crowds at random, and at
one point a major character inadvertently starts a riot by wandering
into the wrong neighborhood.

The book, written in 1968, is part cyberpunk fantasy and part
frightening reality; at times I find it impossible to believe that it
was written 30 years ago.  Much of it hits too close to home.  (Heck,
just this morning CNN was talking about a joint venture for hydrogen
fuel-cell cars... based on the book's setting, we're right on
schedule.)

You probably won't find yourself disagreeing with his views on war,
either.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345347870/


Andy

Send mail to fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden)
CD-Recordable FAQ - http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/ (a/k/a www.spies.com/~fadden)
Fight Internet Spam - http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ & news.admin.net-abuse.email


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not read that book. In high school
we read Orwell's book '1984' (published in the 1940's ?) and thought
it was a very frightening scenario. For us old Geezers, I think we
sort of expect each act in the play called 'Life' is going to be a
little more bitter and cruel than the act before it. I feel sorry for
the young guys; the ones still in school who had a little bit more of
their childhood ripped away from them last week. The ones whose own
emotional maturity hasn't developed enough to prevent the event at 
Columbine from influencing their decision to act out in the same way,
to our chagrin, and perhaps their own bitter disappointment in them-
selves years from now. Anyhow, let's get on with telecom topics!  PAT]

------------------------------

From: NBJimWeiss@aol.com (Jim Weiss)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:10:19 EDT
Subject: Seeking Name/Place Database
Reply-To: NBJimWeiss@aol.com


Do you know of a database whereby I can enter an NPA/NXX and have
it respond with the local service provider?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The best, most accurate source is to
dial double-zero on the phone (assuming you are PIC'ed to AT&T)
and ask the operator for 'name/place for NPA/NXX'. That will get
you a correct answer about ninety percent of the time.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: 26 Apr 1999 16:25:29 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.58.4@telecom-digest.org>, Ralph Hyre
<rhyre@medplus.com> wrote:

> What's the real issue with Local Number portability?

> 800 Number portability was achieved years ago (1993?), and the
> technology and operational issues are basically the same, with some
> minor scaling issues.

That's just plain false.  To begin with, LNP involves changes to the
ISUP protocol itself, not just additional TCAP queries.

And even if there were any real similarity aside from both processes
involving TCAP queries, the scaling issues are not "minor".  How many
telephone calls are made per day?  How many 800 calls are made per day?
There's the magnitude of your scaling problem, and a small hint is that
it's so large as to call for a completely different solution for that
reason alone.


Thor Lancelot Simon	                     tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

From: Seema Dhawan <seema@infozech.com>
Subject: Telcomine: Who's Who of Cost Saving Billing Systems
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:29:54 +0530


Hi Patrick,

I would like to bring to the notice of the readers of this group, a
most updated report by the 'Billing World' magazine detailing the top
40 telecom billing systems worlwide. Readers might find it useful as
it has been designed to help telecom executives shorten the time
necessary to evaluate a system.

A full feature on this has been included in Telcomine - Infozech's
newsletter on Telecom and Technology. The newsletter is 'free' and it
goes out monthly to a select group of around 5000+ telecom
professionals worldwide. Please allow me to include a brief extract of
what the April'99 issue contains. The full issue is available at
http://www.infozech.com/telcomine.html

*****TELCOMINE************

Wealth of Information about Telecommunications
Volume 2,No 4, April 1999

IN THIS ISSUE

1. INTERNET AS MASTER SPY IN WAR IN YUGOSLAVIA

For the first time in history Internet proves to be a powerful, if
surreptitious, war weapon to both sides in the NATO-Yugoslav War.

2. LANDMARK REPORT FOR SERVICE PROVIDERS :WHO'S WHO OF COST SAVING
BILLING SYSTEMS

In a most updated survey of Telecom billing systems which help service
providers and other bulk users of telephone lines save huge amounts,
Billing World comes out with the "1999 Telecom Billing System
Functionality Report" detailing the top 40 billing systems worldwide.

3. INFOZECH AMONG CHOSEN 40

Infozech is among the companies covered in the prestigious "1999
Telecom Billing System Functionality Report".

4. COMPUTERIZED VOICES EXPRESS EMOTIONS

A unique computerized voice synthesizer package called 'GALE'
developed by a research student at University of Florida injects
emotion into robotic sounding computer voices and makes them speak in
four moods - sad, happy, fearful and angry.

5. COMPUTERS READ THOUGHTS TO HELP PARALYTICS TRANSMIT MESSAGES

In a breakthrough discovery some German Scientists have developed a
computer system which enables completely paralyzed people to
communicate by "reading" their brainwaves.

6. INTERNET TECHNOLOGY TO MONITOR PATIENTS FROM AFAR

A new Internet technology that allows doctors to keep track of
chronically ill patients, 24 hour a day, from anywhere, is promising
to fundamentally change the way long-term patients are treated and
monitored in the next century.

7. UK COURT PUNISHES ISP FOR TRANSMITTING LIBELLOUS MESSAGE

Demon Internet, Britain's largest dial-up Internet Service Provider
has been hauled up by a British High Court for transmitting defamatory
messages posted on its electronic bulletin board even after warnings
from the victim.

8. EUROPEAN MOBILE USERS OVERCHARGED 300% ON PHONE BILLS: STUDY

A new study on Roaming by the European branch of the International
Telecommunications Group (INTUG) has revealed that mobile business
users in Europe are being overcharged 300% on their mobile phone
bills.

9. FREE INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE SIGNS HALF A MILLION SUBSCRIBERS

Netzero- A Free Internet Access Service launched only last October is
already claiming to have passed the half a million subscriber mark and
estimates that it will have a full million by mid-year.

10. OUR MAILBOX

See How Telcomine Saved a reader 45% in Phone Costs

Best Regards,

Seema Dhawan

Infozech -- Software for Telecom Service Providers
D-30 Press Enclave,  Saket, New Delhi, India
Fax: 91-11- 6287117, Tel: 91-11-6234664, 91-11-6283113
in US Contact: 408-490-2840, 2090 Hillsdale Circle, Boulder, CO-80303
Microsoft Certified Solution Provider
Visit us at http://www.infozech.com

Telcomine: A  Telecom & Technology Newsletter http://www.infozech.com/telcomine.html

Anything Telecom" discussion forum : http://www.infozech.com/forum.html
Your answer to any telecom queries  

------------------------------

From: wbrownlo@my-dejanews.com (William Brownlow)
Subject: Re: Who or What is Bell America?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 13:07:14 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


In article <telecom19.48.4@telecom-digest.org>, Greg Stahl
<gsta@vm.stlawu.edu> wrote:

> Recently, radio ads for "Bell America" started playing up here in
> northern NY.  They are advertising Local and LD service.  Has anyone
> heard of them?

My understanding is that "Bell America" is not a real company - as of
yet.  According to my sources it is to be the name of the company
resulting from the merger of Bell-Atlantic and GTE.  Now if someone
named Bell has started a new little CLEC ...


William "Bill" Brownlow
"While my employer has their opinions, I have mine.  Occasionally they
converge"
"Wise men are not wise at all time."  Emerson, The Conduct of Life, 1860

------------------------------

From: hurtigh@ancestor.se (Anders)
Subject: VOIP Switchboard Applications?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:45:57 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


Hi,

Our company's telephone switchboard must be replaced due to
y2k-problems.  Now, we're interested in running a LAN-based VOIP
switchboard, using our client PC's as phone terminals with headsets or
similar and a CISCO gateway to the public telephone network.

Problem is, of course, that there doesn't seem to be any good software
available yet. Anybody out there who knows about such applications or
anything to be released soon?


Regards,

Anders

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 18:30:16 EDT
From: dhorvath@cobs.com (David B. Horvath, CCP)
Subject: "Internet Pioneers"


> The Telephone Pioneers began around 1900 when a couple dozen of the
> people who had been with AT&T since Day One decided they should have a
> club for themselves. In later years as all the old people died, the
> rule was changed to say that members had to have at least twenty years
> of employment with Bell. I wonder if the time has come for an 'Internet
> Pioneers' organization? If enough people send me some sort of valid
> evidence that they were active on the net at least 15-20 years ago and
> express an interest in an association among themselves and a web page
> or mailing list, perhaps I will start such a thing. It might be purely
> social,  or perhaps a mix of social and service to the net and the
> newcomers who are arriving -- not quite at the rate people are fleeing
> from Kosovo -- but pretty darn fast, to the net community daily. 

I'm interested and qualify ...

I had (and used :-) ) free userid's on MIT's AI, Dynamic Modeling, and
Macsyma (MIT-AI, MIT-DM, and MIT-MC) systems starting in September or
October of 1980...  That's back when we were all buddies and fellow
students/researchers -- before the "unwashed masses" got on.  I
remember one day dialing into the TIP somewhere long-distance from
Philadelphia (Washington DC? Cambridge Mass? Southern California?) and
printing the Macsyma reference manual on a DEC LA-36.  300 baud, about
8 hours, a nice stack of paper (nice, not high).  I won't admit how
the phone call was paid for since the University toll-blocked the
dial-out lines in the terminal room.

I miss ITS (Incompatible Time Share - the MIT operating systems
running on the DEC System/10's (KL-10 CPU if I remember correctly)).
ARPAnet and domain names with only one level (no .com's, .edu's, .jp's,
etc).


David B. Horvath, CCP                       dhorvath@cobs.com
Consultant, Author, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor
(also: dhorvath@arcnow.com, dhorvath@dca.net, davidh@decus.ca,
       and many other places)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, so far, you are the only person
who responded to that item. I guess no one is interested. Of course
one problem may be that I did not really play by all the rules around
here in the old days (I still usually don't), and a lot of the old,
old, old clique is still annoyed with me because of it. 

Yes, I remember the one-level addresses. Do you remember when instead
of using the '@' sign we said 'at', as in 'username at mit'  or
'username at berkeley' instead of ptownson@lcs.mit.edu like we do now?

I have a shell on a machine at Berkeley that I have had for years;
it has gone through more name changes and re-locations than I can
begin to keep track of. I use it mostly for recreational purposes,
for my own private chats, etc. Remember how so many of us used to
be 'shell collectors', or Unix account collectors? I still have
about six or seven shells on various boxes all over the USA from the
old days. Now-days, you sign up with an ISP and ask him for a shell
account and you get the strangest look from him, almost a sort of
'what are you trying to pull, anyway' attitude. Most will flatly
refuse to give a shell account. One even said to me once, in a sort
of joking way, 

     "Why, I would not not even give a shell to my own grandmother
      if she asked for one, let alone some itinerant hacker like
      you who would probably wreck my network."

Of course I thanked him for his courtesy, and offered to take employ-
ment from him staffing his help desk, to buffer him from how many
ever dozen calls he got each day from users trying to locate the
'any' key they had been told to press.

I got a couple of shell accounts in the old days by pointing out to
the sysadmin some potentially dangerous situation they had overlooked.
One place, I found /etc/passwords had been left sitting in the open
because the admin had forgotten to chmod it properly. I told him, and
he said so what, it is an encrypted file. I said yes, but I do not
need to know what root's password is, I *know* what my password is,
have you never heard of cut-and-paste?  The 'others read and write'
permissions were gone on that file two minutes later when I went to
check. Such innocent, naive times, weren't they?

Perhaps you also recall the old 'bang address' style where we said
something like 'ucbvax!username@mit' ... with those you read the 
address from the @ sign to the left. On the telecom mailing list, I
used to have lots and lots of addresses ending in .ARPA, and quite
a few of the bang style addresses which still mostly work, but I
convert them now whenever I still see one on the list, which is very
rare anymore. 

And remember the email to FTP gateways? Long before the web, when a
file transfer meant FTP'ing to a site -- if you could get through the
congestion, and if you were allowed to use FTP at your location --
many people were unable to obtain the files they wanted. This was
especially true when the earliest BBS's started networking with us
through Fidonet gateways. So we had scripts that would accept incoming
mail and parse it looking for the requested files, gather up the files
and send them back by email. It was a workaround when FTP was not
available between networks, etc. The person got the requested files
a couple days later, but that was better than not getting them at all.
The Telecom Archives Email to FTP script used to get a hundred calls
a day right after I put it up several years ago, now it gets maybe one
or two inquiries weekly while the web site got two thousand hits today.

You were the only one to respond David. That tells me where the inter-
est is in that idea of mine.     PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #60
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue Apr 27 14:39:08 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA29260;
	Tue, 27 Apr 1999 14:39:08 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 14:39:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904271839.OAA29260@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #61

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 27 Apr 99 14:39:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 61

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Nigel Roberts)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Colin Sutton)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Craig Partridge)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (James Wyatt)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Bill Newkirk)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (Walter Dnes)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Rate Rationalization, was Re: NANP Has 8+ Years to Go (John R. Levine)
    Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388 (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Nigel Roberts <nigel@nic.gg>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 17:15:04 +0100
Organization: Island Networks


I too would be interested in such an organisation, having had
'tourist' accounts on MIT-AI and MIT-DM (70 and 134 IIRC) when I was
at university in SE England in the late 70s.

In fact there was only one ARPAnet node in the whole of the UK at the
time (UCL), but since a few dozen other Universities and research
establishments were connected together by the Post Offices
Experimental Packet Switching Service (which later became standardised
as X.25) we could reach UCL from Essex using EPSS, and then connect to
the USA from UCL.

MIT-DM was the home of 'Zork' of course. And that's where we spent a
lot of time.

And following a late night coffee session in my flat in late 1978
after being ejected from the University's computer centre when in
closed at 10 o'clock between myself, Roy Trubshaw, Richard Bartle and
Keith Rautenbach, someone came up with the idea 'what if you could use
the DEC-10's shareable # high-segment to run a Zork type world with
more than one player in the dungeon at the same time ...'


Regards,

Nigel Roberts	nigel@nic.gg 	http://www.nic.gg


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> The Telephone Pioneers began around 1900 when a couple dozen of the
> people who had been with AT&T since Day One decided they should have a
> club for themselves. In later years as all the old people died, the
> rule was changed to say that members had to have at least twenty years
> of employment with Bell. I wonder if the time has come for an 'Internet
> Pioneers' organization? If enough people send me some sort of valid
> evidence that they were active on the net at least 15-20 years ago and
> express an interest in an association among themselves and a web page
> or mailing list, perhaps I will start such a thing. It might be purely
> social,  or perhaps a mix of social and service to the net and the
> newcomers who are arriving -- not quite at the rate people are fleeing
> from Kosovo -- but pretty darn fast, to the net community daily.

------------------------------

Reply-To: Colin Sutton <colin.sutton@syd.landisstaefa.aust.com>
From: Colin Sutton <colin@sutton.wow.aust.com>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Organization: Siemens Building Technologies
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 23:51:00 +1000


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, so far, you are the only person
> who responded to that item. I guess no one is interested.

Not that we're not interested, just too busy, or still looking to the
future, not the past.

One of these days I'll look through those 132 column teletype
printouts of jokes I downloaded via my decus account that my wife
keeps telling me to chuck out - there was no disk space for them on my
PDP-11 :-( Not to mention the decus backup tapes, the Sinclair
spectrum audio cassette backups from 1980, the Game and Watches from
1981,...

> Of course one problem may be that I did not really play by all the
> rules around here in the old days (I still usually don't), and a lot
> of the old, old, old clique is still annoyed with me because of it.

Surely you've been forgiven the errors of youth :-)


Colin Sutton  - AARNET "pioneer" - well, one of the first commercial users
of the Australian Academic Research Network, anyway.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You could drop out the word 'been' from
your last sentence and that would be true also. I hope that does not
sound too arrogant. Some of the things which seemed so important at 
the time have long since taken a backseat to more pressing issues. Do
you remember the numerous battles over the years regarding newsgroup
creation, whether or not some newsgroup should be moderated or open,
what the exact topic should be, etc? I do not persnally remember when
there were only six or eight newsgroups in total, but I remember when
there were only a couple hundred, instead of the fourteen thousand
plus listed now, although admittedly many recieve little or no traffic.

I remember when there were only groups beginning with the name 'comp'
and it was extremely hard to get a new group started. There had to be
a proposal submitted, thirty days of discussion, and a vote taken. If
the vote passed, then one of only two or three people were authorized
(in the sense that anarchists respected the right of anyone to author-
ize anything) to do a 'newgroup' control message. The common agreement
was that all sites honored a newgroup request. Then 'alt' came along,
as in 'alternate' and anyone could create their own newsgroup without
going through the formalities (and possible defeat), but the catch
was many or most sites did not carry the alt groups. It was up to the
person(s) who started an alt group to convince individual sysadmins
to install it on their news spool, unlike 'comp' where you had to go
to a lot more effort (and have a clearly defined group of supporters)
to gain 'legitimate' status but once you did, it automatically went
on sites all over the world, no questions asked. Remember how when
we got to the point there were a couple hundred newsgroups in total,
AT&T and several other large corporations said they did not have room
for that many, so they were going to drop all the 'alt' groups and
not carry them any longer? There was another consideration of course:
some of the 'alt' newsgroups tended to be a bit rowdy at times, not
always maintaining the kind of decorum and image that many companies
wanted their employees to see, at least on company time.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: craigp@world.std.com (Craig Partridge)
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 14:17:15 GMT
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die


> You were the only one to respond David. That tells me where the inter-
> est is in that idea of mine.     PAT]

I was intrigued by the idea but wasn't sure what the organization would
achieve, short of stuffing feathers in the caps of the folks who had
email back then


Craig Partridge

{ihnp4,kremvax,seismo}!harvard!partridge [c. 1982]
craig@bbn.arpa [1983]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I think about it now, one achievement
might be to permanently capture the memories people have of those days
so that they will be preserved. I am reminded of a great little book
called 'Reminisences of the Day of the Chicago Fire' published in 1901
by the Chicago Historical Society. Someone got an idea back then which
basically went like this: 'you know, it has now been thirty years 
since the terrible fire (in 1871), and before long all the people who
actually were around that day are going to be dead and there will not
be anyone left who actually witnessed it. All we will have are third-
party accounts from historians, etc. What we need to do is round up
as many of those people as we can, and have them tell in their own 
words what they remember from that day, what they did to save their
homes and families, etc and what they remember of the street scenes
during the fire.' And they did just that, putting together a book of
a couple dozen short -- between two and a dozen pages -- accounts 
given by people. One of the best was a fellow who was only eighteen
years old at the time who talked about sitting with a group of people
about 5:00 AM that Monday morning on the west bank of the Chicago
River as the sun came up watching the blazing inferno on the other
side of the river. 

I see that as a role for such a group as I propose. We have plenty 
of third-party accounts of the Internet, and some are rather good.
For instance Michael and Ronda Hauben (Ronda is a regular here) have
published their 'Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and
the Internet'. All good material, and there are other books like it.

But we need to have the 'peoples history' written down as well. If 
I may paraphrase, 'it has been about twenty years since this thing
got started. Before too many or all of the old people die or get
scattered out of contact we need to make them write a few paragraphs
about how things were on the net in the seventies and early eighties.'
I propose a web site which would include such capsules from the
'old people' as well as provide pointers to the works of 'professional
historians', the people who have written extensively about the history
of the net. But the 'peoples history' would be the key part of it.

There are plenty of web sites around devoted to teaching people how
to make web sites. There are plenty that serve as search engines or
starting points for other web sites. Why not one which would serve to
let others know where we came from, and how the net got to where it is
today? I think I have changed my mind. I do not think 'Internet 
Pioneers' is the best choice. Maybe 'Internet Historical Society' is
a better choice. Or maybe both.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: James Wyatt <jwyatt@RWSystems.net>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 09:25:29 -0500
Organization: Fastlane Communications (using Airnews.net!)


> old days. Now-days, you sign up with an ISP and ask him for a shell
> account and you get the strangest look from him, almost a sort of
> 'what are you trying to pull, anyway' attitude. Most will flatly

FastLane Communications in DFW, Texas doesn't usually mention it, but they
offer free shell accounts. You can do CGI and 'bots if you don't get too
obnoxious(sp?) and it is *well* connected. Just ask when you sign up ...
You can visit online at www.fastlane.net if you wish.

> Perhaps you also recall the old 'bang address' style where we said
> something like 'ucbvax!username@mit' ... with those you read the 
> address from the @ sign to the left. On the telecom mailing list, I

I still have UUCP-connected customers, but they have their own domains
and we use MX records now. I have *no* idea how OutLook handles bang
addresses, but many SMTP-to-proprietary-mail gateways get confused.

We used to get our internet mail from texsun.sun.com until Morris'
folly caused Sun to drop *all* guest accounts. When texsun died, the
University of Texas at Arlington (thanks David!) then helped us until
some jerk at Tandy complained that tandy.com's mail should go
direct. We used to feed numerous UUCP sites for free in exchange for
our MX feed and just about saturated our Telebits with newsfeeds. This
meant that Sun/Dallas and UTA only had one or two systems calling, but
helped dozens of systems and hundreds of people. It also meant that
rwsys.lonestar.org has had the same email address for about a
decade. (but we prefer rwsystems.net now!)

> And remember the email to FTP gateways? Long before the web, when a
> file transfer meant FTP'ing to a site -- if you could get through the
> congestion, and if you were allowed to use FTP at your location --
> many people were unable to obtain the files they wanted. This was

I used to try them once in a while (usually used shell account at Sun
and UUCPd it home). I *really* learned about them when Godron Burditt
(an occasional c.d.t poster) used to haul the latest FreeBSD
distribution and source trees to GNUware via our UUCP mail link! Good
thing he had a TeleBit modem too ...

I also had a port on 1200b AX.25 and TCPIP on 145MHz and 440MHz for
amateurs to pull mail and use the internet in the early 90s. (Anyone
else here remember KA9Q and JNOS?) I have been slowly gathering stiff
to put it back up, but at 9600b some day. I kinda went from ham RTTY
(teletype) and BBS to UUCP to internet over the years with transient
exchursions between the interests.

It was interesting to see UseNet posts that mentioned the 'rwsys' UUCP
name from various systems around here. It was obvious who you were
connected to in those days (esp. ihnp4, ucbvax, decvax, etc) whereas
it's hidden in MX records and traceroutes now. Less geeky I suppose,
but less 'scenic' in retrospect. 


 Jy@ (jwyatt@rwsystems.net KA5VJL)

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@loralorion.com>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 11:29:05 -0400


Pat, 

Regarding the 'Internet Pioneers'.  I think it would be a great
idea.  

The ranks of ham radio have long had an organization called the
'Quarter Century Wireless Association', the requirement is that you
were first licensed as a ham radio operator twenty five years before
you may join.  You can check their Web site at: 'http://www.qcwa.org'.
I will become eligible for membership next year.

However, how long has the Internet been with us?  I don't think they
could require twenty-five years as I don't think the 'Internet' has
been around for that long.  For now, they'd have to settle on a lower
number of years.


Fred


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think 15-20 years would be a good
starting point, maybe dropping it to 10 years for people who made 
some substantial contributions during the late 1980's.  PAT] 

------------------------------

From: Bill Newkirk <wnewkirk@iu.net>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 23:37:50 -0400
Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com


Maybe it just needs time to percolate around a bit ...

However, people don't seem to want to join clubs/organizations today.

------------------------------

From: waltdnes@interlog.com (Walter Dnes)
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:53:21 GMT
Organization: Interlog Internet Services


On 26 Apr 1999 13:35:31 GMT, craig@rmit.EDU.AU (Craig Macbride) wrote:

> Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric B. Morson) writes:

>> No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing patterns
>> from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
>> deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

> How about cutting loose the non-US members (possibly not Canada,

Nothing personal against the US, but I think that Canada should also
be split off into its own country code.  Right now we have approx 20
area codes, and will continue to expand.  It would be nice to have all
sorts of internal area code number-space.  And the US will probably
need our codes for its own use in the future anyways.

> but at least the Caribbean countries) of the NANP at the same
> time, thus giving more numbering space to the US and stopping
> all the fraud schemes based on confusing people into calling
> numbers they believe are in the US which are in fact in other
> countries?

Excellent idea.  What is the rationale behind separate area codes for
a bunch of overgrown sandbars, many of which barely justify a whole
exchange, let alone an area code?  And how many of their phone numbers
will disappear once people have to dial 0+ instead of 1-809+ or
1-664+, and telesleaze won't be able to pull that stunt on the
unsuspecting public.


Walter Dnes <waltdnes@interlog.com>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 11:24:58 -0400
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA


craig@rmit.EDU.AU (Craig Macbride) wrote:

> How about cutting loose the non-US members (possibly not Canada, but
> at least the Caribbean countries) of the NANP at the same time, thus
> giving more numbering space to the US and stopping all the fraud
> schemes based on confusing people into calling numbers they believe
> are in the US which are in fact in other countries?

Leaving aside the rate confusion issue, the answer to this question is
that it simply won't help matters much.  According to the "NANP
Exhaust Study" (http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf) there
are currently 410 assignable spare NPAs in the NANP.  Even if you
kicked *all* non-US countries (including Canada) out into separate
contry codes, it would only free up 41 NPAs -- an increase of a mere
10 percent for the pool of spares.  Not that big a help, especially
considering the costs associated with switching those other countries
to new country codes.  And actually getting the ITU to allocate some
of its numbering space for over a dozen new country codes is another
can of worms altogether.  (Is it time to rerun that old thread on the
mechanics of how to break up the NANP while still allowing graceful
permissive dialing periods?  :-)


Bob Goudreau			Data General Corporation
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com		62 Alexander Drive	
+1 919 248 6231			Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

------------------------------

Date: 26 Apr 1999 19:43:42 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Rate Rationalization, was: Re: NANP Has 8+ Years to Go
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> NANP Exhaust Study..published  www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

> Which brings up the simpler solution, but one, alas, which the ILECS
> won't like, namely a rationalization, and _reduction_, of the rate
> structures.

I believe this happened in the Denver area to delay the introduction
of new area codes.  They combined several small rate centers into a
smaller number of large ones.  Since Denver is surrounded by mountains
on one side and cornfields on the other, and the only other nearby
city of any size, Boulder, was already a local call, and I believe
that local calls were already unmetered, this probably didn't turn
many toll calls into local ones, so US West didn't object (much).

I agree that the current rate center setup is a complete anachronism,
and you need only compare maps of rate centers to maps of where the
switches and wires really are to confirm that.  For example, my cell
phone is in 607-279 which is in the Ithaca NY rate center which is
local to me in Trumansburg, but the switch is in Syracuse, an hour and
a half away.  The cell company used to have a switch in Ithaca, but
they got rid of it a few years ago and consolidated all their
switching in Syracuse.  The Syracuse rate center is a toll call from
both Ithaca and Trumansburg, of course.

Or, even worse, I'm in T'burg, Ithaca is south of here, and Interlaken
is north of here.  Calls between T'burg and Ithaca are local.  Calls
between Interlaken and Ithaca are local.  But calls between T'burg and
Interlaken are toll, even though Interlaken calls are physically
handled in the T'burg switch!  The phone company has admitted to me
that this is due to historical quirks, is now stupid, but there's not
enough traffic between Interlaken and T'burg to be worth the grief of
going to Albany and filing for a rate change.

But if this NPA started to fill up, it's screamingly obvious that
Ithaca, Tburg, and Interlaken should all be combined into a single
rate center, along with a couple of other small towns on the other
side of Ithaca.  Or for that matter, to reflect wire and switch
reality, everything from here to Syracuse and 20 miles north of there
should be one rate center.

This would go a long way to fixing the prefix crunch, since the number
of CLEC reserved prefixes could easily drop by a factor of five or
ten.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:39:14 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: European-Wide Country Code of +388
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.59.7@telecom-digest.org>, Richard@office.mandarin.com
wrote:

> It may have been that at one time, but the current proposals are quite
> different.  +388 is now intended to be an overlay, which would provide
> users with "European" phone numbers instead of numbers based out of the
> country where the user is actually located.  Some might think of +388
> as being more a form of "politically-correct" number!

Hadn't heard about this proposal.  How will the calls be billed??  Will
it depend on the originating and/or terminating country?  Will they be
dialable from outside the non-EU European countries?  Outside Europe
entirely?

[quoting me (Linc Madison) from a previous article:]

>> The Ukraine is certainly big enough that it would have deserved a
>> two-digit code (unlike +45 Denmark, +64 New Zealand, +65 Singapore,

> ITU-T policy is that all new country code assignments will be three-digit.

Yes, that would be why I said, directly above the bit you quoted:

>>  With the possible exception of +3 (which was envisioned to replace all
>> +3 and +4 codes), no more one- or two-digit codes will be allocated.
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think your clarification was unnecessary, particularly since it gives
the false appearance that I was not aware of the ITU-T policy.

>> but the people who created the plan didn't adequately think through the
>> transition required to get there.

> More that they didn't realise the level of opposition there would be
>  from the "member states" to being required to change their phone
> numbers just to please Brussels.  Ironically, most of those "member
> states" have gone through (at least) one major renumbering since then
> of their own volition.

Well, I'd say it's both, really.  The plan was poorly conceived from a
political standpoint, ignoring the needs and desires of the member
states, but it was also poorly conceived from a technical standpoint,
ignoring the convoluted transition that would be required.  The scheme
provided an inadequate transition plan to a goal that the countries
involved hadn't agreed to.

If by some chance the EU does pursue the idea of making Europe +0 when
that range becomes assignable in a couple of years, they will have to
work out the political issues as well as the technical.


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #61
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue Apr 27 17:16:19 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA09189;
	Tue, 27 Apr 1999 17:16:19 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 17:16:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904272116.RAA09189@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #62

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 27 Apr 99 17:16:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 62

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Australian RF Emission Standards Effect Cellular Telephones (John Stahl)
    Bizarre Cellular Cross-Talk (Linc Madison)
    MTP Level 2 Error Correction Question (Kyung Jun, Cho)
    MCI Weekend Rate Available Through 1010 Code? (Benjamin D. Lukoff)
    Good Conference Phone? (Fr Faure)
    The Complete PC's  ->> Complete Communicator VoiceMail Card (Etop Udoh)
    GTE/PacBell 2001 Circuits (Chris Johnston)
    N11 Code For TT Relay (Linc Madison)
    Requesting Information on European Telecom Operators Market (A. Basquin)
    Seeking Name/Place Database (BV124@aol.com)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (Gideon Stocek)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (suhrig@bright.net)
    Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY (Walter Dnes)
    Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability (Seymour Dupa)
    Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, OH (R Bean)
    Re: Cell Phones, blah blah blah (John Saxe)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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 Apr 1999 09:50:08
From: John Stahl <aljon@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Australian RF Emission Standards Effect Cellular Telephones


Here in the US there have been a few reports lately with regards to
some potentially negative results from testing cellular phone RF
transmissions on human beings. Additionally some groups have come out
against putting transmitting towers (cellular, PCS, radio and TV)
nearby populated areas with the idea that the large amounts of RF
energy near these antennae are a major concern for the well-being of
the human and animal population.

While the US government continues it's studies of this matter, some of
the other major world governments have taken on making new rules and
regulations regarding maximum RF power output levels.

Recently it was reported in various news media that the Australian
Government released standards for RF power emission from any and all
transmitting devices including cellular (would effect both analog and
digital types) telephones. (Official government Press Release URL
detailing this new Australian Standard is:
http://www.aca.gov.au/media/01-99.htm) This new standard called "The
Australian Standard for Limits of Exposure to Radio frequency Fields"
will soon be the "law" in Australia.

Called out in it is the Australian standard AS 2772.2 (Radio frequency
Radiation: Principles and Methods of Measurement - 300 kHz to 100 GHz)
and Standard ASNZS 2772.1 (Int):1998, (The Australian Standard For
Limits of Exposure to Radio frequency Fields). These two 'standards'
contain all of the pertinent data supporting new Australian limits on
maximum power allowances for any and all transmitting
devices. Incidentally, in these standards is reference to US based
standards groups such as the IEEE.

These documents contain a definition of this maximum transmitting
power in terms of SAR (Specific Absorption Rate). The new Australian
maximum SAR for general public exposure to any transmitter is 0.08
W/kg. The standard AS 2772.1 details how this pertains to human
beings.

The internet site where additional info on this potentially 'controversial'
subject can be found is: 
http://www.aca.gov.au/index/default.htm.

There is also a site where the Australian Standards group is located for
availability of these standards documents: 
http://www.standards.com.au

I have contacted several of the ACA people and have been supplied with
some additional background information regarding the potential health
issues they have found in their studies. If anyone is interested in
some further reading materials, please contact me and I will be happy
to forward to you.

It could be just a matter of time before the US government 'feels' the
pressure from all of the standards group's for it to impose limitations
on RF energy output!


John Stahl
Aljon Enterprises
Telecom and Data Systems' Consultants
Endwell, NY USA
email: aljon@worldnet.att.net

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:42:32 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Bizarre cellular cross-talk
Organization: LincMad Consulting


I was talking on my landline POTS phone today, to a friend who was
calling from some variety of cellphone or PCS phone.  Suddenly, as
clear as day, I heard someone else's conversation, something along
the lines of "Dad, can you hear me now?"  I hadn't realized that my
friend was on a wireless phone, so I thought perhaps someone was
monkeying with the demarc on one end or the other.  The cut-in was
only for about 20 or 30 seconds, before the other party/parties
went away.

Kinda makes you wonder ...


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

From: Kyung Jun, Cho <chobaek@chollian.net>
Organization: DACOM Corp.
Subject: MTP Level 2 Error Correction Question
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 04:56:06 GMT


There are two Error Correction Method Basic and PCR(Preventive Cyclic
retransmission) in ITU-T Q703.

We use the basic error correction method in domestic area, and I know
most international carrier use PCR method in Internationa SS7 span.

I would like to know if there is any problem when we interconnect
between national exchange(BASIC error correction method) and
International exchange(PCR method) via ss7 signaling link.

------------------------------

From: Benjamin D. Lukoff <bd087@scn.org>
Subject: MCI Weekend Rate Available Through 1010 Code?
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 18:51:15 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


Hello all,

I just read an article on saving money on long distance calls at
http://moneycentral.msn.com/articles/smartbuy/deals/3172.asp ; it
reads in part, "Know the 1010 codes. If you know how to use the 1010
system, there are hundreds of unadvertised specials each week. For
instance, I use the MCI weekend program of 5 cents a minute, even
though AT&T is my main carrier during the week. That way, I cut the
cost of my weekend calls in half, and I still have a very good rate
the rest of the time."

I wasn't aware that MCI's "5 cent Sundays" rate, and in fact, any
special rates, were available by dialing 1010xxx codes before the
number.  I seem to remember being charged more using Sprint's 10xxx
code a few years ago than I would have had I been a subscriber.  Has
anyone else had experience with this, and is there a good place,
preferably on the Internet, where one can find a list of companies
with their 1010xxx codes?  I was looking for a list about four years
ago and only managed to get one by contacting the FCC through
Fedworld.  They would have charged me for it had I not been an
undergraduate at the time, and it was rather confusing.


Thanks,

Benjamin Lukoff
bd087 (at) scn.org

"It's the sale of the century and we all know that everything must go"
 --Andy Partridge

------------------------------

From: ffaure@bigSPAMGAZETTAIDAMEfoot.com (F. Faure)
Subject: Good Conference Phone?
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 09:21:47 GMT
Organization: What me, organized?
Reply-To: ffaure@bigSPAMGAZETTAIDAMEfoot.com


All,

I need to buy a new conference telephone, as everyone complains that
the Panasonic KX-TS700FR-B we bought a couple of months ago is
terrible. Should have done my homework instead of trusting that
salesman ...

Could someone recommend other brands? I found infos on 3Com/USR's
site, and also www.phonezone.com:

3Com
ConferenceLink CS1000 Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS1050 Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS1055 Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS1070-1 Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS1075-N Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS1075-S Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS850 Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS870-N Speakerphone 
ConferenceLink CS870-S Speakerphone 

PhoneZone
Hello Direct ConferencePro
Polycom SoundPoint Pro 
Polycom SoundPoint for AT&T 
Polycom SoundStation EX 
Polycom SoundStation 
Polycom SoundStation Premier with Satellite 

Other?

Thanks for any tip,

FF

------------------------------

From: Etop Udoh <s_druid@mindspring.com>
Subject: The Complete PC's  ->> Complete Communicator VoiceMail Card
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 22:02:12 -0700
Organization: ....FILE SERVER FROM HELL....


Is anyone familiar with the company "The Complete PC" which came out
with the "Complete Communicator" voice mail card and some accessories
for them ...

I have several of their cards including my latest one, the Window's
Version of the card.  I have the Window's Software, but I'm missing
the DOS software which installs itself in a directory called "CCDOS" ??

I believe there are several versions of this software, and the last
version which came off of their bbs, or ftp site (now BOCA) is not
quite 100% compatible ... so I need one that is a little older than
that one.



Etop Udoh          |  Southern Polytechnic State University [89-##]
P.O. Box 4234      |  Http://s_druid.home.mindspring.com
Marietta, Ga 30061 |           s_druid@mindspring.com

"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most"

------------------------------

From: Chris Johnston <chris@netus.com>
Subject: GTE/PacBell 2001 Circuits
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 16:01:17 -0700
Organization: Netus Internetworking, Southern California, USA


Hi.  Working on wiring two offices together.  I can get a 2001 circuit
from GTE and my PacBell rep is waffling.  My problem is that no DSL
router manufacturer has been able to tell me if their product would
support such an arrangement.  Flowpoint and Adtran have two desireable
products good for truly SDSL access.  768K or 1100K access is ideal
for this application.

Anyone have thoughts?

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:11:29 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: N11 Code For TT Relay
Organization: LincMad Consulting


There has been some discussion of assigning a national N11 code for
voice calls to Text Telephones (TT's, formerly known as TDD's,
Telephone Devices for the Deaf, or TTY's, TeleTYpewriters).  I've seen
some proposals to assign a pair of N11's, one for voice-to-TT and the
other for TT-to-voice.

It seems to me that it should be reasonable to assign only one N11
code for both directions.  On each call, the relay operator is dealing
with a TT on one end and a voice call on the other, so the issue of
origination should be inconsequential.  TT callers are already told to
press the space bar when dialing 911; the same instruction would apply
for the new N11 service.

Personally, I think that this is an idea that should go forward.  Is
it percolating through any official bodies at the moment?


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

From: Anthony Basquin <anthony.basquin@acresearch.com>
Subject: Requesting Information on European Telecom Operators Market
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 18:45:53 +0200
Organization: UUNet


Help me in defining the environment around telecom operators in Europe.

MY QUESTION ARE :

- How many Telecom operators and ISP's are offering E-business services or
products or plan to do so, in Europe? Who are they?

- What are the most important operators acting in Europe in terms of annual
turn-over, geographic coverage, and complementary of services?

Any expert or non-expert feedback will be greatly appreciated. 


Thanks in advance,

Anthony Basquin

------------------------------

From: BV124@aol.com
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 14:15:29 EDT
Subject: Re: Seeking Name/Place Database 
Reply-To: BV124@aol.com


The following identifes the source of a nifty WINDOWS application that
does what you ask for and more!

To order by US-mail:
Robert Ricketts
The PC Consultant
PO Box 42086
Houston, TX 77242-2086

To order by e-mail:
Internet e-mail:  robert@pcconsultant.com

To order by phone:
888/456-7950 Toll Free
I am away from the office occasionally.  My voice-mail system will
answer if I am away.  You can leave your name and number to call back
(I'm alerted when a message is received) or go ahead and place your
order.  The latter is faster!

To get the latest version, connect to our web site: www.pcconsultant.com     

If this URL breaks for some reason, please send e-mail to the above
address asking for the current URL.

------------------------------

From: Gideon Stocek <gstocek@spam_away.lucent.com>
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:05:30 -0700
Organization: Octel Communications Corp.


Can someone provide a good reference for changes required to ISUP
and/or TCAP application requirements for LNP? I'm curious as to how
this is all supposed to work.


Thanks,

Gideon Stocek

------------------------------

From: suhrig@bright.net 
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 22:11:28 GMT
Organization: bright.net Ohio


On Mon, 26 Apr 1999 11:03:47 -0400, rhyre@medplus.com (Ralph Hyre)
wrote:

> What's the real issue with Local Number portability?

SNIP

> Why can't the same process be adopted for local calls?  In Ohio, I'm 
> already being assessed a 'Local Number Portability charge' to make this 
> happen.  Presumably this pays for administration of the as-yet-nonexistent
> database.

Local number porting is in use in Ohio. For now it is only porting
between the ILEC and CLECS in the same exchange. As I understand it
the FCC has not yet allowed porting outside the original exchange
until they see how many problems are generated.

We have had problems with several ported numbers in the Lancaster Ohio
exchange.

------------------------------

From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:32 EDT
Subject: Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY


wdag@my-dejanews.com (W.D.A. Geary) wrote:

>> Does anyone know what the NEW " AREA CODE " will be ?
>> I suggest " 783 " for SUF

> Pace to 1-800-FLOWERS, codes that actually had alphabetical meaning
> went out with hula hoops. 

Certainly not.  In fact, until four years ago, mnemonic values for
*area* codes (as opposed to local exchange prefixes) were not possible
at all, since no letters are assigned to the "0" or "1" keys, which
made up the middle digit on all area codes created before 1995.

Since the opening up of the NNX numbering space for NPA assignment,
there have been numerous examples of new codes that were chosen with
specific mnemonic values in mind.  For example, Canada's three
territories (Yukon, Nunavut and NWT) are at the TOP (= 867) of the
world.  Just last week, Tennesseans were publicizing the fact that
their state's next NPA will be VOLunteer (865).  And the breakup of
NPA 809 over the past four years has lead to quite a few Caribbean
islands getting their own mnemonic codes:

Anguilla 			264 (ANG)
Antigua				268 (ANT)
Bahamas				242 (BHA)
British Virgin Islands		284 (BVI)
Grenada				473 (GRE)
Montserrat			664 (MOI)
Puerto Rico			787 (PUR or PTR)
St. Lucia			758 (SLU)
St. Vincent & the Grenadines	784 (SVG)
Trinidad & Tobago		868 (TnT)


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: The northern suburbs of Chicago have
847, which was intended as VIP for Very Important People.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: waltdnes@interlog.com (Walter Dnes)
Subject: Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:53:26 GMT
Organization: Interlog Internet Services


On Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:42:46 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom
wdag@my-dejanews.com (W.D.A. Geary)wrote:

> I also think that we will _soon_ have to go to either 8-digit
> local numbers or _variable length_ numbers (terminating dialing
> sequence with # key, just like SEND on cellphone). This would
> certainly simplify telephone-number entries in address books and
> business cards/advertisements, and allow something like:

> 1-680-555-1212# (base number for Wardenclyffe Microtechnology; voice phone)
> 1-680-555-1212-1# (fax machine)
> 1-680-555-1212-2# (pager)
> 1-680-555-1212-3# (cellphone)
> 1-680-555-1212-41# (data line 1)
> 1-680-555-1212-42# (data line 2)
> ISDN already supports a "subaddress" that could be used for this.

  This raises a question about extensions at a PBX.  Does the telco
have to assign real phone numbers for extensions?  Using the above
example, could Wardenclyffe Microtechnology have a base number of
1-680-555-1212 followed by a 4-digit extension?  If so, the one
phone number could provide a virtual numberspace of 10^n numbers
where n is the number of digits in the extension.

  Let's take a real-life example.  I have a *PULSE* phone line, not
tone-dialing.  My fax+answering machine, once it answers, accepts
*TONE* sequences for retreiving messages, etc.  I've also set a
passcode that is required to accept faxes.  If I want to "take" some
paper document home to work-from-home, I can fax myself the document.
People I give the passcode to can also fax me.  Only the junk-faxers
lose.

  If there's any worse waste than mostly-unused exchanges for
separate carriers, it's the city bus info lines with one phone
number for each stop.  One phone number plus an extension could
accomplish the same task.

  Does every desk at a large office building need to have a "real"
7-digit phone number, or could an extension also provide a huge
virtual numberspace?  And while we're at it, does every desktop
computer at a big office building *REALLY* need its own "real"
IP address, or would a reserved-for-internal-use 10.X.X.X IP not
serve the purpose?  This waste is part of why IPv4 is facing the
same exhaust problem as NANPA.  The company could reserve 1/10th
of its current usage of "real" IP addresses, and dole them out via
DHCP and/or VPN when someone wants to go outside the LAN.  It would
probably do great wonders for...

  a) security; because the real internal addresses would be non-
routable, except for the firewall/gateway/mailserver/etc.

  b) productivity; employees would know that any non-work usage
of their internet connections would be very closely monitored
and likely noticed.


Walter Dnes <waltdnes@interlog.com>

------------------------------

From: Seymour Dupa <grumpy@bigbird.en.com>
Subject: Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability
Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc.
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 22:39:00 GMT


Is *no* other Local Exchange Carrier available to go to even if we
wanted to?

John

Will Roberts <oldbear@arctos.com> wrote:

> Local Number Portability (LNP) is the FCC-mandated ability to keep your 
> same telephone number even if you switch Local Exchange Carriers.  

   ---
  If You Always Do the Things You've Done,
  You'll Always Have the Things You Got.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, Ohio
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 20:00:37 CDT
From: Ron Bean <rbean@execpc.com>


merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes:

> This is class envy.

Considering how cheap cellphones are now, I'm not sure who is being
envious of whom. I see nothing wrong with requiring a hands-free phone
while the vehicle is moving. For the same reason, I think we should
require that radios be built into the dashboard, and make it illegal
to hold a portable radio up to your ear while driving. If you can't
afford a built-in radio, too bad.

> If you outlaw cell phones, please also outlaw:

>        drive through restaurants

I think you're supposed to *stop* before you place your order.
In any case these are on private property, so traffic laws don't
apply.

>        babies on board

They're supposed to be strapped in. Maybe we should outlaw
breastfeeding while driving?

>        children in the back seat ("Don't make me pull over!")

Better to pull over than to make empty threats to your kids while
driving (they catch on real fast).

>        doing makeup in the rearview mirror
>        reading a book

I don't think anyone would argue with these.

>        using a map

This is dangerous, and I refuse to do it. I either find a place
to stop, or keep driving around until I'm hopelessly lost and
*then* find a place to stop.

> But let's be fair here.  Let's outlaw EVERYTHING that could be a
> distraction to the driver.

Many people would like to do exactly that.

The simplest solution might be to pass a law that says that if you're
in an accident while talking on a cellphone, you're assumed to be 100%
at fault. Then let people decide whether it's worth the risk.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: While it is not illegal to operate a
television set (portable of course) in an automobile, I believe in 
many places it is illegal to have one in the front seat, where it is
presumed the driver would be watching it instead of the road.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 09:25:17 -0400
From: John Saxe <JXS@guggenheim.org>
Subject: Re: Cell Phones, blah blah blah


Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

>>This is class envy.

I don't know about Portland, but here in "greater" New York City (And
that includes Brooklyn and--unfortunately--Northern New Jersey where I
live) cell phones seem to be passed out to anyone who can make a fist
without instructions.  There doesn't seem to be any "class"
distinctions except for the lack of it shown by people who display
them as accessories, and use them in public with that loud tone of
voice that is designed to draw attention to themselves.

The brilliant Max Cannon sums up the issue of DWCP (driving with cell
phone) in one of his Red Meat cartoons at:
http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/comics/rm_407.htmlx.

Oh, by the way, I have one -- a Nextel as big as a brick, which I keep
in my case for ballast and occasional calls when off site.


John Saxe, 
Technical Support Dept.
(212)423-3576

"No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny:
the officious demands of policemen,
government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets."
--Edward Abbey

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #62
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Wed Apr 28 14:10:05 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA28035;
	Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:10:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 14:10:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904281810.OAA28035@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #63

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 28 Apr 99 14:09:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 63

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Bill Ranck)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Matt Ackeret)
    Re: MTP Level 2 Error Correction Question (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    CPUC Files Waiver Requests With FCC For Numbering Relief (Linc Madison)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (Art Kamlet)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (John R. Levine)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (John R. Levine)
    Re: Bizarre Cellular Cross-Talk (Arthur Ross)
    Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools (Matt Ackeret)
    Buy a Cable Modem and Go to Jail (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: <ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu> Eric Ranck
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: 27 Apr 1999 19:36:41 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA


I saw things from the BITNET world though.  I remember when
ARPAnet/Internet had specific gateways into BITNET.  You had to know
the gateway and route mail to it with a bang address on the left side
of the address.  It was something like

joeuser!somevax.arpa@gateway 

At the gateway the address would get stripped of the BITNET stuff and
the bang got replaced with an '@' and then off it went.  JANET, in the
UK had bang separated addresses that were 'backward' to the ARPAnet
addresses.  You couldn't just hit 'reply' in those days.

I worked in the User Services department at my university, and I had
managed to acquire enough lore on how to address things for various
gateways that e-mail questions frequently came to me.  One day,
shortly after lunch, a professor came in and said he wanted to
correspond with a colleague in Isreal.  I knew that BITNET was
supposed to have a trans-Atlantic link hooked up "any day now," and
the e-mail address he wanted to try was at one of the EARN (European
version of BITNET) nodes so really there was no big trick.  I showed
him how to send e-mail, and said that I wasn't sure if the new link
was up just yet, but I would send a test note just to show him how it
worked.  As we talked, the fellow in Isreal responded!  Not only was
the new link in place, but the fellow on the other end was logged in
and answering.  It is hard to describe how I felt.  Sending that note
and getting a response took less time than making a phone call would
have.  I was practically giddy.

That was the point at which I realized what a fantastic tool
networking could become.  The whole potential just seemed so
unbeleivably vast.  I'd say it was a turning point for me, and I have
lived through the following 15 or so years enjoying the ride and
anxious to see how things turn out. 


*****************************************************************************
* Bill Ranck +1-540-231-3951 ranck@vt.edu * * Virginia Polytechnic
Institute & State University, Computing Center *
*****************************************************************************

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You forgot to mention what the letters
in BITNET stood for: <B>ecause <I>t's <T>ime ... I had about five or
six hundred names on the Digest list at .bitnet sites and although I
could have kept them all on the same master mailing list and let the
stuff for .bitnet just go through the gateway, it turned out that the
gateway was very sluggish and kept breaking down, which eventually the
admins at the time detirmined was due to the size of my mailing list. 
So what they had me do was grep out all the .bitnet names on the list
and make a separate list for them. Then they gave me an account on 
the gateway machine at Northwestern University to pump those out. It
was called 'accuvax.bitnet' or 'accuvax.eecs.nwu.edu' depending on
who was asking for it. Same machine .. it sat in the same room just
a few feet from where my work station was, but that gateway would
choke every time it got my load. So I had to put all the .bitnet names
over there on accuvax, and a .forward file which pointed to a script
that would start moving the mailing list over there. Then as an issue
of the Digest would go out, one address on the main mailing list was
actually just an 'exploder' which pointed at accuvax. So *one* copy
only of the Digest went to accuvax which used it like a trigger to
start the .bitnet list moving. That would have been in 1989 and 1990.

It seems to me both Northwestern and MIT had things set up so that
people sending email to BITNET just used the .bitnet suffix the way
we do with .edu or .com now, and that told sendmail do not bother
trying to parse anything here, just hand it to the gateway. 

When we sent mail to those tiny little private BBS's which were part
of Fidonet the entire address line had to be of the form 
username!z1.f3.n2@name.of.gateway, meaning Fidonet Zone 1, net 3,
node 2 I believe, and when it got that far it would look to the
left of the bang and find out who was username on that local BBS. 
But mail coming back had to be different. The entire To: line was
something like 'Internet:username!sitename@the.local.fido.hubsite'
and if they wanted it to go to a Bitnet place they still had to
say 'Internet' first as in "Internet:username!sitename!bitnet@whatever".

But I will tell you one thing: we did not have any spam! :) Regards
that 'giddy feeling', I saw someone with an Apple 2 computer, with 48K
one day in 1978 or 79 and a 110 baud modem. He was having a terminal-
to-terminal conversation with someone a few blocks away, and I watched
him doing that and felt the same kind of emotions you describe. I never
of course imagined myself ever doing anything like that, and then a
year later more or less I was running a BBS on my own Apple ][+ and
then a couple months later two BBSs at the same time, my own and the
one we started as a volunteer thing for the Chicago Public Library.
I always used Applesoft BASIC (Beginners All purpose Symbolic Instruction
Code) for my BBS programs and stuff. Really it was Microsoft BASIC
but Apple had a license to use it in their machines under the name
'Applesoft'. For the library BBS I used Bill Blue's 'Peoples Message
System' a popular software program at the time.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 28 Apr 1999 01:41:31 -0000
From: Matt Ackeret <mattack@area.com>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Organization: Area Systems in Mountain View, CA - http://www.area.com


In article <telecom19.60.9@telecom-digest.org> you write:

> And remember the email to FTP gateways? Long before the web, when a
> file transfer meant FTP'ing to a site -- if you could get through the

Umm, a lot of the file downloading from web sites _is_ via ftp.

I realize you are referring to using ftp directly, but ftp:// is one
of the types of URL.


mattack@area.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think I heard that mentioned once
before Matt. In fact, I think the guy who set up the Telecom Archives
web site fixed things so you could go to an archives file, right-click
and download the file to your computer. Just imagine: years and
years of Editor's Notes available with a mere right-click on the
requested file. Makes you sort of nauseous, doesn't it.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: MTP Level 2 Error Correction Question
Date: 27 Apr 1999 20:10:58 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.62.3@telecom-digest.org>, Kyung Jun, Cho
<chobaek@chollian.net> wrote:

> There are two Error Correction Method Basic and PCR(Preventive Cyclic
> retransmission) in ITU-T Q703.

> We use the basic error correction method in domestic area, and I know
> most international carrier use PCR method in Internationa SS7 span.

Actually, the PCR (or "aggressive") mode, where data is constantly
retransmitted until it's acknowledged, is usually used only on
links with high latency, such as satellite links.  AFAIK it's not
commonly used on undersea cables (but then again, I'm hardly an
expert on international SS7, so I could be wrong).

> I would like to know if there is any problem when we interconnect
> between national exchange(BASIC error correction method) and
> International exchange(PCR method) via ss7 signaling link.

So long as your software is conformant to the protocol specs, I think
it will just work.  All PCR "error correction" does is mindlessly
retransmit already-sent packets until they're acknowledged by the
other end.  This is perfectly legal to do on any MTP link, so long
as the forward and backward sequence numbers and indicator ("parity")
bits are handled correctly.  I suppose it's concievable that on a link
with Really High latency (multiple satellite hops?) using "basic"
mode you might get into a condition where you couldn't actually recover
from an error, because the sequence number had wrapped around, but
you're talking about latencies on the order of a second, assuming
MSU sizes of 60 octets or so.

If you're implementing the software, you should probably just write
the code to do PCR mode; it's very simple.  If you aren't, and your
vendor doesn't support it, you should make them do so -- again, it's 
very easy.

If you're hoping to just run signaling links from an exchange 
or STP speaking a national variant of SS7 to the far end of some
international carrier's undersea or satellite network, I think
you're going to have worse problems -- you really need exchanges
and STPs in international gateway configurations to handle the necessary
interworking, SS7 is *far* from the same in international and most
national variants.


Thor Lancelot Simon	                             tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 18:37:59 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: CPUC Files Waiver Requests With FCC For Numbering Relief
Organization: LincMad Consulting


The California Public Utilities Commission issued a press release:

Contact: Armando Rendn, 415-703-1366    April 26, 1999     CPUC-018
<http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/news/1999/990426_PUC_asks_FCC_for_waiver.htm>
CPUC Asks FCC For Waiver On Number Allocations To Help Check Area Code
Proliferation

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has asked the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to waive key federal rules
that would provide the CPUC with the additional tools it needs to try
to bring under control the "number crisis" facing the state.

The waivers, if granted, would enable the CPUC to oversee the
allocation of phone numbers to companies more efficiently and to
consider assigning area codes to specific technologies, such as
pagers, fax machines, and modems.  In just the past three years, the
number of area codes has doubled in California.

CPUC President Richard A. Bilas was meeting in Washington, D.C., today
with FCC Commissioners and staff in a personal effort to obtain for
the state more flexibility in allocating phone numbers.

In two companion filings, the CPUC asked for the following actions:

A waiver of 47 C.F.R. 52.19 (c)(3) which prohibits the assignment of an
area code to a specific technology or service

The grant to the CPUC of additional authority to:
1. implement a mandatory number pooling trial
2. order efficient number use practices within existing prefixes
3. handle requests for code assignments outside the present rationing process
4. order carriers to return to the Code Administrator unused prefixes
5. order carriers to return unused or under-utilized portions of prefixes
to the pooling administrator, when one is selected.

California will open its 26th area code later this year. To meet the
demand for numbers, without implementing any conservation measures,
will require 15 more area codes by the end of 2002, bringing the total
number of area codes in this state to 41.

California has 190 competitive local phone companies and 56 wireless
firms, all of which need to assign numbers to their customers. Numbers
are assigned in blocks of 10,000 per rate center; there are 800 rate
centers in the state. According to the way phone numbers are now
allocated, a carrier seeking to provide service statewide in
California would need 8,000,000 numbers to begin offering service.

The petitions seek FCC authority without which the Commission cannot
act.  Once granted, the CPUC would investigate and determine the worth
of any conservation methods, before ordering action.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

LincMad Commentary: The CPUC was very disappointed that both Pacific
Bell and GTE declined to participate in a voluntary trial of number
pooling, and current FCC regulations do not allow the CPUC to make
the trial mandatory.  The timing of this request, right on the heels
of the NANPA report on the impending exhaust of the entire 10-digit
numbering system for North America, is excellent.

If every one of the CLECs had just one prefix in each rate center,
that would give California over 200 area codes, before you even
count the numbers assigned to Pacific Bell, GTE, and the various
wireless carriers.  Clearly such a situation is unacceptable.

Even with thousands-block pooling, the CLECs would require 20 area
codes.  The bottom line is that only full pooling of *ALL* unused
numbers in each rate center, plus some reasonable consolidation of
rate centers, perhaps with an expansion of the local calling zone
beyond its current 12-mile radius.


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet)
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: 27 Apr 1999 17:43:09 -0400
Organization: InfiNet
Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com


In article <telecom19.62.11@telecom-digest.org>, Gideon Stocek
<gstocek@spam_away.lucent.com> wrote:

> Can someone provide a good reference for changes required to ISUP
> and/or TCAP application requirements for LNP? I'm curious as to how
> this is all supposed to work.

You are posting from a Lucent addrress yet ask about LNP?  My advice
is to check with the lucent LNP standards folks.  Try the ActiView
folks in Holdmel, for example, for an LNP person.

Basically there will be a few additional applications transactions
which will have to query the LNP SCPs or SCP-databases (the SCP can
manage the SS7 queries to SCDs which act just like databases.)

There are proposed standards which have local routing numbers and
dialed numbers turned around in transit, and without a picture in
front of me, I hesitate to try to describe these.

Your use of TCAP does reflect a certain, um, bias, right? Those are
the proprietary defined application messages, am I right?  But are not
restricted to SS7 by any means.

As to why it tales so long to implement LNP?  First, because they
allowed Interimim LNP to be put in, and now it seems there might be
heel dragging to move to real LNP, and second, because those SCPs cost
big bucks.  The Ameritech charge for LNP is collecting money to
eventually buy SCPs.  If Ameritech placed high priority to do LNP it
wouldn't put this as a charge on costomer's bills.  It doesn't put the
costs of services it wants to offer on bills, only those it is pushed
into.  When was the last time you saw a phone company list a charge
for, say, repeat dialing when busy, on your bill unless you used it?
They added the software and hardware for it, but never showed it on
the bills because they want to do that.  


Art Kamlet Columbus, Ohio  kamlet@infinet.com

------------------------------

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: 27 Apr 1999 22:56:53 -0400
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> As I understand it the FCC has not yet allowed porting outside the
> original exchange until they see how many problems are generated.

I was under the impression that the sticking point was who would pay
for the call.  Even if the old and new exchanges are local to each
other, distance-rated long distance calls might charge different
amounts to the two exchanges.  (Inter-lata is almost all flat rate,
but intra-lata is still often distance sensitive.)


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA
Date: 27 Apr 1999 23:04:25 -0400
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Nothing personal against the US, but I think that Canada should also
> be split off into its own country code.

I suspect that many Canadians wouldn't like that idea.  Having a
common dialing plan with the US is very helpful to the large number of
Canadians and Canadian businesses with strong ties to the US.  I
suppose it's an advantage to US residents and businesses with ties to
Canada, but I still get the impression that most Americans have only
the vaguest idea where Canada is and, if they think of Canada at all,
think that Toronto is built on a glacier.

> [ re breaking 809 into separate NPAs ]
> Excellent idea.  What is the rationale behind separate area codes for
> a bunch of overgrown sandbars, many of which barely justify a whole
> exchange, let alone an area code? 

Now, now, they all have at least two prefixes.  But there's a simple
reason: routing and billing.  The CCITT says that you have to be able
to route and price an international call on the first six digits.  In
the US and Canada, it's easy, you can tell from the first four, 1-NPA,
which country it is.  For a long time there were few enough Caribbean
prefixes that they could assign them so that in 1-809-NNX, all of NN0
through NN9 were in the same country, so you could tell from the first
6 where it was.  They started needing enough prefixes so they couldn't
do that any more, so each country or territory got its own NPA.

As someone else noted, Canada and the Caribbean togehter are only 10%
of the total NPAs, so recovering them for the US wouldn't stave off
number exhaustion very long.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 21:39:27 -0700
From: Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org>
Subject: Bizarre Cellular Cross-Talk


Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) wrote:

> I was talking on my landline POTS phone today, to a friend who was
> calling from some variety of cellphone or PCS phone.  Suddenly, as
> clear as day, I heard someone else's conversation, something along
> the lines of "Dad, can you hear me now?"  I hadn't realized that my
> friend was on a wireless phone, so I thought perhaps someone was
> monkeying with the demarc on one end or the other.  The cut-in was
> only for about 20 or 30 seconds, before the other party/parties
> went away.

This sort of thing actually occurs fairly often in analog cellular
systems.  It is almost undoubtedly a color code failure. Analog
cellular has a bit over 400 channels (frequencies) available to each
operator in a market. The transmission is analog FM, with the channels
apportioned to the cells in such a way as to try to maximize the
distance between re-uses of the same frequency. The unfortunate
reality, however, is that occasionally some undesired, remote station
may, for a short time, be stronger than the correct station due to the
vagaries of electromagnetic propagation in the land mobile environment.

The old AMPS standard tries to cope with this through the use of the
so-called Supervisory Auditory Tones. These are tones, added to the
downlink, around 6000 Hz. They are filtered out of what is delivered
to the customer's ear, but the phone compares the received tone to the
tone that is being transmitted by the right station, which is made
known as part of the call setup and handoff messaging. There are only
three possible tones available. A few seconds thought shows that,
assuming the interfering signals are randomly selected from a large
population of inappropriate cells using the same channel (one in 21,
typically), that there is a one in three chance of the color code test
passing, even though the wrong cell is being received. Ergo, the kind
of "crosstalk" observed.  This kind of thing occurs fairly often in
analog systems, and, IMHO, is a design deficiency of the old
standard. It probably made sense when the expected user population was
small, but it is clearly inadequate now.

The new digital systems do a FAR better job of this. While there is
still some probability of hearing an inappropriate station, the
probability of the equivalent subscriber-unique digital "cover"
failing is something like one in 2^42 (about one in four trillion)
rather than one in three, besides the need for the spreading code
phase to match, which is something like one in 512 on top of the
digital cover. Big improvement. This sort of accidental cross-connect
doesn't happen, as a practical matter.


Best regards,

Dr. Arthur Ross
2325 East Orangewood Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730
Phone: 602-371-9708
Fax  : 602-336-7074

------------------------------

Date: 28 Apr 1999 01:36:48 -0000
From: Matt Ackeret <mattack@area.com>
Subject: Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools
Organization: Area Systems in Mountain View, CA - http://www.area.com


In article <telecom19.60.1@telecom-digest.org> TELECOM Digest Editor
noted:

> NO, we do not need any more gun laws; NO we do not need any knee-jerk

If they did not have access to guns, it would have been much more
difficult to kill so many people.


mattack@area.com

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's the same thing which was said at
the time of the last mass killing spree. There have been so many of 
them I cannot remember the exact order in which they occurred. And 
after the last mass killing spree, and the one one before that and
the one before that, new laws were enacted about guns. Each new law
prevented more killings, didn't it? Either you use a weapon in a re-
sponsible way, or you do not use one in a responsible way. If, as
'they' say, the only purpose of a gun is to kill someone, then we
should not allow police officers to carry one either, but we know 
that in fact the mere display of a gun in a responsible way helps to
maintain some modicum of civilization. We obey the laws in this
country if for no other reason than our understanding that in the
background somewhere, there is always that gun which can be used to
force us to obey. Perhaps we obey because we want to, or maybe it
is very inconvenient not to obey, but if it comes to that point, a
gun is back there somewhere which can and will be used. 

You are asking about my personal possession of such a thing? Guns
frighten me to death. I would never allow a gun in my home, however
humble my home. I could not bring myself to touch one or pick it
up; I'd rather you just kill me than force me to kill you. Looking
at one makes me emotionally upset when I think about the ways in 
which guns have been abused. Would I ever want to take away your
freedom to use a gun in a *responsible* way? Never. You run your
house and life as you please; I will run my house and life as I
please. You mind your business and I will attend to mine. Guns have
no part in my life, or home or business. Let them be part of yours
if you wish. I have no ethical or moral right to restrict you. 

We have enough gun laws to go around six times over. None of them
have worked. More laws now are futile. Anyway, in Colorado their
plan was to kill 'at least 500 people', in large part with the
explosives (other than gun powder!) they carried in. They 'only'
wound up killing a dozen or two.  Whose fault was that, that the
results fell far short of their stated goal? 

Maybe you saw the little blurb yesterday in the 'slashdot' report:
a ten year old boy wrote in to say, "I came home from school today
and found that my parents had gotten rid of my computer. They said
they could not be certain about the kinds of things I would see on
the Internet. I am at a friend's house writing this email to you.
Please try and help my parents understand the Internet is not at
fault for what happened ...". Well kid, neither are guns.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 00:35:51 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Buy a Cable Modem and Go to Jail


On Tuesday evening I sent out a special mailing to the list with the
fascinating account by Judy Sammel of her experience with Comcast,
a cable television company and one of their subsidiaries called
comcast@home.  It tells of the ineptitude of the company, the very
awful humiliation she endured as a result, and the way she was 
shoved around from one person to another at the company before any
kind of results could be obtained. 

Everyone should have a copy by now, and if you have not read it, I
hope you will take a few minutes today to do so. 

It is also posted as a special feature at http://telecom-digest.org


PAT


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #63
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Thu Apr 29 21:45:34 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA07111;
	Thu, 29 Apr 1999 21:45:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 21:45:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904300145.VAA07111@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #64

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 29 Apr 99 21:45:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 64

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    An Apology and Clarification (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Job Opening: Disaster Telecomms Specialist (Chris Lowe)
    V-SPAN and 'Bring Your Child to Work Day' (Josh Cartagenova)
    User Commands For Supplementary Services on Analog Line (am354@torfee.net)
    NANP Running Out of Numbers in 8+ Years (Tom Lager)
    Legislation Passed to Tranform Satellite TV (Monty Solomon)
    Definition of Traffic Terms Wanted (wica@asiaonline.net)
    Bosch 718 GSM Phone and Serial Ports and PC (Kevin Schaffer)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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 Apr 1999 19:46:01 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: An Apology and Clarification


A couple days ago in an issue of the Digest, a note from Tara Mahon
discussed a new service being offered by Insight Research Corporation,
the company where she has been employed for quite some time. 

Their new product, Local Access Alert, is intended to provide rather
detailed analytical and forecasting services to their clients. The
price for the service was given as about twelve thousand dollars per
year, and I ridiculed this as being in my opinion, a bit pricey for
an information service.

Tara wrote me to explain the service in a bit more detail, and I feel
perhaps I owe her an apology for the cynical remarks I made as an
Editor's note.  Here is some of what Tara said in her reply to me,
which overall was not for publication, but I do not think she will
mind if I use her own words as part of the description of the service.

> Yes, I understand that you feel the price is high for the service, but
> let me emphasize that we are not simply taking the news and cutting
> and pasting into a newsletter.  Yes, anyone out there can get that
> from a variety of online sources, which is why some on line news
> services are struggling right now.

> Our product is not simply reference material, nor something that
> another company has online for free.  In addition to our market
> forecasts, our products have strategic and competitive analysis from
> primary interviews with a variety of companies, analysis behind the
> deals and mergers, and user case studies.

> Let me explain it this way ... Yes, a full-time analyst at one of the
> carriers could spend their days doing the research, collecting primary
> data and secondary data from a variety of sources, formulating
> forecast algorithms, and determining their five-year market potential
> for private line services.  In fact, some do do that.  Others purchase
> research and spend their time on actually acting upon the results and
> recommendations of the research.  And then, all companies have to do
> their due diligence and get alternate opinions from independent
> sources.  They also have to conduct research into their competitors
> which they themselves cannot often do.  Also, they may want to get
> case studies regarding customers who have already used specific
> services ... this is also difficult for the carrier to get an
> independent opinion.  This is why they rely on Insight Research.
> And when you're talking about a multi-million- or billion-dollar
> market, a few thousand dollars is a relatively small price to pay for
> market intelligence and analysis.

> Pat, what you produce and what we produce are two very different
> products.  What's similar is that they have enormous value to the
> right audience.

> Thank you,
> Tara

Tara has a good point. And she has been a reader and participant here
in this Digest for a number of years. I have to admit that my commentary
was at least partly a 'sour grapes' kind of thing. I've never had any
illusions about Making Money Fast on the Internet or otherwise, but
maintaining a 'not for profit' mailing list and archives does get to
be old and tiresome after awhile. But Tara certainly is not a charlatan
nor does she operate some sort of 'we started on the net yesterday'
company. 

Her new product, Local Access Alert is worth at least a look, and each
viewer can decide on a personal basis about its worth in their own
organization. 

Here are some excerpts from the original announcement, which appeared
in issue 58:

  Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 11:52:51 -0400
  From: Tara D. Mahon <tara@insight-corp.com>
  Reply-To: tara@insight-corp.com
  Organization: The Insight Research Corporation
  Subject: Local Access Alert

Local Access Information Finds a Home

A new continuous information service focusing on local access issues
premiered last week by Insight Research, a leading provider of
telecommunications market research reports.  The service, Local Access
Alert, features weekly news analysis, monthly analyst papers, an
annual report, and telephone inquiry support, designed to provide
telecom professionals with the strategic intelligence crucial to
success in the local access market.

In addition to performing in-depth examinations of major industry
announcements, Local Access Alert will also go behind the news to
probe these key industry issues:

	- What is the consumer and business demand for broadband
access?  What applications (e.g., telemedicine, distance learning,
streaming video) are most likely to be used?

	- How and where will Competitive Local Exchange Carriers
(CLECs) deploy flavors of digital subscriber lines (xDSL)?  Will they
be able to do it fast enough to compete with the CATV companies, who
are rapidly chalking up cable modem subscribers?

	- Will the lines finally begin to blur between Internet
Service Providers (ISPs), voice CLECs, and data CLECs, or will they
each retain their separate functions?

	- What will be the response of the incumbent carriers
(regional Bells, independent LECs) to all this action?  Will they
innovate and stay ahead of the curve, or will they become lumbering
dinosaurs, one step shy of extinction?

Philip C. Richards, Vice President of Insight and 30-year telecom
industry veteran heads the innovative new service.

Local Access Alert is offered annually at $11,900 for up to five
registered subscribers.  Complete service details and a free
subscription offer are online at:

http://www.insight-corp.com/local.html.  For further information,
please contact:


Tara D. Mahon
tara@insight-corp.com
The Insight Research Corporation
973/605-1400
       
                  -----------------------------

Anyway Tara, readers, sorry about the sour grapes addendum to the
item last Monday. Now let's continue with this issue of the Digest.

PAT

------------------------------

From: Chris Lowe <lowe@darlington.com>
Subject: Employment Opportunity: Disaster Telecomms Specialist
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 14:31:34 -0700
Organization: CAIS Internet


Telecommunications Specialist
Washington, DC, USA

DESCRIPTION Natural or man-made disasters occur around the world, and
when they occur, disaster relief (humanitarian assistance) teams are
needed to respond to these disasters. Often these teams respond to
areas that are isolated or the disaster has destroyed the normal
communications system. As a Disaster Relief Telecommunications
Specialist, your job would be to assist team members with set up of
the necessary communications systems for reporting disaster relief
requirements back to the Headquarters as well as communications for
coordinating the response on-scene.

Responsibilities Effect voice/data communications via terrestrial or
satellite based systems, between home base and isolated/remote (often
cutoff) parts of the world. Will be responsible for set-up, training
and operations, inventory control and minor repair to computers,
radios (HF/VHF/UHF,) portable satellite phones and various other
communications equipment used while deployed worldwide to disaster or
humanitarian relief scenes for 30-45 days at a time.

Junior and senior positions available. The uniqueness of our
requirements, requires a special person with broad experiences,
exceptional personalities and willingness to get along with, learn
from and train others.

Positions include: Paid Medical/Dental Insurance plan, paid vacation,
401K retirement plan.

REQUIREMENTS:

Desired Requirements

*Military tele-communications background preferred or other electronics
training

*Valid Security Clearance

*Knowledge of VSAT, Windows NT, Unix, networks, laptops, desktops, etc

*Experience with Computer Networks, Video Teleconferencing, HF/VHF/UHF
radio networks

*All around general Electronics Technician

*Ham radio

*Bi-lingual Spanish/English or French/English, pluses

*Excellent personal skills

*Ability to communicate effectively, both written and verbally
(English, primarily)

*Previous experience with the UN, USAID, ARC, ICRC or other NGO
valuable

Minimum Requirements

*US Citizenship/valid passport

*Willingness to travel worldwide on minimal notice for up to 45 days
at a time

*Radio or computer technical background

*Proficient in Internet, email, word processing, spreadsheets, etc

*Open minded to all cultures

*Valid drivers license. (Good driving record)

*Must be in excellent health

*Must have an exceptional ability to work with personalities of all
types

*Willingness to learn and do fast

*Eligibility for a security clearance

*High School diploma with some college or technical school

   mailto:lowe@darlington.com (Chris Lowe)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 09:57:49 -0400
From: Josh Cartagenova <JOSHC@vspan.com>
Subject: V-SPAN and 'Bring Your Child to Work Day'


Contact:
V-SPAN				
Joshua Cartagenova				
Marketing Manager							
610-382-4056						
Email: joshc@vspan.com		


V-SPAN TAKES A VIRTUAL APPROACH TO "BRING YOUR CHILD TO WORK DAY"
V-SPAN holds the 3rd annual "Bring your Child to Work Day" via Videoconference 

King of Prussia, PA --April 29, 1999 With over 400 excited children
from around the world, V-SPAN, the largest privately held
teleconferencing and gateway services provider, held the 3rd annual
"Bring Your Child to Work Day" via a videoconference. The two sessions
included 20 global clients and 400 children that took part in the
"Virtual V-SPAN Jeopardy Game".

"This year's virtual 'Bring your Child to Work Day' was the largest
and most successful to date. It is always a pleasure to watch the
children as they participate in their first videoconference. They
become increasingly excited when they realize that other children from
around the globe can hear and see them in real time", states Ken
Hayward, president of V-SPAN.

The "Virtual V-SPAN Jeopardy Game", which was hosted by, V-SPAN's
co-founder and Director of Managed Conference Services, Neil Suhre,
involved Mr. Suhre posing a variety of questions about children's
television shows to the participants. The children's correct answer
resulted in team points. At the conclusion of the 45-minute game
sessions, the winning teams were congratulated and prizes were sent to
all participants.

"With hundreds of children participating at more than 20 different
locations around the world, the popularity of this special event is
unquestionable.  It was exciting to introduce videoconferencing to
this group. It is this technology, specifically, that impacts their
lives by allowing parents to spend more time at home instead of 'on
the road'", said Neil Suhre, Director of V-SPAN's Managed Conference
Services Group.

About V-SPAN:

V-SPAN is a worldwide leader in gateway and teleconferencing services,
specializing in the management of large, multipoint videoconferences.
V-SPAN is primarily engaged in providing videoconferencing
connectivity and gateway services to the interactive visual
communications marketplace. The organization has become recognized as
a global market leader in the delivery of "virtual meeting services"
to corporations, government, and educational institutions. V-SPAN
services include: gateway connectivity, videoconference network
management, award-winning Managed Conference Services Group,
multipoint bridging services, Internet streaming, Web-Enhanced
Teleconferencing, worldwide scheduling & reservations and help desk
services.  V-SPAN Corporate headquarters is located in the
Philadelphia, PA area with offices nationwide. For additional
information about V-SPAN services and unrivaled customer dedication,
please contact 1-888-44V-SPAN or visit our Web site at www.vspan.com.


Joshua Cartagenova
Marketing Manager
V-SPAN
Virtual Connectivity...Anyplace @ Anytime
1100 First Ave, Ste 400 - King of Prussia, PA 19406
Ph: 610-382-4056  Fx: 610-382-1099  E: joshc@vspan.com

------------------------------

From: am354@torfree.net
Subject: User Commands For Supplementary Services on Analog Lines
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 14:30:45 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


Supplementary services like: Call Waiting, Call Hold, Call Conference/
Transfer are available on variety of equipment: switches, PBX-es, key
systems, ISDN TAs and access routers.

I noticed that the user interface implemented on analog phone lines in
order to support them (hook flash, double hook flash, various
star/pound prefixed/postfixed numbers) is largely equipment dependent.

Is there any kind of standard in this area?

Is it a unique set of user commands in the case of an analog line
connected to a 5ESS or a DMS100 switch or, to some degree, the command
set is configurable by the switch operator?


Thanks,

Adrian

------------------------------

From: pteng@ptd.net (Tom Lager)
Subject: NANP Running Out of Numbers in 8+ Years
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 08:34:01 -0400


Pat,

     I have been reading some of the comments on the newsgroups
concerning the fact that we only have a little over 8 years before
North America runs out of telephone numbers.  I have a solution, that
is so simple probably no one in authority will want to hear it.  It
doesn't involve any complex schemes such as adding digits and making
numbers longer.  There are no special characters involved.

     We should simply do what has worked so well since the beginning
of all number dialing and that is a split.  All we need to do is to
split world zone 1 into two zones.  This would effectively double the
available numbers.  I think the number and complexity of translation
changes necessary would be minimal when compared to those needed to
make switches accept an entirely different format for telephone
numbers.  Think about it.


Tom Lager
General Manager

Palmerton Telephone Company
Serving the Beautiful Blue Mountain Valley
Since 1900


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suggested this at one point a few 
years ago, before the present scheme was started which no longer
requires 0/1 as the second digit of the area code. My suggestion was
like this:  divide the USA in two parts, possibly along the Mississippi
River like the radio station division between 'W' and 'K' stations.

Divide the present country code 1 into two parts, or perhaps three
parts if Canada is to be included, known as 12, 13, and 14. Anyone
calling within their own 'country code' would continue to dial seven,
ten or eleven digits as they do now. To call the other side of the
USA, 'international' dialing procedures would be used, as we do now
with '011'. 011 would continue to be 'international, anywhere else'
while 012 was one part of the USA, 013 was another. People in other
countries calling here would instead dialing country code 1 start
dialing country code 12, 13, etc, plus the ten digit number.

They would *not* be referred to as 'country codes' where the USA was
concerned, but perhaps as 'zone codes'. This would require very little
programming, and I doubt very many hardware changes. Each central
office would have to be programmed for which (existing) area codes
were in its 'zone'and which ones required the 01x addition. A
permissive dialing period could go on for a couple years, perhaps with
a short recorded message inserted when a call to an area code no
longer in the same 'zone' was dialed, saying something like,
'remember, beginning Saturday, (date), calls to this point must be
dialed 01x, and then the area code and number. Calls *within* your
zone are dialed as you have done in the past. Begin using this new
procedure now please.'

During the permissive period, neither 'side' would assign an area
code currently used by the 'other side', instead, drawing from the
available reserve. Even after the permissive period ended, I think
it would be wise to go as long as possible without either side
replicating an existing area code from the other side, at least
until most people had forgotten about the old style numbering scheme.

This way, there is no need for extensive modifications enabling the
switch to deal with eight digits locally. The switches can already
deal with quite a few digits following '011' and it should be simple
enough to teach the switch a new definition for 'international'. 
Perhaps my suggested point for the division would not be best; telcos
are not radio stations after all, and there are enough people along
the Mississipi River on either side who would be inconvenienced by
having their neighbor be an 'international point' (gee, we thought
having to dial ten digits to reach the person across town was bad
enough). Maybe the division would be so that there were an equal
number of existing area codes on each side of it, or maybe the
division would be in some less populated area like western Kansas
or Nebraska. I think it makes better sense that way than spending
how-many-ever billions of dollars modifying all the switches and
everyone having to dial eight digits all the time instead of people
having to dial three extra digits some of the time.    PAT]

------------------------------

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Legislation Passed to Tranform Satellite TV
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:15:00 -0400


http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/04/biztech/articles/28satellite.html

By STEPHEN LABATON

WASHINGTON -- The House approved broad legislation Tuesday that
rewrites the rules for the satellite television industry, permitting
companies to broadcast local television programs and long-distance
signals that have until recently been either restricted or more
costly.

The legislation passed 422 to 1, with the lone dissenting vote cast by
Representative Robert Brady, Democrat of Pennsylvania. It imposes a
new "must carry" requirement backed by cable companies that mandates
that satellite companies like Echostar Communications and Direct TV
that decide to offer any local signals must also offer all local
programming in those markets by 2002.

Supporters of the bill said it was intended to resolve long-running
disputes between the satellite and broadcasting industries, while also
helping the satellite companies compete with cable television, which
many analysts say holds a monopoly in many markets.

"This will level the playing field between cable versus satellite,"
said Representative Howard Coble, Republican of North Carolina, the
chief sponsor of the legislation. "With this new competition will come
better services at lower prices."

Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, the senior Democrat
on the House telecommunications subcommittee, said, "I can't imagine
in this video revolution that we're facing a bigger moment than
today."

The House action comes nearly one month after the cable industry was
deregulated from most price controls set by the Government under a
three-year-old law that had assumed greater competition between
operators of cable television and satellites. Although subscriptions
to satellite television have grown significantly in recent months,
consumer groups have said that the high cost of satellite dishes and
other equipment necessary to receive signals combined with the lack of
local programming has discouraged true competition to the cable
companies.

The legislation also follows recent court decisions that had
threatened to reduce the attractiveness of satellite television to
consumers by restricting its ability to broadcast signals of the major
networks. Current law permits satellite companies to beam network
signals if those customers cannot receive local stations using rooftop
antennas.

Consumer advocates said the legislation would be helpful to viewers,
but was only a modest beginning.

"It's a small step in the right direction," said Gene Kimmelman, the
co-director of the Washington office of Consumers Union and a leading
opponent of the deregulation of the cable industry.

Lobbyists and executives from the satellite television industry
generally praised the legislation.

The legislation permits satellite companies to carry the same
local-broadcast affiliates that are provided by cable rivals. Current
law restricts consumers from receiving satellite retransmission of
network programming if local channels can be received by an
antenna. It reduces the copyright fees on satellite companies for
carrying superstation and distant network stations. And it eliminates
a provision in the current law that requires consumers of cable
television to wait for three months after they cancel their cable
service before receiving satellite service.

Similar legislation has already been adopted by two Senate committees
and could be debated on the floor of that chamber next month, aides
said today.

Lobbyists and executives from the satellite television industry
generally praised the legislation.

"We're pleased with the bill," said Andrew R. Paul, a senior vice
president of the Satellite Broadcasting and Communications
Association. Still, Mr. Paul and others from the industry said
legislative battles remain ahead over several of its provisions.

Bob Marsocci, a spokesman for Direct TV, said that although the
legislation was "a step in the right direction," it contained some
provisions that the company would continue to lobby against.

For instance, satellite companies oppose a provision that would
require them to provide roof antennas to subscribers who lose distant
network signals.

Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 15:41:14 +0800
From: wica@asiaonline.net
Subject: Definition of Traffic Terms Wanted


Do you have the <bold>"OFFICIAL"</bold> definition of

1) incoming traffic  
2) refile traffic, 
3) transit traffic  


Thanks,

Ron B

------------------------------

From: Kevin Schaffer <kschaff2@ford.com>
Subject: Bosch 718 GSM Phone and Serial Ports and PC
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 14:59:21 -0400
Organization: Ford Motor Company


Does anyone know if the Bosch 718 GSM phone can be controlled by the
serial port?  I have used the serial port in the past to control an
Ascom Axento GSM phone using the GSM Hayes AT-style commands to place
voice (not data) calls.  This is, for example, ATDT 5551212; where the
semicolon forces it to make a voice rather than data call.

The computer becomes a $2,000.00 12-button keypad for placing voice
calls.

I am having extreme difficulties drilling through the Omnipoint
technical support, even though they assured me as I was buying two of
these that it could be done.

I have their PC-Editor software, which reads and writes address book
entries, no doubt using the GSM AT command subset that handles this, so
I know my cables (supplied with the software) and phone are OK.  It's
just that in Hyperterminal, none of the usual suspects work: 9600,
19200, N81, E72, etc.

I get no response at all, neither garbage or otherwise, in
Hyperterminal.  Has anybody actually done this with a Bosch phone?


More info:

I am NOT trying to make a data call (est. 7-10 minutes to get a phone
technician to understand this).  I do not need the $600.00 data modem to
sit between the phone and the PC.

I am NOT trying to pipe the voice signal (analog audio, whatever)
through the PC to a PC speaker, nor use the PC microphone as the mic.
(est. 3 more minutes to get a phone technician to understand this).

My 30 day no-questions return policy is up in a week or so, so I'm
naturally starting to lose hair over this.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #64
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Fri Apr 30 01:57:08 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA15285;
	Fri, 30 Apr 1999 01:57:08 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 01:57:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199904300557.BAA15285@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #65

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 30 Apr 99 01:57:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 65

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines (Curt V)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (Patrick Hollowell)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why aren't they? (Allen Mcintosh)
    Re: Good Conference Phone? (Carl Navarro)
    Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools (Thomas Peter Carr)
    Re: Columbine and Cell Phones (was Re: Cell Phones in Schools) (B Ackerman)
    Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Brad Ackerman)
    Re: Dealing With Comcast? Buy a Cable Modem and Go to Jail (Bill Levant)
    Re: Dealing With Comcast? Buy a Cable Modem and Go to Jail (Max Buten)
    Archives Renovation Update (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Curt V <curt@insnet.com>
Subject: Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 15:22:24 -0500
Organization: Posted via RemarQ Communities, Inc.


Hey, as long as you are talking about lines to a house, I have been
trying to find one of the old devices that Bell used to use which
allows two POTS lines to be muxed together over one pair of wires so that
they could actually be used at the same time.  I have an application
that doesn't allow me to use a digital line (e.g., ISDN BRI) and I
can't pull another pair of wires into the location.  Anyone have any
idea where I can find one of those?


Thanks,

Curt V
Highland Park, IL

------------------------------

From: patrick@hollowell.net (Patrick Hollowell)
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Organization: Network Management Associates, Inc.
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 22:30:26 GMT


Aside from that, 800 calls are routed to an IXC for transport.  LNP
calls are not.


Patrick Hollowell
Network Management Associates, Inc.
Charlotte, NC
patrick@hollowell.net

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: 28 Apr 1999 23:11:14 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.63.5@telecom-digest.org>, Art Kamlet
<kamlet@infinet.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom19.62.11@telecom-digest.org>, Gideon Stocek
> <gstocek@spam_away.lucent.com> wrote:

>> Can someone provide a good reference for changes required to ISUP
>> and/or TCAP application requirements for LNP? I'm curious as to how
>> this is all supposed to work.

> You are posting from a Lucent addrress yet ask about LNP?  My advice
> is to check with the lucent LNP standards folks.  Try the ActiView
> folks in Holdmel, for example, for an LNP person.

> Basically there will be a few additional applications transactions
> which will have to query the LNP SCPs or SCP-databases (the SCP can
> manage the SS7 queries to SCDs which act just like databases.)

"Not exactly".  There's one key change to ISUP, the addition of the
TCNI ("tick-knee") bit to the Initial Address Message, which indicates
that LNP database lookup has already been done and that the called
party address is an LRN.  (Wow, I hope I got that right, I've avoided
LNP work like the very plague, though I was trained on this stuff
mostly by accident.)

Unlike predecessor technologies, in LNP the magic is *not* all in the
"databases" (which is a pretty silly thing to call remote-procedure-
call servers that remote-control switching hardware, but whatever ...).
There are a number of bits of major new functionality required to
support LNP (at least in widespread deployment -- yes, this has been
kludged together various ways in the absence of even SS7 itself):

	* 10-digit Global Title Translation in STP's (SS7 routers)
	* Changes to ISUP itself (the addition of the TCNI bit)
	* Elimination of F-links between switches (which were mostly
	  gone anyway, but...) because you could get into a situation
	  where you could route the *call* but not the *lookup* that
	  would tell you you were misrouting the call
	* Distributed database update mechanisms
	* AIN 0.2 (the SDS instead of the "3/6/10" trigger, formalization
	  of trigger priorities, and explicit error handling procedures)
	* Huge improvements to switch and SCP transaction performance.
	  In one very common implementation, the LNP query is actually
	  handled by a fixed-function "SCP" that's actually embedded
	  in the Tekelec Eagle STP itself.  However you do it, LNP means
	  your SCP performance probably has to get a hundred times better
	  than it was before.  Switches have had to learn to handle a LOT
	  more outstanding transactions, as well.  SS7 networks have had
	  to be built-out for vastly more traffic per call.

The load on the SS7 network is substantial enough that some companies
do rather unusual things just to save a few bytes here or there: about
a year ago I spoke to one ILEC and SCP vendor who were working
together to do the actual LNP queries as ITU CS-1 IN queries instead
of Bellcore AIN queries, because a difference in encoding some field
saved them 10 bytes per message.  Not a big deal until you realize
that's probably 5-10% of the total bytes it took to set up the call
*completely* before, if not more ...


Thor Lancelot Simon	                                      tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Organization: Telcordia
From: mcintosh@bellcore.com (Allen Mcintosh)
Date: 28 Apr 1999 12:08:55 -0500


In article <telecom19.58.4@telecom-digest.org>, Ralph Hyre
<rhyre@medplus.com> wrote:

> What's the real issue with Local Number portability?
> 800 Number portability was achieved years ago (1993?), and the
> technology and operational issues are basically the same, with some
> minor scaling issues.

Let me outline a few of the "minor" issues:

Let's say that local carrier "A" has been assigned NPA-NXX 999-999
under the old scheme.  You move your number, 999-999-1212, to local
carrier "B".  Someone from local carrier "C" calls 999-999-1212 using
IXC "X".

1) When should that database dip happen?  Should "C" forward the call
through "X" to "A", and only do a database dip if "A" says your number
has been moved?  (Called query-on-release.)  This is disadvantageous
to "B", since calls to numbers serviced by "B" take a fraction of a
second longer.  For this reason, query-on-release was not allowed.
The alternative is a database dip for each call to an NPA-NXX that has
been marked "ported".  If you assume LNP has been implemented
everywhere, this means a database dip for every inter-switch call.

2) Who should do the database dip?  "C" or "X"?

These are political issues, so sorting them out took time.

3) At the time of 1-800 portability there were switches that could not
do the IN SS7 signaling for a database dip.  (For all I know, there
may still be switches out there that can't do IN/AIN.)  Since 1-800
traffic is only a fraction of all calls, it was reasonable to forward
all such calls to a tandem and let it do the work.  If ALL calls (or
just most of them) require a database dip then this solution is no
longer feasible.  Upgrading switches takes time and $$.

4) SS7 signaling for an average POTS call takes on the order of 80
bytes.  Signaling for the average database dip takes roughly 150
bytes.  Suppose every POTS call requires a database dip.  What would
this do to the originating carriers' SS7 networks?

5) Databases used for 1-800 are too rich (and too slow) for local
number portability.

6) Suppose "A"'s database says that 999-999-1212 has moved to "B", but
"B"'s database says "A" still owns the number.  What will happen when
"C" or "X" tries to figure out where to route the call?  How do you
maintain consistency in the absence of a central database (as for 1-800)?

7) Routing for ISUP call setup in SS7 is based on the NPA-NXX of the
called number.  This won't work if numbers are portable.  The solution
was to use a bogus called number and "hide" the real one.  (This
wasn't an issue with 1-800.)

I don't mean to imply that these are all hard problems, just that
there were legitimate technical issues here that required some
thought.

------------------------------

From: cnavarro@wcnet.org (Carl Navarro)
Subject: Re: Good Conference Phone?
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:28:01 GMT
Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America


On Tue, 27 Apr 1999 09:21:47 GMT, ffaure@bigSPAMGAZETTAIDAMEfoot.com
(F. Faure) wrote:

> I need to buy a new conference telephone, as everyone complains that
> the Panasonic KX-TS700FR-B we bought a couple of months ago is
> terrible. Should have done my homework instead of trusting that
> salesman ...

Evidently everyone else hated the Panasonic system too.  My
distributor tells me they are MD'd, but Alltel still has some stock.

> Could someone recommend other brands? I found infos on 3Com/USR's
> site, and also www.phonezone.com:

They tell me the 3C/USR 1000's are MD'd too :-(.  I have really good
luck with those.  That makes POLYCOM the winner by default!

I have not used them, they're pricey.  At 5X the price of a Panasonic,
it's not an item you bring into inventory for a demo :-).


Carl Navarro

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools
From: carr@falcon.si.com (Thomas Peter Carr)
Date: 29 Apr 1999 09:03:09 -0500
Organization: Smiths Industries


Matt Ackeret <mattack@area.com> writes:

> In article <telecom19.60.1@telecom-digest.org> TELECOM Digest Editor
> noted:

>> NO, we do not need any more gun laws; NO we do not need any knee-jerk

> If they did not have access to guns, it would have been much more
> difficult to kill so many people.

Why is it that everyone has forgotten that this is NOT the worst killing of
school children.

The worst was 38 students at Bath, Michigan on 18 May 1927.

  http://detnews.com/1999/nation/9904/22/04220188.htm

Without guns, people who want to kill will find a way.


Thomas Peter Carr                               | I have a dream, ...
carr_tom@si.com                 (Internet)      |    M L King Jr    08/28/63
616-241-8846 / 616-241-7533 FAX (Telephone)     |
Smiths Industries, MS 3D1; 3290 Patterson Ave SE; Grand Rapids, MI  49512-1991

------------------------------

From: bsa3@cornell.edu (Brad Ackerman)
Subject: Re: Columbine and Cell Phones (was Re: Cell Phones in Schools)
Date: 28 Apr 1999 23:19:05 -0400
Organization: NERV GeoFront, Tokyo III


Jeremy Beal <jbeal@bmsc.com> writes:

> It was only about 10 minutes later that they realized that there were
> televisions located in every classroom, and that there was a very good
> chance that the attackers had heard the information from the phone
> call.  The station promptly asked anybody trapped to call 911 rather
> than the station. An unintended consequence to the rapid sharing of
> information ...

Another problem -- if you're dealing with only slightly more
sophisiticated opponents, you need to worry about said opponents
eavesdropping on the phone call.  Strangely enough, analogue
telephones are still being sold in the US, and only GSM phones have
any encryption worth mentioning.  With analogue phones, listening in
is as simple as turning on a scanner, keying in 870.000 MHz, and
pressing start.


Brad Ackerman N1MNB      "...faced with the men and women who bring home
bsa3@cornell.edu          the pork, voters almost always re-elect them."
http://skaro.pair.com/                   -- _The Economist_, 31 Oct 1998

------------------------------

From: bsa3@cornell.edu (Brad Ackerman)
Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ...
Date: 29 Apr 1999 00:10:27 -0400
Organization: NERV GeoFront, Tokyo III


Ed Kummel <intouchusa@erols.com> writes:

> Personally, having experience in European GSM (900MHz), US GSM (also
> known as PCS, 1900MHZ) US digital, both TDMA (AT&T) and CDMA (LEC) and
> analog, I personally prefer the voice quality of the analog
> system.

Oro?  I've used every American air interface, and GSM is by far the
best in this regard.  CDMA comes close with good equipment (Sony
phones have good audio quality; Samsung phones are quite pathetic.),
and analog -- ouch!  Mabye analog provides acceptable quality if the
cell is coming in at full quieting, but that just doesn't happen where
I am.  My GSM 1900 handset (Siemens g1050) has audio quality which, if
not equal to a landline, is good enough so that nobody can tell the
difference, and it does that even if the signal strength is only S4 or
S5.

Also, I mentioned the security aspects of analog phones in another
Digest thread -- in short, it's so easy to eavesdrop that you have to
assume someone is doing so.  The NSA could very well have equipment to
crack A5 encryption, but I'm not an employee of a foreign company with
a product ripe for Fort Meade-aided industrial espionage, and I doubt
that they're interested in credit card fraud.

> It seems that the digital networks that are prevalent (Powertel,
> Sprint, AT&T, Pactel, Western Wireless) is looking more and more
> like the way the analog cellular system was 5-8 years ago. (no
> roaming between carriers, and if so, no calls could be received...we
> still have the problem of no international dialing on analog
> systems).

As with Ryan, I've had no problems roaming on any GSM network, and
I've done it on Fido, Aerial, Deutsche Telekom, Mannesmann Mobilfunk,
and the Netherlands' PTT's 900 MHz network (I forget what they call
it; I was only there for an hour.)

Have you ever tried roaming outside of North America on a non-GSM
phone?  You can't -- unless you count AT&T's "option" of paying
$50/year and $2.50/minute for a SIM card.  Considering that my recent
trip to Germany cost me $1/minute on my Omnipoint SIM, and you could
do better than AT&T's price by buying either a prepaid or a two-year
contract (the latter if you do more than a few hours of roaming/yr), I
wouldn't call that much of an option.

BTW, back when I was a Frontier customer, $1/minute was what I used to
pay to roam in Toronto, NYC, or Boston, minus Frontier's $3/day
roaming charge.  Now, Boston and New York City, along with every other
Omnipoint market, are in my home area, and in Germany, roaming would
have cost even less if I had paid more attention to whether I was on
Deutsche Telekom or Mannesmann.

Finally, if you really think that the analog networks are fully
deployed, myself and John Levine can give you a rather enlightening
test drive through upstate New York.  There are plenty of coverage
nodes around here, and I expect that Omnipoint will provide
considerably superior signal when they initiate full deployment.
(Last I heard, that was scheduled for 2Q, of which two months remain.)


Brad Ackerman N1MNB      "...faced with the men and women who bring home
bsa3@cornell.edu          the pork, voters almost always re-elect them."
http://skaro.pair.com/                   -- _The Economist_, 31 Oct 1998

------------------------------

From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 21:11:30 EDT
Subject: Re: Dealing With Comcast? Buy a Cable Modem and Go to Jail
Reply-To: Wlevant@aol.com


Geez, Comcast got lucky.  It's a damned good thing that Ms. Sammel is so 
good-natured.  

*Criminal* charges ?? Expungement of a criminal record ??

I would have sued the f**k out of 'em.


Bill


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think they were very lucky. The worst
that has happened to them or is likely happen is they have been seeing
a loss of customers as a result of the bad publicity on this. It has
been all over the internet now, in several newsgroups and mailing lists
as well as this Digest. It has been covered on television in a couple
places as well as on the radio. Since I put the story out here a couple
days ago, I've gotten email from people in Comcast service territory
using 56 K who were considering changing to cable modem who now say 
they are going to think about it a bit longer, at least until/if/when
a viable alternative to Comcast and @home is available in their area. 

Like yourself Bill, my conclusion is Ms. Sammel must be awfully good-
natured to have allowed this to pass as she did. She is obviously 
under the erroneous impression that the only way her 'record could be
expunged' was by releasing Comcast from any liability in the matter,
and that is a complete lie. She does not need their cooperation or
approval on that matter at all. There are laws in her state like every
other state that a person who has no previous criminal record (let
alone be found not guilty) who gets in no other trouble for some
period of time can apply for expungement. 

In any event, I would have held off on applying for expungement in 
order to not have to give Comcast any waivers. First, like yourself,
I would give them a good suing. Not, as she suggested, on the basis
of malicious prosecution or falsely lodging charges against her, both
of which require pretty strict qualifications. I would sue them for
harassment and fraud; ie they took her money with the understanding
that she was their customer, then made claims that she was not their
customer (instead, someone stealing from them). I would sue them
because they damaged my reputation. I would sue them for interupption
of my service on the occassions the wires were removed by the latest
imbecile they sent out without my approval and because later the two
traps on the line caused the signal to be worthless. I would sue them
for making me wait 45 minutes on hold, and for breaking appointments
without notice to do installs, maintainence, etc. I most definitly
would try and start a class action, representing other subscribers of
Comcast who were or had been similarly situated. I would sue them for
every broken promise and worthless claim they had made. The only 
thing I would NOT do is I would NOT gvie them a waiver on malicious
prosecution in order to obtain an expungement. That can be done
independently (regardless of whatever baloney the Comcast attorney
gave Sammel) and would not force me to release them from liability.

In other words, if I have not been perfectly clear, I would happily
fix things so that their attornies were tripping over their own feet
coming and going up and down the steps of the courthouse to respond
for their client. And don't say it cannot be done. In 1974 I sued the
First National Bank of Chicago for fraud, and theft of money through
the US Mail. I only did it when the United States Postal Inspection
Service said they could not force the bank to comply with postal laws,
and when the bank said to me they had no intention of complying with
postal laws. Oh no? Let's check it out. I won that case, and about the
same time my efforts via the FCC forced MCI to change its advertising.

I've told of that incident here in the Digest; if anyone wants to see
it again, let me know. Cableco -- large parts of the industry -- are
more sleazy than telco ever thought about being in Ma Bell's heyday.
There are a few exceptions. 

By the way, Ms. Sammel, not only do you NOT need Comcast's approval to
have your record expunged, they would really love it if you begin
attending the public meetings of the cable commission in your
community and you frequently filed formal complaints their attorney
had to answer prior to franchise renewal time each year or two.   PAT] 

------------------------------

From: maxbuten@home.com (Max Buten)
Subject: Re: Dealing With Comcast? Buy a Cable Modem and Go to Jail!
Organization: Ampers and Sons
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 01:21:56 GMT


In article <99.04.27.00013@telecom-digest.org>, editor@telecom-digest.org 
says...

> If there are any readers of TELECOM Digest or the c.d.t. newsgroup who
> still remain unconvinced about whether Comcast and Comcast@home are <snip>

> If this does not scare you folks on the east coast away from doing
> business with them, I do not know what would. 

Are you suggesting that I give up my cable connection with Comcast@home 
and go back to 56k modem?  Nooooooooo Waaaaaaaaaaay!  Or maybe I
should pay 4 times as much to Bell for slower service?  Noooooooooo
Waaaaaay!


Max Buten
maxbuten@home.com
http://members.home.net/maxbuten/

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am only suggesting one thing, Max.
You might want to find out if your local county jail has jacks where
you can plug your computer in to the internet so you can stay in 
touch with everyone here while you wait for a Comcast employee who
'stepped away from her desk' or 'been in a meeting all day' or 'been
in training class all week' or wants to tell you to call some other
division of the company so they can put you on hold for 45 minutes
before giving you a run-around to return your call. 

Even though they told Ms. Sammel they were going to implement
procedures, etc .. a little birdie today told me they had done
nothing of the sort, and that when the 'Sammel incident' -- as it is
now known was brought up at an industry meeting recently, some people
from Comcast who were present were 'dumbfounded and speechless' as my
correspondent put it. They had never even heard of the incident. That's
how well Comcast and @home corrected the problem. They made sure most
of their employees did not even find out about it.

Apparently @home was making a presentation to some cableco executives
and telling them how well they communicated and worked together. 
Someone brought up the 'Sammel incident' and said if you and Comcast
don't speak to each other or sychronize your work together, why should
we believe you when you say you will talk to us and work with us?
And that, said the little birdie to me, was when the room became
silent, a few jaws dropped open, and none of the presenters at the
meeting knew quite what to say or how to respond. Their employer
had kept them in the dark on it. 

Obviously, cable modem is the way to go these days if you have access
to it. I am only suggesting Max, that if your connection is with
 @home, through arrangements with Comcast, you'd better be careful.
If there are alternative connection methods which are similar, I
would select one of them instead. A lot of cablecos are going to be
doing their own thing. Consider that when it becomes available.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 23:16:23 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Archives Renovation Update


As of Wednesday, music is now available to Netscape users of the
archives as well as the Internet Explorer visitors. The problem
was that the Netscape Server at lcs.mit.edu did not have the MIME
type 'audio/midi' correctly defined. That has now been corrected,
and I thank Mary Ann Ladd for taking a couple minutes to work on
it for me -- for all of us really. 

So feeling energetic and knowing for sure it would only take me
30-45 minutes or so, I decided to make what small changes would be
required to synch the pages so that Opera browsers would be
included. 

30-45 minutes! hahahahahaha! Since Opera tends to go along with
most HTML commands that Internet Explorer will accept, it should be
easy enough to go to wherever a browser test is done and where looking
for navigator.appName to be 'Internet Explorer' simply change it to
say 'Internet Explorer || Opera'  meaning one or the other. Then
I found that Opera uses the appName string 'Netscape' ... meaning,
it wants people to think that it is part of that group. That, even
though it uses Explorer's 'bgsound src' to play music rather than
Netscape's 'embed src'. I could not very well do any browser tests
with a situation of 'be either IE or Netscape' so using Opera's
app.Name was out. The so-called 'navigator.appCodeName' on all
browsers these days seems to be 'Mozilla', a name that Netscape was
using from the beginning, then in the early days when they were way
ahead of Microsoft with browser features, Microsoft stole 'Mozilla'
to put in their browser name so that web sites would accept them on
an equal basis. Now Opera calls itself 'Mozilla' also.  So much for
that. The User_Agent string was a long, unweildy thing in every case
which I never was able to type in correctly. But appVersion at least
was unique, allowing the very simple '3.' as a way to say this is
an Opera browser instead of an appVersion 'MSIE' guess-who browser.

So after some logic exercises, I was able to write it up so that
everything was assigned, then it if was not 'MSIE' *and* not '3.'
therefore let's assume it is Netscape-for-real and make the needed
reassignments to Netscape's way of doing things. Now let's go look
things over with the Opera browser ...

A choice of music or not appears, and the music plays as requested.
Good!  But something is not quite right ... it appears that Opera
sticks in unwanted line breaks after a command that has nothing to
do with the text; a background color instruction for example, or
a background music command ... bingo, the rest of the text gets
dropped a line. Opera has a hard time dealing with indenting the
text to go around images the way you want it, and although it will
do it, you have to say it totally different than the way you say it
to Netscape or IE. Then is when I discover it really comes much 
closer to being in the Netscape 'family' than in the Explorer style.
Throughout the opening page of the Archives using Opera I would find
that (having assigned it to go along with IE) there were all these
lines showing up centered that should not be, and lines that would
not start next to a .gif where I wanted them, etc. 

But the worst was yet to come! On IE and Netscape browsers, using a
'target=new' instruction as part of an anchor allows for a smaller 
window as part of a new instantiation of the browser to open inside
the large main window. This is good for footnotes or other incidental
items you want people to see without taking them away from the main
page at your site. IE actually starts a new browser with a small
window, carries over the 'history' to the new browser, and allows 
the user to click it shut and once again view a full screen from the
main browser. Netscape simply opens a new browser with full screen,
forcing the user to narrow it down somewhat as desired, but at least
the history is carried over, along with commands to close the window
and go back where you started automatically, etc.

Opera has no idea what 'target=new' means as part of an anchor. It
closes the browser that was running and opens a new one, shutting 
down everything on the old browser instance ****except the music***
but it forgets all the history (thus no backward/forward arrows) and
on closing that window you are out of it totally. If you choose as
an alternative to use the address bar, you can keep the browser alive
alright, and go wherever you want, but with the music **from the
first browser** never going away, just playing and repeating itself
endlessly. While 'bgsound' stays open with a target=new but shuts off
when the main window is either (a) minimized to the task bar or (b)
the page is reloaded from cache or the server, 'embed src' will stay
open on being minimized to the task bar as well as with target=new.
And if you do target=new while Opera is handling bgsound, it goes
totally buggy: the music will never shut off, period except when 
the browser is totally terminated. 

Opera has no way that I can tell to force a page to be reloaded from
the server rather than from cache, although I am sure there must be
some way of doing it; I just have not figured it out. After '45 minutes'   
I looked at my clock and saw that it was 5:10 AM ... so I quit to
go to bed. What I may do in the next day or two is write a different
index.html page; identical in their links and comments, etc, but with
Opera's idea of a good time where the HTML is concerned. Then when I
see them coming, I will redirect them to the other page. Seriously,
I would rather be the contortionist here rather than force users to
get the browsers I want them to use. 

In the meantime, as I always did say, "this page is best viewed if
you stop by my office and look at my monitor" ...  I also corrected
a small bug that occassionally gave the caller no choice of music at
all and a totally blank background. It would be too incredibly
boring to try and explain how that bug came about. 

For now, cheerio!
    
                     http://telecom-digest.org
                "Sorry, no Make Spam Fast, no Nude
                 Teens, no warez, none of the very
                 traditional internet fare: just
                 all you ever wanted to know about
                 telephones and telecommunications."



PAT


------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #65
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Fri Apr 30 21:41:07 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA27645;
	Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:41:07 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:41:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905010141.VAA27645@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #66

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 30 Apr 99 21:41:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 66

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call! (Arthur Ross)
    Book Review: "A Guide to Virtual Private Networks", Murhamm (Rob Slade)
    A New SPAM Problem (Ben Bass)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Patrick Burke)
    Re: Card Reader Type Public Phones (Stephen Geis)
    Re: Columbine and Cell Phones (was Re: Cell Phones in Schools) (Thor Simon)
    Re: Good Conference Phone? (Frederic Faure)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (Jan Ceuleers)
    Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools (Matt Ackeret)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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 Apr 1999 12:11:49 -0700
From: Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org>
Subject: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call!


(Moderator's Note describing a method of using 'international' codes
for various sections of the USA deleted).

Pat -

If I'm not mistaken, this is quite similar to the way France works now.
Local calls are 8 digits, first nonzero. Leading zero indicates "not
local". Country is divided into zones (6, I think). To get another zone
internally is "0N"(zone) + eight digits. Outgoing international is
something like "00"+country code+local number. Incoming international is
your own international access code+33(France)+N(zone)+eight digits.

BTW - I have been writing memos to some of my acquaintances at Lucent
for some time now to the effect that "It is time to re-think network
addressing," the general theme being that numeric, geography-based
addressing in this age of 300 MHz processors and multi-gigabyte hard
drives on every desktop, is an anachronism. While these memos are
probably winding up in the circular "nut" file, I still believe
it. There are, of course, a few small problems ....

It is an interesting exercise to figure out, back-of-the-envelope, how
much stuff would be needed for an electronic database ("white pages")
for every human being on earth. My estimate puts it at about half a
residential-sized closet of the dense disk drives that are now
available on every street corner.

What we do now is to associate the end of a pair, possibly a "virtual"
pair, meaning a specific handset in wireless systems, with a 7-digit,
8-digit, 10-digit, or whatever, "phone number," with extensions for
international delivery. The numbering is geography-based. It is that
way because, historically, the network used such addresses internally. 

It was for the convenience of the network, not the customer. The
equivalent of a database translation (name-to-address) was done by the
end user. Problem is that the REAL destination, most often a person,
is NOT stationary. Also, often the desired destination is NOT a
particular person, but a FUNCTION, e.g. next customer service rep,
maintenance supervisor, the office of such-and-such, etc. The
traditional telephony solutions for this are a) call forwarding, b)
voice mail, c) automatic call distributors, d) pagers, e) wireless
roaming call delivery, etc. And the database translations often must
be extended by the end user (and often considered, by him/her as a
terrible nuisance) via the interminable "for this press one, for that
press two" DTMF menus.

My premise is that the network should locate, not the end of a 26 AWG
copper pair, but the person, or more precisely some kind of electronic
"proxy" for the person, e.g. something like a GSM SIM (subscriber
identity module). This identity gizmo would fit into ANY telecom
device and the network would do some kind of distributed database
wizardry with it, that would result in calls, e-mail, whatever, going
to whatever this device was plugged into, be it landline, wireless,
mobile, or whatever. After some number of decades of evolution, every
telecom device would have one of these standardized interfaces, maybe
kindof like a mag stripe credit card reader. The physical
implementation of some SIM cards is like that.

Locating an endpoint would entail a distributed database query. The
target might be a person, a function, a place (sometimes you DO want a
geography-based delivery, after all). IP addressing is kindof partway
there. While the internal addresses are these 32-bit, hardware-based
things (to become far-longer in the next iteration of IP, I
understand), there is a translation mechanism for alphanumeric
mnemonic identities to the numeric: the DNS system. Right general
idea. The logic of the addressing is geography-independent.

Convergence (whatever that means!) of the voice network(s) with the
IP-based networks is another aspect of all this, of course.

The biggest problems:

1. Data entry. There are what, maybe a billion or more 12-button
desksets out there in the world? If the database lookups are to be
based on alphanumeric strings, where does the data come from? Laptops
are not going to replace handsets any time soon. We used to have a
good solution for this: Mabel the operator, who just listened to you
and did the database lookup in her head. Not practical for the whole
planet. I don't think PDAs are it either. They have a sortof
techno-cult following, but would your grandma use one? Automatic voice
recognition on a grand scale? It is getting to the point where it is
close to useful.

2. Privacy and civil rights. This has serious implications for civil
liberties, privacy, etc. Given that the "Personal Identity Module"
would, mostly, be associated with an individual, this system would
amount to a big-brother-ish thing that could locate anyone who used
the system, at any time.  Also, given that caller ID has been
basically ruined as a useful service by the civil libertarians who
have convinced a whole lot of state legislatures/PUCs that giving out
identity of a callER to the callED party is somehow an invasion of the
privacy of the callER, it would probably be a hard sell in that
regard. And then there are those stories of a certain country's secret
service who are supposed to have tried to assassinate someone by
planting a bomb in his cellular phone .... In principle, you have the
potential for abuse now with wireless roaming call delivery. The
HLR/VLR combination knows, or is supposed to know, where each
subscriber is at any given time (within a few cells). I have heard via
the grapevine, that certain law enforcement & intelligence services
DO, justifiably, try to take advantage of that to find the Godfather,
drug kingpin, etc.

3. How does the schema for this giant distributed database, i.e. the
contents of the PIM, get defined? And what is in it? What is forbidden?

4. Authentication? Authentication REALLY is the process of making sure
that someone is going to pay the bill for the services being used. In
my more exotic moments I imagine some gizmo that you stick your finger
into that reads your DNA .... I know, this seems outrageous. So did
using DNA for criminal identification, which is now recognized by many
states, to the point where it need not be justified before use as an
argument in court. I also note that someone now offers as a commercial
product, a fingerprint-reading gizmo for security access.

5. Business/regulatory model? This is perhaps the biggest problem of
all - a quagmire.... Who sells what? How do they make money at it? How
is it regulated? IS it regulated?

Would it be any surprise that management sends my memos to the "Nut"
file?  But this imminent exhaustion of the NANP should be a wake-up
call, to say nothing of a golden opportunity!

   -- Best
   -- Arthur

PS: Sorry ... got carried away - this just started out as a little note
about the French numbering plan ... !

PPS: There is, I understand, a guy on the MIT faculty who has been
preaching something similar to this for quite a while now. Name is not
at my fingertips though.

PPPS: An acquaintance of mine may be taking some concrete steps in
this regard: Professor Leonard Kleinrock of UCLA. His company is
called Nomadix, Inc, I think. He has been advertised by UCLA, with
only a little hyperbole, as "the father of the internet." (My son, a
recent graduate of UCLA, tells me "Didn't you know that UCLA invented
the Internet? They have the Tee-shirts to prove it!" They actually
have a lot more ...)


   -- Dr. Arthur Ross
      2325 East Orangewood Avenue
      Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730
      Phone: 602-371-9708
      Fax  : 602-336-7074

[Moderator's Note: Sorry to disappoint you, but your son is
wrong. UCLA did not invent the internet ... *I* did. I remember
distinctly how it happened. I was waiting on hold for a customer
service rep at cableco to be available to come on the line and sass me
personally. I always had thought it would be a good idea if people had
a way to rapidly communicate their ideas on how to Make Spam Fast and
how great it would be if all the people who liked having sex with
chickens had a way to leave anonymous messages for each other. I would
call my new concept a 'newsgroup'. So I thought up a scheme to hook
computers together and a protocol for transferring data regards a
user's preference for dark meat or white meat; and their default
values for either passing along the spam they received to a million
other users or generating a new scheme of their own. I wrote it all
down in a notebook while I was waiting for the cableco rep to come on
the line. Well somehow my notebook was stolen, with all my plans, no
doubt by people at UCLA or possibly by my competitors at the {New York
Times} or the {Washington Post} when they realized my new invention
would would cut into their profits when the publishers were no longer
able to appease the largest advertisers by controlling the kinds of
scurrilous things the users would circulate widely about them in
print. Then too, I have always wondered if Colonel Sanders might have
stolen all my notes, having taken umbrage at the consequences of my
idea that lovers of fine chicken would no longer have to be isolated
in society. Or it might have been a Frightened Mother; I've lived next
door to a few of those in my lifetime also. Well, you can imagine my
horror to discover ten years later (I had been waiting at home all
that time for the cable installer to show up) to find that all my
ideas had been developed into something called the Internet and
Usenet. So from now on, I want you to refer to me as the Father of the
Internet. And you can be its Big Brother.  Is that okay with you?
PAT]

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 08:20:06 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "A Guide to Virtual Private Networks", Martin Murhamm
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKAGTVPN.RVW   990321

"A Guide to Virtual Private Networks", Martin W. Murhammer et al,
1998, 0-13-083964-7
%A   Martin W. Murhammer
%A   Tim A. Bourne
%A   Tamas Gaidosch
%A   Charles Kunzinger
%A   Laura Rademacher
%A   Andreas Weinfurter
%C   One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ   07458
%D   1998
%G   0-13-083964-7
%I   Prentice Hall
%O   800-576-3800 416-293-3621 fax: 201-236-7131
%P   174 p.
%T   "A Guide to Virtual Private Networks"

You don't have to look very far to figure out that this book is by
IBM, of IBM, and probably for IBM.  All of the authors (even those
that don't rate the front cover) work for IBM, and ... well, lookee
here!  IBM just happens to make products that relate to virtual
private networks (VPNs)!

Chapter one is a reasonable overview of the basic concepts behind
VPNs.  However, the level of the writing is inconsistent, some parts
of the explanation are a bit confused (they tend to use the term
"tunnel" a lot, even where "circuit" might be more fitting), and
overall one gets the feeling that this should be presented on a big
screen in a dark auditorium, with a suit droning on and on.  There is
a tendency to illustrate (with not very illuminating figures) rather
than explain, when it comes to the technical bits.  Either that, or
just start to list off protocols.

Encryption is explained fairly well in chapter two.  There is some
detail as to the actual operation of some algorithms.  (I notice that
DES [Data Encryption Standard] is not among them, and that it is
claimed fully, and not just derivatively, for IBM.)  The discussion of
key and algorithm strength is weak, however, and there is no
discussion of the basic problems or concerns of key management.

Chapter three provides format details of the IPsec (Internet Protocol
security) AH (Authentication Header) and ESP (Encapsulating Security
Payload) protocols.  References for the appropriate draft documents
are given at the end of the chapter.  The Internet Key Exchange (IKE)
(also known as Internet Security Association and Key Management
Protocol [ISAKMP]) is discussed in chapter four.  Chapters five to
seven look at scenarios for branch offices, business partners, and
remote access, respectively.  There is little new content, and most of
the material could be inferred from the text of earlier chapters. 
Showing admirable forbearance, most of the detail of IBM products is
held for the appendices.

While not all parts are particularly readable, the book does, at
least, have the advantage of being short.  The fundamental concepts of
VPNs are given, enough so that a technical manager could get a basic
grasp of what was required.  Possible attacks, and the complexities of
implementation, are not dealt with very well.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKAGTVPN.RVW   990321

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
           GOVERNMENT.SYS corrupted, reboot Ottawa? (Y/N)
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 10:18:58 EDT
From: Ben Bass <bbass@net.bluemoon.net>
Subject: A New SPAM Problem


Pat,

A head up to your readers ...

My employer received a number of unsolicited, junk faxes this
morning. One was for a collection agency, another for a scheme to get
on the Internet and the third was a solicitation for "1 Million + fax
numbers! All area codes! That's right, one million fax numbers for the
incredibly low price of $299. For details, call (800) 609-8221.

Calls to that number get an auto attendent and an option to leave a
message in a "full" mailbox. The number in the fax header is
407-201-9283.

I called 877-259-3390 number on the one from the collection agency and
informed them to remove us from their list and I also advised them we
would never do business with any company who sends unsolicited faxes
or e-mail.

Efforts to reach the web page people, www.prosperitypromo.com (does that
sound like a spamhaus?) at 800-741-1308, also reached a "full" mailbox.


Ben Bass, N2YDM
ben@broadcast.net


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A full mailbox? I wonder if a bunch of
those nuts that use the internet all the time for news and email were
calling in to lodge complaints? I would say just keep trying until you
get through to someone there at the company. You have some important
questions to ask them about their service. Now don't overdo it by
calling six or eight times and allowing the phone to stay off hook
until the voicemail times out and drops the connection. I mean, if
everyone did that it would bankrupt the company when their next phone
bill showed up; same as happened to little Jeffie Slaton a few years
ago when Southwestern Bell delivered his hundred-thousand dollar phone
bill in a cardboard box via Parcel Post a couple months in a row. 
I would not wait around at home either; use payphones, and do not
forget to hang up the receiver when you walk away.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Patrick Burke <patrick.burke@ascom.ch>
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 09:52:16 +0200
Organization: Ascom Switzerland, Bern, Switzerland


L. Winson <lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
telecom19.57.5@telecom-digest.org...

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know why card reader type
>> phones never really caught on?   [good points snipped]

> Damn good question.  I myself would rather have the security of
> inserting a card and entering just my pin number rather than entering
> (and remembering) a whole series of numbers.

<...snip...>

In Switzerland and Holland, at least, card phones are standard. In
fact, it's sometimes impossible to find a coin phone. Cards can be
purchased at many locations and I've never had a problem finding
one. They come in various denominations between about $3 and $15
(local equivalent). For my usage a card lasts a couple of weeks, and
then I buy a new one. In these schemes there is no PIN and the cards
are transferable; i.e. anyone can use your card. I have never heard
that theft is an issue.

When I first arrived I was frequently annoyed to walk up to a phone
with change in my pocket and find it only accepted cards. Eventually I
grew accustom to prepurchasing phone time and keeping a card in my
wallet, and now I prefer this approach.

------------------------------

From: Stephan Geis <Stephen.Geis@itu.int>
Subject: Re: Card Reader Type Public Phones
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 10:04:45 +0200


Pat's comment on the 24 Apr 1999 20:21:40 GMT posting Re: Lawsuit Says MCI
'Redlines':

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know why card reader type
> phones never really caught on? I think that type of phone would be
> most useful in combatting fraud. If the caller had to insert the
> actual pastic card in the phone -- as one does at a cash machine --
> and then punch in a pin as well, that would defeat the people with the
> binoculars completely wouldn't it, as well as the eavesdroppers. No
> physical plastic, no call. If you have the plastic, you still have to
> know the pin, and three or four random attempts to find out the pin by
> trial and error would result in the card being cancelled. Look at cash
> machines: if the machine finds you to be a disagreeable person or
> suspects you are a charlatan, it just swallows your card and won't
> give it back at all, telling you to go see your customer service rep
> at the bank instead if you have something to complain about.

FYI in Europe (at least in Switzerland and France) card readers are
standard on public telephones.  In Switzerland the readers can now
handle both magnetic stripe cards and the chip-bearing "smartcards"
which are widely used not only for prepaid cards for phones, but for
bank cards and electronic purses.  The readers on phones (unlike those
on ATMs here) are not able to swallow miscreant cards, however.


Stephen Geis
Geneva, Switzerland

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Columbine and Cell Phones (was Re: Cell Phones in Schools)
Date: 30 Apr 1999 14:39:53 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.65.7@telecom-digest.org>, Brad Ackerman
<bsa3@cornell.edu> wrote:

> Jeremy Beal <jbeal@bmsc.com> writes:

>> It was only about 10 minutes later that they realized that there were
>> televisions located in every classroom, and that there was a very good
>> chance that the attackers had heard the information from the phone
>> call.  The station promptly asked anybody trapped to call 911 rather
>> than the station. An unintended consequence to the rapid sharing of
>> information ...

> Another problem -- if you're dealing with only slightly more
> sophisiticated opponents, you need to worry about said opponents
> eavesdropping on the phone call.  Strangely enough, analogue
> telephones are still being sold in the US, and only GSM phones have
> any encryption worth mentioning.  With analogue phones, listening in

Oh, and to continue along our recent line of "a little bird told me"
stories: a little bird told me that _that_ (and, mind you, GSM
encryption itself isn't so hot) is because when Qualcomm was in the
final stages of software development for the CDMA phones used in most
non-GSM digital systems here in the US, the government dropped by and
let them know that if their _phones_ did any kind of meaningful
encryption in the USA, they would never get an export license for
their base stations, whether the version they wanted to export had
encryption or not.

Nice, huh?


Thor Lancelot Simon	                               tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your public serpents (err, I mean servants)
can go off on a tangent like that sometimes and it ain't funny when
they do. Back in CB Radio days, Motorola radios used a programmable
chip called '02A' for frequency selection. Everyone knew how to program
it, and all the guys would open up their radio, cut just a single very
small little bit of the (solder) trace, add a tiny double-pole, double-
throw switch on the side of the radio (part available from Radio Shack
at the time for 89 cents) and bingo, their 40 channel *legal* radio
became a 120 channel unit, with 40 channels above licensed CB and 40
channels below licensed CB, or 360 'channels' if you counted the upper
and lower side of each frequency plus the center itself. Some of the
crafty guys would peak their radio so they could get it to oscillate
all the way up in ten meters. Some were even brazen enough to talk 
about it on the radio itself, and teach the other guys what to do.  

No matter how many times the FCC 'field auditors' would hit the streets
around midnight on a hot summer night in Chicago, driving their van
around, attempting to triangulate someone's signal, it was rare they
would ever catch a guy using his radio like that. So instead, the FCC
went to Motorola and told *them* to can the beans. Motorola said it was
not their fault people misused their product and the government's res-
ponse was then suppose we fix it so you are not in a position to sell
any products at all?

The government's next stop was in DFW, Texas, where Tandy/Radio Shack
and their Chicago affilate Allied Radio were doing a land office 
business, a lot like ISPs do now, because in those days Citizens Band
Radio was where things were at. Clerks in Radio Shack stores everywhere
were eager to sell as many radios as they could, so many of them on
their own prepared a little 'cheat sheet' with the technical instruc-
tions for making the illegal modifications; and of course the couple
dollars in parts needed were there in the store for sale also. Then 
when a customer bought a radio, the clerks would ask, 'do you plan on
doing the mods yourself or do you want one of us guys in the store to
help you for a couple dollars extra.' Just as brazen as could be. The
corporate office never saw any of those 'couple dollars extra' and
tried to defend itself by saying so, but the government told Tandy/
Radio Shack that they had also better shape up and fly right, or,
'there might be trouble getting those radios that you sell imported in
here from the factory in Korea to start with. Then what would you do?' 

Radio Shack understood perfectly well what was being said, and within
a week or so every store had a notice posted in the back room where
only the clerks could see it saying that ANY discussion of 'mods' or
or the distribution of unauthorized literature in their store which
taught customers how to 'do the mods' would result in termination of
employment. Radio Shack also had to pay a fine, but Motorola got out
of paying the fine since they did not actually sell radios direct and
it could never be proven they encouraged customers to 'do the mods',
'the way those brazen fools at Radio Shack were doing' said one VP
of Motorola at the time. 

And of course Frightened Mothers everywhere would never allow their
children to use the CB radio because, 'you just cannot be sure of 
who they are going to talk with or what they they are going to talk
about; just last week some man tried to lure my son into meeting him
at the corner of Oak and Polk at midnight.' As some prophet once
said, 'there is nothing new under the sun, not a damn thing.'    PAT] 

------------------------------

From: ffaure@bigSPAMGAZETTAIDAMEfoot.com (Frederic Faure)
Subject: Re: Good Conference Phone?
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 18:58:36 GMT
Organization: What me, organized?
Reply-To: ffaure@bigSPAMGAZETTAIDAMEfoot.com


On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 13:28:01 GMT, cnavarro@wcnet.org (Carl Navarro)
wrote:

> They tell me the 3C/USR 1000's are MD'd too :-(.  I have really good
> luck with those.  That makes POLYCOM the winner by default!
> I have not used them, they're pricey.  At 5X the price of a Panasonic,
> it's not an item you bring into inventory for a demo :-).

	I already found the Panasonic kinda pricey for just an analog
phone (close to FF2800/$500 sales tax included), so I'll try the
cheaper models of Polycom.

(What does MD stand for?)


Thanks for the tip,

FF.

The system required Windows 95 or better, so I installed Linux!

------------------------------

From: Jan Ceuleers <janceuleers@computer.org>
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:53:19 +0200
Organization: the Experimenter Board
Reply-To: jan.ceuleers@computer.org


Ralph Hyre wrote:

> What's the real issue with Local Number portability?

> 800 Number portability was achieved years ago (1993?), and the
> technology and operational issues are basically the same, with some
> minor scaling issues.

These scaling issues are not minor. They are the difference between
triggering the IN platform (and global title translation etc.) on only
a percentage of calls (i.e. freephone calls), and triggering the IN
for essentially _all_ calls.

This has major repercussions on the dimensioning of the IN, the CCS7
network, and indeed on the dimensioning of the voice switching network
itself.

Expanding on this latter point: all calls would have to be routed to the
nearest SSP (service switching point), an IN-enabled switch. Routing
would therefore not be optimal at all. For example: lots of tromboning
would take place. (The fact that each local switch knows its own
subscribers only partly addresses this issue: the other part requires
each local exchange to be directly connected to an SSP; that is: without
intermediate transit nodes).

Even if all switches were already upgraded to SSP functionality (which
would first require all switches to be digital, second for all switches
to be CCS7-enabled and -connected, and third for their SSP capabilities
to be enabled), the cost impact might still be high, as an IN call
requires more processing resources than an 'ordinary' call.

Moreover, the call setup delays on IN calls are longer than on non-IN
calls. If all calls suddenly become IN calls, the average call setup
delay may become too large for the network to remain compliant with
ITU-T requirements. (This is however pure conjecture on my part).


Jan Ceuleers, Antwerp, Belgium

To reply via e-mail, please insert a dot between jan and ceuleers

------------------------------

Date: 30 Apr 1999 01:33:04 -0000
From: Matt Ackeret <mattack@area.com>
Subject: Re: Use of Cellular Phones in Schools
Organization: Area Systems in Mountain View, CA - http://www.area.com


In article <telecom19.57.1@telecom-digest.org> TELECOM Digest Editor
noted:

> How much worse are things going to become in the USA?  We have a
> president who tells parents they have to be careful about keeping
> their children from seeing a lot of violent images; meanwhile he
> continues throwing bombs with abandon at Yugoslavia. Does he not

I think the US shouldn't be the "policeman to the world".  Even in
World War II, we did not get involved until our territory was directly
attacked.

However, "throwing bombs with abandon" is a silly way of describing
it.  Milosivec has been killing a particular group of people in his
country (and don't come back with "would it be better if it were
indiscriminate"!).

This is completely unrelated to two insane kids with access to guns
who go to school on a rampage.


mattack@area.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But many historians believe that
Franklin Roosevelt was just itching to get started. He could barely
wait for his turn. The same people believe that not everyone was
all that surprised by the attack on us; after all, the daily newspaper
in Honolulu on Saturday, 12-6-41 -- the day *before* the Sunday morning
attack -- did have a front page story saying 'Air Raids considered
likely over weekend'. 

If Milosivec is the bogey-man here, Adolf Hitler re-incarnated and all
that (or to paraphrase from 'Nightmare on Main Street' and Jason)
 ... Adolf is back, and this time he is really on a rampage ... then
why not just go assasinate him, overthrow his government and start
over. All that is really happening now is NATO is serving to validate
Clinton's wishes. Yes, the same Clinton who tricked all the nerds into
voting for him by visiting their hives in Seattle and California and
telling all the wonderful things he would support for computers and
the net; and the same Clinton who tricked all the gay guys into voting
for him by giving them lies about his plans to change the way the
military does things. Clinton no more controls the military than I
do. And as for 'wonderful things for the net and computers', well you
see how quickly he comes to our defense in things like the encryption
battle and privacy rights. Enough about him and Mr. Adolf Milosivec.
Goodnight.    PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #66
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat May  1 20:56:07 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA07595;
	Sat, 1 May 1999 20:56:07 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 20:56:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905020056.UAA07595@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #67

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 1 May 99 20:56:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 67

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Digest Business Directory! 800 Spam List (Babu Mengelepouti)
    Cell Phones in Airplanes: Costa Rica (AES)
    5 cents/minute US-UK Sundays. Which Company? (ValH.)
    Re: MCI Weekend Rate Available Through 1010 Code? (Eli Mantel)
    Re: BNC, was Book Review (Andrew Emmerson)
    Re: Bizarre Cellular Cross-Talk (Simon Hewison)
    Re: The Complete PC's  ->> Complete Communicator VoiceMail (Carl Navarro)
    Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA (Rob McMillin)
    Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They? (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Brian F. G. Bidulock)
    Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call! (Art Kamlet)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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 Apr 1999 14:54:25 -0700
From: Babu Mengelepouti <dialtone@vcn.bc.ca>
Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca
Organization: US Secret Service
Subject: Digest Business Directory! 800 Spam List


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought what we needed to have here
was a business directory; a place where Digest readers could easily
locate the phone number of folks who want to do business with you.
Naturally, anyone who wants our business will make it easy for us to
be in touch with them on the telephone, which these folks listed 
below have done. 

You know what needs to be done.     PAT]

                ------------------------------

People often ask me what to do with these spammer's phone numbers.
Please know that every call to an 800# cost someone money. Since it is
a free call to you.. guess who pays? There ya go. So.. if posted to a
mail list of 1000 people, and even 100 call, the spammer gets to
pay. So listen to the entire message when you call. Call from
payphones, courtesy phones, etc. One call to each number from each
phone you have access to. Any more than that is potential harassment
and WE are law abiding citizens. Of course, some of these ask you to
leave your name or number and they will get back to you. Be creative
:)

(newest entries at top of list)

=-=
04.25.99	increase sales		1-888-869-5520 ext: TKM
04.23.99				(800)899-8849
04.22.99	weight loss		1-888-240-2779
04.22.99	"			1-888-861-5357
04.22.99	"			1-800-242-0363 ext. 2460
04.22.99	LD calling		800-400-8532
04.21.99	meet girls		1-800-750-GIRL (4475)
04.19.99	make money		1 800 345-9688 ext 9630
04.19.99	make money		1-800-636-6773 ext. 3886
04.19.99	credit cards		1-888-264-9272
04.19.99	merchant accounts	1(800) 600-0343    ext. 1234
04.16.99	canada vacation		1-888-682-0043
04.12.99	MLM			888-386-4290  refcode JDC 0411
04.12.99	retire early		1-800-345-9688  Ext. 7777
04.12.99	cable descramblers	800-242-0363 ext.2748
quit smoking				1-800-328-7102
quit smoking				1-888-725-8419
www.casino-help.com			1-800-636-6773 ext.7635.
avoid irs/money spam			1-888-217-2894  
					1-888-217-3291
marketing				(800) 242-0363 EXT. 2427
computers/bulk mail			(800) 242-0363
Designs In Life 			1-800-340-0162
credit rebuilding			(800) 337-5812
vmb/calling solutions			(888) 546-5348
search engine spam			(800) 771-2003
spam					1-888-445-0206 
to be removed..				1-888-829-1943 
MLM					1-800-345-9688  ext. 4718
MLM					1-888-713-7210
height increase				1-888-829-1943
weight loss				1-800-345-9688 #3305
 From: corporate@tssolutions.com	1-888-357-1852
 To: gideqoo12@mci2000.com		800-600-0343 ex. 1256 (leave a message)
 From: worldly55@hotmail.com		1-800-401-0209
PKirch1179@aol.com			800  607-6006 Ex 2492# press 1 
stop smoking				1-888-725-8419
misc spam				800-242-0363   Ext.1659     
Commercial Copier Sale			800-300-6693
Photo Sticker machines 			888-386-4290  Reference code V462
 From: rise7813w@yahoo.com		(800) 771-2003 
http://www.software602.com 		888-468-6602.
stop smoking 				1-800-328-7103
web hosting spam			1-800-242-0363 x2361
www.hakai.com 				1-800-668-FISH (3474)
Commercial Copier Sale			800-300-6693
 From: mailer@mail2.powercall.ca		800.427.6937
phone spam				800.473.9199
FAT-LOSS SPECIALIST			1-888-689-3097
spam					1-800-345-9688  Ext. 7777
Multilevel Marketing			1-800-600-0343 ext. 2310
associate mentor program 		1-888-248-6850
psychic spam				1-800-372-3384 
 From: "Thomas" <ebizness992@usa.net>	1-800-248-1137
Online Fufillment Orginization		800-771-2003,
	"we do not send unsolicited email" as of 3.20.99 mailbox full
 From: z2jd@ibm.net			1-800-345-9688  Ext. 4500
 From bessey678@systemage.co.jp		800-242-0363  Ext. 1457
weight loss crap			1-800-631-3299.
unknown spam				1-800-242-0363 x2361
 From: URTI3318@yahoo.com		Email removal 800-771-2003,
unknown spam				888.403.5601
unknown spam				800.242.0363 x2428
unknown spam				1-888-248-7073  
 From: <Harry15143@aat.co.uk>		1-800-328-7103
 From: JCh7649460@aol.com		800-607-6006 box 2666#
 Cyber Advertising Systems 		1-800-409-8302 Extension 1284 
 From goldbrg6@usa.net  Thu Mar  4 	CALL 1-888-264-9272
 From: <RocketJeff@rockettalk.com>	1-877-449-Rocket
 From: SPhil79466@aol.com		1 800-607-6006 ex 2492# call now!
 From: pbhy@msn.com			1-800-593-3645 
 From: loqaswe@pvtnet.cz		1-800-320-9895 Ext 7040
 From: amscott@hamkk.fi			1-800-320-9895 Ext 7040
 From: <poohata62@vlsi.kaist.ac.r>	Call now (800)811-2141
					800.226.0633  (second number)
 From: JVERDUCE@aol.com			1-800-350-9692 
 From: y2kreport@altavista.net		1-888-248-1529 
 From: hotbusiness@tu.koszalin.pl	1-800-322-6169 Ext. 1882
 From: blueink8@hotpop.com		1-800-810-4330.
unknown spam				800.929.3576 
 From: DOBBIE2ME@aol.com
Call some of the following toll-free numbers and listen
to what other people say about this business:
  *1-888-703-5389 (Gay Dietch almost didn't join)
  *1-888-269-7961 (Brenda Cook quit her job in 1 month)
  *1-888-446-6951 (Big Mac made $10,000 his first month)
  *1-888-731-3457 (Jeff Gardner makes $1,000/week)
  *1-888-256-4767 (Tim Nelson made $3500 his 1st week)
  *1-888-438-4005 (Paul & Deb made $2000 1st two weeks)
  *1-888-715-0642 (Steven F. made $50,000 in 12 months)
Call the Top Secrets Information Hotline:
  *If you live in the US or Canada: 
     *Call 1-800-811-2141 Code# 63128

------------------------------

From: siegman@ee.stanford.edu (A.E.Siegman)
Subject: Cell Phones in Airplanes: Costa Rica
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 16:36:34 -0700
Organization: Stanford University


I've read numerous earlier msgs in this and other groups about the
illegality/immorality/technical catastrophes associated with using a
cell phone in flight.

Just as a data point, I was on a scheduled commercial (Sansa) flight
from Tamarindo (dusty cow-pasture landing strip in NW Costa Rica) to
San Jose, Costa Rica, earlier this week.  Single-engined 18-passenger
plane, no bulkhead between pilots and passengers; I was sitting in
front row.  Flight elevation 9600 feet above sea level, maybe 6000
feet above ground level.

As soon as we reached cruising altitude the pilot (a Tom Cruise
look-alike) took off his headphones, pulled out a very ordinary
looking folding cell phone, dialed his girl friend (or someone
amiable), and proceeded to yak it up (in Spanish) for a large portion
of the 45 minute flight.  At one point the co-pilot's cell phone also
rang; he pulled it out of his hip pocket, answered, and chatted for a
while also.

Costa Rica has a population of 3.5 million, and just one area code (or
whatever it is) for the whole country.

------------------------------

From: vhealeyS@qwestinternet.net (Val Healy)
Subject: 5 Cents/Minute US-UK Sundays. Which Company?
Date: 01 May 1999 16:41:46 PDT


Hi All,

A few days ago I caught a fleeting glimpse of a TV commercial that
announced 5 cents/minute from the US to the UK, Germany, etc on
Sundays.  Unfortunately I had a distraction during the message and
didn't find out which company it was.

Anyone know? If so, a telephone number would be a huge help.


TIA,

valh.

------------------------------

From: Eli Mantel <mantel@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: MCI Weekend Rate Available Through 1010 Code?
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 07:54:12 GMT


Benjamin D. Lukoff (bd087@scn.org) wrote:

> I wasn't aware that MCI's "5 cent Sundays" rate, and in fact, any
> special rates, were available by dialing 1010xxx codes before the
> number. I seem to remember being charged more using Sprint's 10xxx
> code a few years ago than I would have had I been a subscriber.

You recall right.  After several years during which people could
use different carriers for each call, the major carriers all
began discriminating against non-subscribers using their services
by implementing a "casual-caller" surcharge, that ran a dollar or
two on every call, over and above the highest rate they charge
their customers.

However, although you can be PIC'd to only a single carrier for
your interlata calls, there's no rule that says you can't set up
accounts with multiple carriers, if they'll let you.

The problem with this, though, is that most carriers insist that you
give them an authorization to change your PIC.  When your local
phone company processes the PIC change, they will also notify your
current carrier, who will no longer consider you a subscriber.

I think you can workaround this by getting a PIC freeze, which
should then cause your local phone company to ignore the PIC change
request.

Got all that?  Good.  But aside from the nuisance of remembering
which carrier access code to dial which day of the week, there
are some other drawbacks.

First, MCI will charge you $1.07 each month for the PIC-C fee (even if
you're not actually PIC'd to them).

Second, MCI has a $5 monthly minimum on most of its plans, so your
savings plan could backfire if you don't use enough time.

Third, there are phone companies at least as reliable as MCI, and
certainly more ethical than MCI, that charge residential customers
7.9 cents a minute 24 hours a day with no monthly fee (except
for the $0.53 PIC fee), minimum, or other committment, with 6 second
billing increments and 6 second minimum time per call ... and these
are NOT voice over IP services (at least as far as I can tell).

So while it's true that you can save money using MCI on Sundays
and some other carrier the rest of the week, the incentive to do
so is pretty limited if you get yourself set up on the right calling
plan to begin with.

------------------------------

From: midshires@cix.co.uk (Andrew Emmerson)
Subject: Re: BNC, was Book Review
Date: 01 May 1999 09:28:13 GMT
Organization: CIX - Compulink Information eXchange
Reply-To: midshires@cix.co.uk


In article <telecom19.58.2@telecom-digest.org>, rslade@sprint.ca (Rob
Slade) wrote:

> I would have been very interested to see what the derivation of BNC
> (as in "BNC connector) was, except that it isn't included.

That's easy. Here is the answer along with some other well-known
connectors. There is a lot of misinformation going around but I guarantee
these derivations are correct.

BNC	=	Baby (or Bayonet) Neill Concelman. A baby-size combination
of the designs of Neill and Concelman.
C	=	Concelman. Developed by Carl Concelman of Amphenol.
DIN	=	Deutsche Industrienormen Ausschuss (German
standards-making  authority)
EIAJ	=	Electronics Industry Association of Japan.
MUSA =	Multiple Unit Steerable Array. Developed in the 1930s by the
British Post Office. It is very similar to the American Western Electric
video jack.
N	=	Neill or Navy type. Originated in 1942 by Paul Neill of
Bell Labs and standardised on a Navy Bureau of Ships drawing.
RCA	=	Radio Corporation of America.
UHF 	=	Ultra High Frequency. Developed in 1940 by E.C.
Quackenbush of the American Phenolic Corporation (later Amphenol). At the
time this connector was designed, UHF meant what we call VHF today.


Andrew Emmerson.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 11:09:31 +0100
From: Simon Hewison <spamtrap@zymurgy.org>
Reply-To: Simon Hewison <simon.hewison@zymurgy.org>
Subject: Re: Bizarre Cellular Cross-Talk
Organization: Demon Internet


In article <telecom19.62.2@telecom-digest.org>, Linc Madison
<Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM> writes

> I was talking on my landline POTS phone today, to a friend who was
> calling from some variety of cellphone or PCS phone.  Suddenly, as
> clear as day, I heard someone else's conversation, something along
> the lines of "Dad, can you hear me now?"  I hadn't realized that my
> friend was on a wireless phone, so I thought perhaps someone was
> monkeying with the demarc on one end or the other.  The cut-in was
> only for about 20 or 30 seconds, before the other party/parties
> went away.

> Kinda makes you wonder ...

If it's any form of standard analog FM based cell phone, it's
incredibly easy for someone with an illegal or broken FM transmitter
to break through, even on harmonics. (In a similar way to being able
to listen to analog cellular phones on a half decent scanner from
Radio Shack.)

Most digital cellular protocols such as GSM variants, and Qualcomm
under similar circumstances would either attempt to channel hop to an
interference free channel, or just drop the call altogether.


Simon Hewison

------------------------------

From: cnavarro@wcnet.org (Carl Navarro)
Subject: Re: The Complete PC's  ->> Complete Communicator VoiceMail Card
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 13:21:19 GMT
Organization: Airnews.net! at Internet America


On Mon, 26 Apr 1999 22:02:12 -0700, Etop Udoh <s_druid@mindspring.com>
wrote:

> Is anyone familiar with the company "The Complete PC" which came out
> with the "Complete Communicator" voice mail card and some accessories
> for them ...

> I have several of their cards including my latest one, the Window's
> Version of the card.  I have the Window's Software, but I'm missing
> the DOS software which installs itself in a directory called "CCDOS" ??

> I believe there are several versions of this software, and the last
> version which came off of their bbs, or ftp site (now BOCA) is not
> quite 100% compatible ... so I need one that is a little older than
> that one.

I have 2.62 running on my PS-2 model 30 and it's pretty stable.
I can't find the original 5 1/4 inch disks (all packed away while my
office is being constructed!), but I can zip up my working cc
subdirectory and ship it to you if you like.

Does the WINDOZE version handle multiple cards better and allow
sharing of the database?

Carl Navarro

------------------------------

From: Rob McMillin <rlm@syseca-us.com>
Subject: Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go Says NANPA
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 18:50:07 -0700
Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site


"Eric B. Morson" wrote:

> Looks like the first REAL steps have been taken to evaluate just how
> SOON the NANP will be in SERIOUS jeopardy as a whole.

> The NANP Exhaust Study has been published....

> http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

> VERY informative ... they now project total exhaustion between 2006
> and 2012, with their best guess being 2007... 8 1/2 years to go! NO
> FCC action recommended regarding 10-D or 11-D dialing yet. No timetable
> for expansion yet. No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing
> patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
> deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

What he didn't mention was that the report says this is ONLY if number
allocation continues in blocks of 10,000. If, as has been proposed,
NPA blocks start being allocated in blocks of 1,000 (NPA-NXX-Xxxx),
the estimated exhaust date is more like 2094... but then, they don't
really give a basis is for that statement.


Robert L. McMillin | Not the voice of Syseca, Inc. | rlm@syseca-us.com
         Personal: rlm@netcom.com

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Portable Local Numbers: Why Aren't They?
Date: 1 May 1999 00:12:24 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.66.8@telecom-digest.org>,
Jan Ceuleers  <jan.ceuleers@computer.org> wrote:

> Ralph Hyre wrote:

>> What's the real issue with Local Number portability?

>> 800 Number portability was achieved years ago (1993?), and the
>> technology and operational issues are basically the same, with some
>> minor scaling issues.

> These scaling issues are not minor. They are the difference between
> triggering the IN platform (and global title translation etc.) on only
> a percentage of calls (i.e. freephone calls), and triggering the IN
> for essentially _all_ calls.

Well, it's not quite that bad initially.  You can avoid that by
setting Specific Digit String triggers only on codes that have had
numbers ported in them, and it'll be a while until that's every
NPA-NXX.  Quite a while.

Of course, since it's now the SDS trigger instead of the 3/6/10
trigger, you can even avoid querying with finer resolution than
NPA-NXX; for example, if you wanted to build the tables out to a
sufficient depth, you could trigger on 847-830-1XXX but not on
847-830-2XXX.

The other big issue is that, very much *unlike* 800 number service,
here both the dialed and "routing" numbers are real telephone numbers.
This is the source of much of the complexity.  When you make an 800
call, the database dip is done, yielding a carrier and a routing
number -- these days, usually just another 800 number; then that
carrier gets the call, probably dips to its own 800 number database,
and comes up with a *real* telephone number, an NPA-NXX-XXXX number
where the NPA-NXX identifies a real office to router the call to, and
proceeds to route the call accordingly.

In that scheme, it's easy to tell the difference between the "fake"
and "real" numbers, because there are no offices in NPA 800; 800-NXX
can never be mistaken for a real office to route the call to, so you
always know whether the database dip has been done or not.

With LNP, there's no such guarantee.  Both the dialed number and the
number returned by the database dip (The "LRN" or Location Routing
Number for the office the number's been ported to) are "real"
telephone numbers -- they both have NPA-NXX for which real offices
exist, to which you could route the call.  Were the queries done just
like 800 database queries, there would be no simple way to tell
whether or not the lookup had been done already, introducing a number
of very ugly corner cases, things like routing loops, query storms,
etc.

To avoid this, the ISUP IAM was modified to include the TCNI bit,
which indicates that the query has already been done.  This, of
course, involves changing every implementation of ISUP in the
network... every switch, and then some other miscellaneous hardware.
It's really the only available solution that met all the constraints,
but it's not hard to see why it's taking so long!


Thor Lancelot Simon	                                      tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

From: Brian F. G. Bidulock <bidulock@dallas.net>
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:48:23 -0500
Organization: Brian F. G. Bidulock, P. Eng.


"L. Winson" wrote:

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know why card reader type
>> phones never really caught on?   [good points snipped]

> Damn good question.  I myself would rather have the security of
> inserting a card and entering just my pin number rather than entering
> (and remembering) a whole series of numbers.

[snip]

Regulation, de-regulation, liberalization.  If you accept your own
card in a card reader payphone you are forced to accept everybody
else's.  Countries with little to no payhone competition with the
monopoly carrier always have card readers on payphones.  Then the
competition complains to the regulator that their cards should be
accepted by the incumbent's phone, otherwise it is a barrier to entry.
Bye-bye card readers: result, increased fraud.

Fraud detection mechanisms, on the other hand are getting more
sophisticated.  Some systems track velocity of usage, others track
the speed of movement of the user of the number or the number of
pseudo-simultaneous sessions which the card number exhibits.
Most mechanisms act to limit the rate and volume of fraudulent use
which can be perpetrated against a single card number.  This is all
for the "protection" of the user, however, it reduces to a question
of cost and liability, like most things. 


Brian F. G. Bidulock, P. Eng.
bidulock@dallas.net

------------------------------

From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet)
Subject: Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call!
Date: 30 Apr 1999 23:03:00 -0400
Organization: InfiNet
Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com


In article <telecom19.66.1@telecom-digest.org>, Arthur Ross
<a.ross@ieee.org> wrote:

> BTW - I have been writing memos to some of my acquaintances at Lucent
> for some time now to the effect that "It is time to re-think network
> addressing," the general theme being that numeric, geography-based
> addressing in this age of 300 MHz processors and multi-gigabyte hard
> drives on every desktop, is an anachronism. While these memos are
> probably winding up in the circular "nut" file, I still believe
> it. There are, of course, a few small problems ....

As you say below, IP addressing, to be expanded from 32 bits
(absolutely essential of course, but there's lots of hardware and
firmware from a zillion companies that becomes obsolete quickly) will
eventually replace the NANP -- but not all that quickly.

My note, however, is about Lucent's role in network addressing.

The NANP itself is probably included in Judge Greene's 1982
decision which split apart AT&T and the RBOCs in the Jan 1 1984
divestiture, and is still humorously :-( referred to in some
circles as the Second Modification of Final Judgement.  (The 1956
decree issued in Newark NJ against Western Electric in which, among
other things, they agred to make communications patents available
to all, was the earlier judgment, the one being modified by the
Justice Department lawsuit.)

The MFJ created BellCore and mandates Bellcore to be responsible for
all coordination of national issues, national security etc.  I believe
that makes BellCore, under agreement signed by the Justice Dept and
AT&T (from which Bellcore and Lucent sprung forth, and which has not
been superseded by later legislation) responsible for the NANP, and
Lucent is but one of many interested parties, but not the one
responsible for the NANP.  Perhaps you should be asking your friends
at BellCore (Lockheed/ Telcore?) rather than Lucent?


Art Kamlet   Columbus, Ohio    kamlet@infinet.com  

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #67
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sun May  2 01:56:19 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA16281;
	Sun, 2 May 1999 01:56:19 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 01:56:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905020556.BAA16281@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #68

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 May 99 01:56:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 68

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Forcing MCI to Change Advertising (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Final CFP: MONET Issue on Energy-Conserving Protocols for Wireless (J Redi)
    Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Ed Leslie)
    Re: NANP Running Out of Numbers in 8+ Years (Louis Raphael)
    Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call! (Dave Stott)
    Comcast @home (Jim Willis)
    Re: Card Reader Type Public Phones (Louis Raphael)
    Legislation Passed to Tranform Satellite TV (Ed Ellers)
    Cordless Phone Help Wanted (dlore@iname.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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 1 May 1999 23:09:15 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising


Someone asked me to repeat this, so here it is. I originally wrote
about this in {Telephony Magazine}, the journal which was very popular
among telco employees until at least sometime in the early eighties. I
do not hear much about them these days.

Anyway, MCI, which means (M)icrowave (C)ommunications, (I)nc. first
went business in the 1960's, under a different name. It was a small,
storefront operation in Joliet, IL in the business of selling and
repairing microwave communications gear. Then Bill McGowan got into
the business, and partnered with the fellow who owned the little shop
in Joliet, and the whole nature of their business changed in the next
few years. A lot of you already know that part of their history. 

Their first venture in handling actual traffic came in 1968 when they
petitioned the Illinois Commerce Commission for permission to operate
a microwave circuit between Chicago and St. Louis, for, as they said
at the time, a 'limited number of customers in a special class'. As
to be expected, Illinois Bell fought the petition and tried to keep
them from operating the circuit, but MCI prevailed in the proceedings
before the Illinois Commerce Commission, and was allowed to open the
service. Some have suggested that first petition they filed asking
to operate a communications network was fraudulent in the way it
misrepresented their planned or perceived customer base. That is a
story for another time. None the less, MCI as a telecommunications
carrier of long distance traffic was now in business. 

Remember, this was before any of the rules about equal access had been
started; there were no such things as PIC codes. Ma Bell, also known
as AT&T ruled with an iron fist. Over the next few years, MCI was able
to expand its territory to include not only Chicago to St. Louis, but
Chicago to New York, Chicago to Los Angeles, etc. By the middle 1970's
MCI was serving about a dozen major cities through a service called
'Execunet',  a phone service for 'executives'.  

In order to access their network,  one used any telephone and dialed
the local seven digit number designated. For example, in Chicago, the
number 312-871-0001 resulted in the caller hearing a new dial tone from
the MCI switch, against which he would dial his account code, and the
desired ten digit number, assuming it was in one of the cities that
MCI served. MCI then went to the city in question, took a regular line
in that place, and out-dialed the seven digits desired. They did no
checking of any sort regards the number dialed; in other words if the
caller in Chicago dialed into the MCI switch, entered his access code
and then dialed something like 212-911, when the call jumped off of
MCI's network in New York, a local line there literally dialled 911.
We tested it a few times back then with things like 411 for directory,
as well as 950 and 976 numbers, which carried premium charges. You 
could even do something like 212-1-312-876-0001 and get the outgoing
line in New York to make a call back to Chicago, whereupon you would
once again hear the MCI dial tone. I think once we had a loop like 
that up about six or seven times around before the transmission got so
bad we gave it up. Basically then, 212 just said 'get a line in New
York and dial the number given'; 415 meant 'get a line in San Francisco
and dial the number given' ... 

 ... you could even dial 900 numbers against the other end (grin) to
psychic hotlines or whatever, dialing 212-1-900-whatever. The early
days were all very crude and unsophisticated. Finally one day, an 
attempt to call a premium charge number returned a recording from the
switch in Chicago saying, 'at the present time, MCI does not complete
calls to 976 numbers ... 'Gradually MCI closed in on the bugs in their
system, and became much more sophisticated. By the middle 1980's when
they had equal access and were serving every single town in the USA,
they had closed most all of the loopholes from earlier years. 

MCI rates between those limited points -- all major cities -- which
they served in the 1970's were about 80 percent of what AT&T was
charging, and MCI was fond of pointing that out in their advertising.

In those days they generally directed all their efforts to only very
large or medium sized companies. Their advertisements would say that
their rates were *automatically* 20 percent less than what AT&T
charged; would you rather pay their price or pay ours? And when their
sales reps would pay visits to large companies to try and sell them
on their service, if the telecom guy at the company said they would
rather stick with AT&T, the MCI sales rep's attitude and demeanor 
would become very quizzical: 'but why would you want to pay 20 percent
more?' And still another company would move over to MCI.

What they were NOT telling people was that the obligatory call to
their seven digit local access number was *supervised*, meaning charged,
by Illinois Bell. And while MCI did not charge you if the distant end
was busy or did not answer (they had no supervisory techniques so in
fact they did not charge for any connection less than thirty seconds
and for all connections greater than thirty seconds, ring/no answer,
busy, whatever). So if you had to make five calls to get through to
a number somewhere, yes, MCI charged you only once (assuming you hung
up within thirty seconds of hearing the busy signal)  **but you still
got charged a message unit from IBT each time around**.  The difference,
as we all know, was that in those days, the local telco gave you the
essence of a 'free ride' to the toll switch in your town, or wherever
it was. MCI got no such free ride for their customers to their switch.

While it would have been true in small communities where the local
telco gives unmeasured local service that there would be that twenty
percent savings using MCI, in larger places -- and that is all that
MCI served in its early days -- where local calls were billed as
'message units' or similar, at maybe five cents each, much if not all
of the 'savings by using MCI' were eaten up by additional local message
charges from Illinois Bell. And there were many cases in which the
bottom line was *more* than it would have been with AT&T since MCI
had many large customers in distant suburbs from Chicago who had to
pay 2,3 or even 4 message units to Bell everytime they called the MCI
switch!

A month or two into their 'saving twenty percent using MCI' experience,
many corporate telecom managers would review the phone bill and see
a definite decrease in long distance charges from AT&T, and it was
MCI's hope they would *not* see the humongous increase in 'message
units' for local calls. And frankly, most of them did not see it. A
large corporation might go through a million or more 'local message
units' every month, and then one month it is a hundred thousand more
local message units than usual. If they happened to be talking to the
MCI sales rep, he would say, 'well it must be that your employees are
making a lot more personal calls', and many is the telecom manager 
who bought that line and sent out a memo to all employees telling them
to stay off the phone with personal calls and use the payphone in the
lunchroom instead for that purpose. But then next month, the bill
would be just as high on local calls, or maybe higher, as obedient
employees would remember to make their long distance calls by dialing
876-0001 then the area code and number, just as they had been told to
do. Line is busy? Hang up and immediatly redial; do it again, and again.

In those days, MCI structured their advertising on the theory that
very few people if any knew exactly what they were paying 'the phone
company' for anyway, and if you told them a way to 'get one over on
Ma Bell' (not using those words of course) a lot of people would be
glad to use 'this new way to save money on phone calls'. MCI's good
luck came in the fact that most people would only look at their total
bill and those portions (like long distance calls) which were specif-
ically coin-rated instead of a bunch of message units lumped together.
So they could rightfully point out that if you looked at AT&T's
portion of your bill 'from the phone company' and then compared it
with the bill that MCI sent you in the mail each month, you would see
that what they said was true; you were paying less to MCI than you
would have paid for the same thing to AT&T. 

At the time, the chairman of AT&T was a fellow named Charles Brown.
Mr. Brown had formerly been the president of Illinois Bell, and when
he had been president of IBT he was a neighbor of mine in Rogers Park,
a neighborhood in Chicago. I wrote him a note and said why don't you
people, umm, clarify things just a bit? AT&T was getting increasingly
annoyed by MCI's advertising tactics ('when you can pay us twenty
percent less, why would you want to pay them a hundred percent') and a
press release came out from Mr. Brown saying in effect that they could
run a cut-rate, wholesale long distance business also if 'all we did
was skim the cream from the highly profitable east coast corridor and
the major cities. If AT&T did not bother to serve every tiny rural
community all over the USA, taking a loss on many of them which was
subsidized by long distance, I suspect we could undercut MCI and sell
ours for fifty percent of what it is now.'

And the press release continued, 'When is the last time MCI went out
to fix someone's phone when it was broken? When is the last time a
couple of their employees were out in the mountains of Wyoming on a
January day in a temperature of five below zero for the sole purpose
of restoring service to a community of thirty people when a blizzard
knocked their community telephone cable down from a pole and put them
out of service? Five below zero, winds about thirty miles an hour, and
several inches of snow and ice on the side of a mountain. One employee
slipped and fell to his death; his partner/co-worker went to his
rescue and wound up severely injured in the process. I guess that is
why they can give cut rate prices on long distance calls and I cannot.' 

A couple months later, MCI instituted a new charge, called 'call termin-
ation fee', and this, they said, was what telco was charging them for
those phone lines in the places where calls went. So now the telephone
consumer was paying (1) MCI for the call, (2) MCI for the distant
termination charge and (3) Illinois Bell for the requisite message
units to get on MCI's switch in the first place. Yet they still
continued with their claim of 'twenty percent less, why would you want
to pay them a hundred percent?'

I began noticing that from about 1 AM each night until roughly 3 AM
the MCI access number would not answer at all. When I asked them why
it was impossible to 'save twenty percent on my calls' between 1 and
3 AM when they apparently took no business, they said to me they had
to have time to 'do the billing'; that they needed to 'shut down the
computer in order to run the billing tapes' ... and my response was,
that seems rather odd, I wonder how AT&T manages to run their billing
tapes, staying up 24 hours per day as they do. 

They also begin advertising deliberatly telling people that, when you
need directory assistance, dial the area code and 555-1212, it is a
free call; once you get the number then hang up and place the call via
our switch. Employees at companies were told that when they had to
call 555-1212 they were NOT to place that call via MCI (for which
they would be billed at the rate for other calls to that community)
but instead to place the call via AT&T; then to place the actual call
itself via MCI in the earlier requested way.

  ** That, friends, is the main reason areacode-555-1212 is no longer
     a free call, and has not been for many years. AT&T gave totally
     free directory service everywhere, but of course you placed the
     call with them 'at rates that are twenty percent higher'. **

I filed a formal complaint with the Federal Communications Commission
asking that MCI be forced to reveal the true cost of phone calls in 
their advertising, and that they either be forced to remain on line
24 hours per day or include in their advertising that their service
was not available during certain overnight hours. 

The end result was that the FCC ordered them to include in their
advertising a statement saying, "additional charges may be imposed
by your local telephone company to access our service, and these
additional charges may in fact offset the savings described above."
They had to include that in their advertising in cities like Chicago
or anywhere the local telco used 'message units' to bill for local
calls. 

Of course that was long before the days of equal access; long before
PIC codes and one plus dialing defaults. But I always did feel that
MCI from its earliest days onward was less than totally honest with
the public; that their stock in trade was using the ignorance of the
general public about how telephones work as a way to rip off, or
'skim the cream' as it was called, the profits in the long distance
business. 

I hope if you did not previously know that MCI got its start in a
small storefront in Joliet, Illinois in the middle 1960's as a radio
sales and repair business that you found that part of my article
interesting at least. 

How SPRINT (S)outhern (P)acific (R)ailroad (I)nternal (N)etwork (T)elecom 
got its start is an interesting story also for another time. It
literally consisted of three or four people who maintained the
telecom department of the railroad back in the late 1960's, and a
modernization of the phone network which left a lot of excess
capacity the railroad decided to sell to other large businesses. 
Sprint got started about three or four years after MCI was established. 

I talked once to an MCI attorney; it might have been about 1975 and
said something about 'sleaze' ... and I remember his response well.
He said, "Ha! listen to this 'shill for AT&T' talk about how sleazy
our company is! Are you trying to say that back in 1903 or thereabouts
AT&T was going around with clean hands that they washed in Holy Water?" 

No, I was not ... sadly, they all have a history that is less than
honorable in their early days.

That's it from me for today!


PAT

------------------------------

From: Jason Redi <jredi@bbn.com>
Subject: Final CFP: MONET Issue on Energy-Conserving Protocols for Wireless 
Organization: BBN Technologies
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 20:42:24 GMT


 ************************* CALL FOR PAPERS *************************

    Baltzer Science Publishers in cooperation with ACM announce a
       Special Issue of the Journal on Special Topics in Mobile
                 Networking and Applications (MONET)

                                  on

           ENERGY-CONSERVING PROTOCOLS IN WIRELESS NETWORKS

                         With Guest Editors:

                         Dr. Chiara Petrioli
                        Politecnico di Milano
                    Chiara.Petrioli@elet.polimi.it

                           Prof. Ramesh Rao
                 University of California, San Diego
                            rrao@ucsd.edu

                            Dr. Jason Redi
                           BBN Technologies
                             redi@bbn.com


OVERVIEW:

The  most  important  factors  which  will determine  the  success  of
wireless mobile communications are  the utility and convenience of the
end user devices.   Paramount to both of these areas  is the amount of
energy  that is  required  by  the mobile  devices.   As most  current
battery  research  does  not  predict  a  substantial  change  in  the
available energy in a consumer  battery, it is important that wireless
devices be designed for energy-constraint.

There has been substantial research  in the hardware aspects of mobile
communications  energy-efficiency,  such  as  low  power  electronics,
processor sleep-time,  and energy-efficient modulation.   However, due
to   fundamental  physical   limitations,  progress   towards  further
energy-efficiency will become mostly a software-level issue.

Recent work has  shown that substantial reductions in  the energy used
by   a   mobile  communications   protocol   are  achievable   without
dramatically   affecting   its   performance.  Legacy   communications
protocols, quality  of service,  overhead and protocol  complexity are
just a few areas that are  beginning to be re-evaluated in the context
of energy-usage.


SCOPE:
This  special  issue  will  concentrate  on  software,  protocols  and
algorithms at the MAC-layer and above which are designed to reduce the
amount  of energy  used  by the  wireless  transceiver.  We  encourage
approaches which are physical-layer independent.  The following topics
are examples of areas which may be considered:

  - energy-conserving access protocols
  - ARQ variants for the reduction of energy
  - effects of energy-conservation on the higher-level protocols
  - APIs for evaluating energy requirements in applications
  - scheduling and resource reservation which include energy as a
    primary constraint
  - QoS guarantees for energy-conservation
  - energy-conserving routing techniques
  - re-evaluation of classical techniques under energy constraints
  - characterization and modeling of energy-saving methods

PUBLICATION SCHEDULE:
      Manuscript Due: May 30, 1999
      Acceptance Notification: August 30, 1999
      Final Manuscript Due: October 30, 1999

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES:
Authors should email  an electronic Postscript copy of  their paper to
redi@bbn.com by  May 30,  1999.  Submissions should  be limited  to 20
double space  pages excluding  figures, graphs and  illustrations.  If
email  submission is  impossible  then  six (6)  copies  of the  paper
(double-sided if possible) should be sent by the due date to:

       Dr. Jason Redi
       Mobile Network Systems Group
       BBN Technologies
       M/S 6/2a, 10 Moulton St.
       Cambridge, MA, 02138
       redi@bbn.com

------------------------------

From: EdLeslie@EDU.YorkU.CA (Ed Leslie)
Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines'
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 05:57:29 GMT
Organization: @Home Network Canada


On Fri, 30 Apr 1999 09:52:16 +0200, Patrick Burke <patrick.burke@
ascom.ch> wrote:

> L. Winson <lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
> telecom19.57.5@telecom-digest.org...

>>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know why card reader type
>>> phones never really caught on?   [good points snipped]

>> Damn good question.  I myself would rather have the security of
>> inserting a card and entering just my pin number rather than entering
>> (and remembering) a whole series of numbers.

><...snip...>

> In Switzerland and Holland, at least, card phones are standard. In
> fact, it's sometimes impossible to find a coin phone. Cards can be
> purchased at many locations and I've never had a problem finding
> one. 

Here in Bell Canada territory, we are "well served". :-) Properly
done, benevolent dictatorship *can* be a "Good Thing". :-))

All of a sudden, a "few" years ago, *every* payphone was replaced with
the new "Millenium Phone" model, which includes a card reader which
not only will read/accept prepaid "phonecards", but which will also
accept the "generally more expensive (i.e. *very* more expensive)"
credit cards.

While this was probably oveall a "good thing", I have to try to ignore
the fact that it probably was all done under the auspices of the
"Canadian Regulated TeleCommunications regulated system" (i.e. there
was a horrrendous capital cost in replacing each and every payphone in
Ontario and Quebec, which simply became part of the "sanctioned" part
of the costs of providing telephone services in the
government-regulated area). 

I now carry a pre-paid phone-card, as do my children, for use in
payphones -- and the payphones actually were software upgraded to
"beep" at you if you did not remove your card after use -- I gather
the major frustration was that a user would forget to remove their
card after making a call (they obviously are not as "Scottish" as am
I). :-))


EdLeslie@TorFree.NET <Ed Leslie>

------------------------------

From: Louis Raphael <raphael@cs.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: NANP Running Out of Numbers in 8+ Years
Organization: Societe pour la promotion du petoncle vert
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 21:19:04 GMT


Tom Lager <pteng@ptd.net> wrote and PAT commented:

> Divide the present country code 1 into two parts, or perhaps three
> parts if Canada is to be included, known as 12, 13, and 14. Anyone
> calling within their own 'country code' would continue to dial seven,
> ten or eleven digits as they do now. To call the other side of the
> USA, 'international' dialing procedures would be used, as we do now
> with '011'. 011 would continue to be 'international, anywhere else'
> while 012 was one part of the USA, 013 was another. People in other
> countries calling here would instead dialing country code 1 start
> dialing country code 12, 13, etc, plus the ten digit number.

I'm not sure how the ITU would react to the idea of adding another
country code, but with your scheme, I suppose that it wouldn't even be
necessary to involve them, as all would still be under +1. Canada and
those parts of the Caribbean in the NANP could also split off, which
would probably relax the problem for many years more. On this side
(Canada), it would also make it possible to continue the old-style
conventions about area codes and prefixes, and to keep situations like
Ottawa-Hull 7-digit dialing (still in use, I think), even though the
two are in different area codes.

If this were to be done, however, something would have to be done
about cross-border 1-800 numbers. Also, I suspect that it might not be
very good for Canadian businesses that deal a lot in the US, as many
Americans would probably be "confused" by having to dial an obviously
international call. Maybe it would be possible to set aside one or two
area codes in each of the countries for businesses that want
"national" phone numbers. Of course, that would just be starting
another problem :-(.


Louis


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 800 numbers would continue to be sorted
as they are now. Either they would go one place or they would to another
place. The only people who would have to worry about it are the carriers
who assign them in the first place. For some percentage of their
existing database they would need to make changes over a period of a
couple years. Maybe 800-xxx-xxxx which now really goes to 415-xxx-xxxx
would have to be set to go to 012-415-xxx-xxxx. 

Regards the ITU, we would still basically be one code, namely '1'; I
guess it could be explained in other countries saying that when
calling the USA, you still dial '1' but then for the eastern side you
dial a '2' plus the number, and for the western side you dial '3' and
the number. That would give us all the way up to '19' for still more
divisions, etc as years went along. 

I think the reason my plan is more workable is because it does not
involve trying to make all the switches deal with 8 digits. Most calls
would still be 7 digits; we are just changing our definition of what
constitutes an 'international call', something the switches are able
to deal with now easily anyway. 

Regards the business people who would be annoyed with the 'international
call' aspect of the whole thing, I remember when my grandmother many,
many years ago was so disgusted with the conversion from manual service
to dial as, she claimed, were all the 'old people', because their eye-
sight was not that good and they had to squint to see the dial. Somehow  
we survived, as the world rushes on.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 07:12:16 -0700
From: Dave Stott <dstott@2help.com>
Subject: Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call!


Our esteemed moderator wrote:

>[Moderator's Note: Sorry to disappoint you, but your son is
>wrong. UCLA did not invent the internet ... *I* did. 

Sure you did Pat!  We all know Al Gore invented the Internet -- he
told us so (and politicians in the Clinton Administration aren't
allowed to lie because it's the most ethical administration in
history!).  Next you'll probably be telling us that dropping bombs on
a country and blockading harbors in Europe is no different than doing
the same thing in SE Asia and it's not _really_ war and so on, and so
on, and so on.


Phone: (480) 831-7355
  Fax: (480) 831-1176
 Free: (888) 43-2HELP


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yep, that's what I am telling you about
the European 'police action' going on and its similarities to the 'police
action' in Vietnam which *finally* ended twenty-some years ago, after
going on for a dozen years. Remember the day back in the middle seventies
sometime when the newspapers glumly announced that, 'until yesterday,
the longest lasting war involving the United States was the Revolutionary 
War, which went on for eleven plus years .. as of yesterday, the war
in Vietnam became the longest lasting war, and there are no signs right
now that it will end any time soon ... ' Of course we had no internet
back then and quick communication among people was very difficult.

Regretably (in one sense) Vietnam was 'so long ago' that about half of
our population in the USA was either not yet born or too young to now
remember much about it. Unless you are at least in your late thirties
or older, you have no real idea of the horrors *in this country* as
a result; the almost daily protest demonstrations by huge numbers of
people, the riots, the endless propoganda from both sides and all
directions, etc. I was interviewed on National Public Radio one night
in 1968 when we were having the worst of the riots -- that year! -- in
Chicago. The National Guard was out in force, throwing tear gas bombs
at people who were throwing rotten eggs at them, etc. There were three
of those great big military conveyences, the things that run on tread-
mills like a tractor, with a large cannon on the front and a place for
soldiers to hide inside -- what do you call them? -- in the parking
lot of the Museum of Science and Industry, about a half block from
where I lived. And everywhere you went, one or two National Guardsmen
standing on the corner. I went downtown one day with my roomate; we
were standing on the platform waiting for the commuter train to arrive.
A National Guard guy was standing a bit away down the platform. I just
glared at the guy ... my roomate said 'what are you thinking about?' I
said, 'I am thinking that what I would like to do is when the train
starts pulling in, walk down there and shove him off the platform 
right in front of it.'  Of course I did no such thing and my roomate
counseled me, don't have ugly thoughts ... but that was the nature of
Vietnam; before it was over, everyone was having ugly thoughts all day
and bad dreams all night.

If the office building you worked in or the school you went to was not
evacuated at least once a week because someone pulled the fire alarm
switch or there had been a telephone bomb threat, you were lucky. If
you were able to go a month at a time without walking down the street
and finding yourself in the middle of a group of war protestors who
were getting clubbed on the head by police with tear gas cannisters
going off all around you then you were fortunate. If by 1972 or so
you did not know personally at least one or two guys who were killed
in Vietnam, you were extremely lucky. And if you wanted to check your
luck that day, you could always call a phone number in Washington DC
where the cheerful public servant answered the phone 'Vietnam Death
Registry' and would put you on hold while she checked the lastest
paperwork. This is too depressing to write about.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Jim Willis <jwillis@drlogick.com>
Subject: Comcast @home
Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 19:48:13 -0400


I guess that is why the cable folks SHAW, in Barrie place a condition
on you subscribing to their service called guess what Shaw@home. In
the fine print in their advertisements - you must subscribe to basic
cable. More money for them and no problems like this ... No we don't
have cable, we use satellite for our TV pay for 12 months get one
month free - fixed price for 12 months, no increases or negative
numbers on next year's bill. Cable seems to be the only service I know
that if you pay for a year you don't get a year.


jwillis@drlogick.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Their making you sign up for basic cable
has nothing to do with helping them to keep their records straight; it
has to do with greed. Someone said I should quit picking on Comcast; 
after all, there are lots of other cable companies out there doing (to
be charitable about it) weird things. 

Yeah, there sure are. Consider TCI .. now there is an example of a 
fine, ethical, well run company (trying not to snicker) ... go look at
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/rfiteljx.html ... if you want to accept
ARRL's version, and I see no reason not to, TCI is breaking Part 15
big time, and totally ignoring the FCC's request to bring themselves
into compliance. When the FCC caught them, TCI agreed to take the
offending devices out of service, and then once the FCC left the
scene TCI went right back to business as usual, making a total
shambles out of the 80 meter band. 

Not only is TCI ignoring the FCC's request to remove the offending
equipment, they are actually installing more of it and making things
worse than ever. You want to hear telephone calls from sometimes
up to ten miles away? Tune 80 meters when you are in TCI's territory.
Oh, don't worry about eavesdropping laws; 80 meters is a public place
where anyone is allowed to listen or use amateur radio equipment. You
obviously cannot repeat what you hear; it is not a *broadcast* or a
transmission intended for the public. TCI likes to think of itself
as a phone company in some places as part of its cable offerings.
Wouldn't you love having your phone calls heard up to ten miles
away on the radio?    PAT]

------------------------------

From: Louis Raphael <raphael@cs.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Card Reader Type Public Phones
Organization: Societe pour la promotion du petoncle vert
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 01:58:52 GMT


Stephan Geis <Stephen.Geis@itu.int> wrote:

> FYI in Europe (at least in Switzerland and France) card readers are
> standard on public telephones.  In Switzerland the readers can now
> handle both magnetic stripe cards and the chip-bearing "smartcards"
> which are widely used not only for prepaid cards for phones, but for
> bank cards and electronic purses.  The readers on phones (unlike those
> on ATMs here) are not able to swallow miscreant cards, however.

Most of the Bell public phones in Quebec and maybe 1/2 of those in
Ontario are similar. Incidentally, credit cards cannot be used in
other phones, unlike in the States.


Louis

------------------------------

From: Ed Ellers <edellers@mis.net>
Subject: Legislation Passed to Tranform Satellite TV
Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 19:07:18 -0400


Monty Solomon quoted from a {New York Times} story:

"The legislation passed 422 to 1, with the lone dissenting vote cast
by Representative Robert Brady, Democrat of Pennsylvania."

Some reports say that he voted against the bill at the request of a
labor union, but don't say which one.

"It imposes a new "must carry" requirement backed by cable companies
that mandates that satellite companies like Echostar Communications
and Direct TV that decide to offer any local signals must also offer
all local programming in those markets by 2002."

Which means that only a few large cities will get "local-into-local"
service between that time and the time that enough capacity can be
obtained using spot beams to carry all stations in a reasonable number
of cities.  (Incidentally, anyone with a small satellite dish can
still get whatever off-air TV s/he already had access to, either by
connecting the antenna directly to the TV set or -- if the TV is
fairly old or cheap -- connecting the antenna to the antenna input
that *every* DBS receiver has.  By contrast, cable customers who want
to watch stations not on the cable system have to add an A/B switch.)

"The legislation also follows recent court decisions that had
threatened to reduce the attractiveness of satellite television to
consumers by restricting its ability to broadcast signals of the major
networks. Current law permits satellite companies to beam network
signals if those customers cannot receive local stations using rooftop
antennas."

Actually, the law requires that a given home not be able to receive a
signal below a certain specified intensity.  If you *can* get that
minimum level, but you have a lot of ghosting or neighborhood
interference, tough toodles.

"(The legislation) reduces the copyright fees on satellite companies
for carrying superstation and distant network stations."

Which are a lot higher than those levied on cable systems.  Frankly, I
don't see why either should have to pay copyright fees, since all a
cable or satellite provider is doing is assisting a viewer in
receiving a broadcast signal, and the providers have no control over
the content of that signal.

"And it eliminates a provision in the current law that requires
consumers of cable television to wait for three months after they
cancel their cable service before receiving satellite service."

That provision only applies to network signals.

------------------------------

From: dlore@iname.com
Subject: Cordless Phone Help Wanted
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 00:56:45 +0300


Please suggest a cordless phone that does not allow other cordless
phones by accident or on purpose, to listen in to my conversation,
or to bill their call to my phonebill (by their phone getting a dial
tone or connecting to/from my cordless' base)

ASAP ... 220v would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your time,


dlore@iname.com

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #68
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sun May  2 18:00:06 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA12794;
	Sun, 2 May 1999 18:00:06 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 18:00:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905022200.SAA12794@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #69

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 May 99 18:00:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 69

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New Pay Scheme Seen Fueling Mexico Cellphone Growth (Tad Cook)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Danny Bateman)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Alan Pugh)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Robert Eden)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Ron Bean)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Billy Harvey)
    Re: Cordless Phone Help Wanted (James Gifford)
    Re: Cordless Phone Help Wanted (support@sellcom.com)
    Re: Canadian Credit Card Phones (John R. Levine)
    Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising (L. Winson)
    Re: 4+8 ? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go) (Leonard Erickson)
    Star TAC 3000 Loses !!!!! (Jon 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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: New Pay Scheme Seen Fueling Mexico Cellphone Growth 
Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 20:56:26 PDT
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)


By Fiona Ortiz

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Beginning on Saturday, Mexican mobile
telephone users will no longer have to pay for calls they receive, a
change that analysts and industry leaders say will throw fuel on an
already explosive market.

"This will definitely detonate the mobile telephone business," said
Roberta Lopez, spokeswoman for tiny northern Mexico mobile phone
company Pegaso.  "People can control their costs now and more people
will get cellular phones."

Mexico's three largest mobile telephone providers -- Telcel, a
subsidiary of phone group Telmex ; Iusacell and a group of four
northern Mexico cellular firms -- all saw 90 percent growth in 1998.

Growth this year of 50 percent to 90 percent or even more is possible
with the "calling party pays" system, industry leaders say.

Pegaso, for one, hopes the new system will be one factor helping to
increase clients from some 2,000 people to as many as 100,000 this
year in the border city of Tijuana.

Mexico is one of the last Latin American countries to abandon a system
under which phone clients had to pay for every call they receive. The new
system was approved on April 16 by the Federal Telecommunications
Commission (Cofetel).

All cellphones will be switched to the new system automatically. Local
calls to mobile phones -- long distance dialing and charges will not
change -- will take a new 044 prefix and will cost 2.50 pesos (about
$0.27) per minute, a rate close to the Latin American average.

Analysts said the new scheme would boost cellular subscriber growth
because it will be cheaper to own a cellular phone and because
providers would be able to market mobile phones to lower-income groups
without running the risk that people would receive a lot of calls they
could not pay for.

"It changes the credit risk profile for cellular companies, improves
it substantially," said Patrick Grenham, an analyst with Salomon Smith
Barney in New York.

Telmex, which has almost all the land lines in the country and about
65 percent of the cellular market, fought the new pay scheme with a
court injunction, arguing that the traffic of calls to cellphones
would diminish.

But analysts do not see telephone traffic going down.

"Local traffic is generally inelastic. People will absorb a higher
cost," said Brad Radulovacki, an analyst with Flemings Research. Traffic
will go up because the new rates, "encourage people to keep their
cellphones on all the time."

Grenham said tht, when people do not have to pay for incoming calls they
start to see their cellphones differently and give out their number to more
people, generating more traffic.

Radulovacki said calling party pays has generated subscriber growth in
Chile, just in the two months since it was introduced.

But analysts said benefits for phone companies would not be seen for
several months here because Mexicans are confused about the new system.

"It's not clear," cellphone user and businessman Melvyn Trejo said.

Like many other cellphone clients here, Trejo thought that the option
to stay with the old system meant that callers to cellular phones
could use or not use the new 044 prefix depending on whether they
wanted to pay for the call.

He did not know that he would have to ask his provider for a new phone
number if he wanted to stay with the old system. Few will make that
choice, analysts and industry leaders said.

Enrique Chavero, marketing director for a group of four cellphone
providers in Northern Mexico, said only about three to five percent of
users will opt to retain the old system.

"Nobody is going to stay with the old system. Why decide to keep your
bill higher?" said Grenham.

------------------------------

From: Danny Bateman <danny.bateman@telrad.co.il>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 05:17:41 GMT
Organization: Telrad Ltd.


When I was studying at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Israel we were
on two networks, csnet and bitnet.  This was back in 85-86.  I used to
send an email to myself using either the csnet or bitnet address.  It
would arrive as much as a few hours later, after it had gone though a
number of gateways, reached somewhere in Wisconsin and came all the
way back here.


  Danny Bateman (Danny.Bateman@telrad.co.il)
  ETAS Team Leader, M1 Software, Telrad Telecommunications  

------------------------------

From: amp@pobox.com (Alan Pugh)
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 23:42:58 -0500
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> And remember the email to FTP gateways? Long before the web, when a
> file transfer meant FTP'ing to a site -- if you could get through the
> congestion, and if you were allowed to use FTP at your location --
> many people were unable to obtain the files they wanted. This was
> especially true when the earliest BBS's started networking with us
> through Fidonet gateways. So we had scripts that would accept incoming
> mail and parse it looking for the requested files, gather up the files
> and send them back by email. It was a workaround when FTP was not
> available between networks, etc. The person got the requested files
> a couple days later, but that was better than not getting them at all.
> The Telecom Archives Email to FTP script used to get a hundred calls
> a day right after I put it up several years ago, now it gets maybe one
> or two inquiries weekly while the web site got two thousand hits today.

Email to FTP is a precursor to the web IMO. It was a rather useful bit
of automation that I recall using several times to get E-Texts from
Project Gutenberg. I guess it's little used these days because people
aren't really aware of it and the whole internet thing is a little
more immediate than it used to be when even dedicated circuits were
dog slow compared to the average dialups today.

Your idea of "Internet Pioneers" is an interesting concept. I'm
interested in early history of the net. I suppose I have a general
interest in technological history as the articles about early
telephony are a subject I look forward to in the Digest.

I'm not exactly someone who could be called an "internet pioneer", 
but I'm one of the few folx I know these days with a working email 
address that's over 11 years old. Perhaps that would qualify me as
an early carpet bagger? :)


alan pugh
E-mail: amp@pobox.com

The easiest way to maximize the amount of information over a
communication line (in the theory's terms) is to hook up a random
noise generator to it.

------------------------------

From: Robert Eden <rmeden@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 04:40:28 GMT


All this reminiscing of Bitnet and UUCP made me think of the Bitnet
NetZine (before it was called such) NUTWORKS, published by
"Brent@Maine" (.bitnet of course).

A quick search engine search reveals a complete archive at
http://www.ccl.kuleuven.ac.be/~luc/nutworks/ (I was missing 1-15,27,28!)

And for the where are they now set, Brent became a lawyer.. who would
have thought ... http://www.brittonlaw.com/main/people/people.html

To further discussions ...
How many networks made up the "Internet" in the 80's?

UUCP    - (anyone update the maps lately?)

BITNET  - IBM RSCS (?) based
          (btw Pat, I think @ originated here... IIRC, the syntax
           for RSCS messages was "tell user at host message" )

TEXNET  - DECNET based network in Texas
          (ahhh VAX Phone from aTm to SW Texas State...)

ARPA    - TCP/IP

FIDONET - BBS network...

AX.25   - Ham Radio.. (a better name escapes me)

and many more ...

------------------------------

Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 22:36:33 CDT
From: Ron Bean <rbean@execpc.com>


>[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:...

>Now-days, you sign up with an ISP and ask him for a shell
>account and you get the strangest look from him, almost a sort of
>'what are you trying to pull, anyway' attitude. Most will flatly
>refuse to give a shell account.

For the record, my ISP still gives *every* customer a shell account,
and encourages people to use it to fix certain kinds of problems (it's
not hard if you're willing to do a little homework).

> Perhaps you also recall the old 'bang address' style where we said
> something like 'ucbvax!username@mit' ... with those you read the
> address from the @ sign to the left.

A few years ago I thought I must be one of the last people to have one
of those addresses (it was on a PC running unix in a guy's basement,
with UUCP to his employer and an extra phone line where people like me
dialed in). About four years ago I signed up with a commercial ISP
like everyone else.

One thing almost nobody remembers is that in those days, the purpose
of a .signature file was to provide a couple of alternate bang-paths,
in case some machine in the middle of your usual path went down for
some reason.

Many people started their suggested path with "[harvard|rutgers|ucbvax]!...",
since those were well-connected, and most people knew a path to at
least one of them.  I remember one summer when rutgers went down and
didn't come back up until school started in the fall.

But UUCP was not the internet; it was for those of us (actually a
majority) who didn't have access to the internet.

> And remember the email to FTP gateways?

Yep, used them occasionally. Being at a UUCP site meant no FTP (and
being very envious of those who had it).

That was also the reason for having ".binaries." newsgroups.  Now that
anyone can get FTP access, they really should be obsolete.

UUCP could take days to get a usenet article across the country.  I
remember my amazement the first time I got an email reply from
California to something I had posted to usenet the previous day!  And
later I got an overnight reply to another posting from someone in
England. By then most of usenet was moving via the internet, and
distance didn't matter anymore.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 09:49:23 EDT
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
From: Billy Harvey <Billy.Harvey@thrillseeker.net>


>> You were the only one to respond David. That tells me where the inter-
>> est is in that idea of mine.     PAT]

> I was intrigued by the idea but wasn't sure what the organization would
> achieve, short of stuffing feathers in the caps of the folks who had
> email back then

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I think about it now, one achievement
> might be to permanently capture the memories people have of those days
> so that they will be preserved.

One of the several lists that I mostly lurk on is called "CYHIST
Community Memory: Discussion list on the History of Cyberspace".  I
have learned man things from some of the pioneers that post.  Anyone
interested can take a peek at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/cyhist.html .


Billy

------------------------------

From: James Gifford <gifford@nitrosyncretic.com>
Reply-To: gifford@nitrosyncretic.com
Organization: Nitrosyncretic Press
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Help Wanted
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 06:00:11 GMT


dlore@iname.com wrote:

> Please suggest a cordless phone that does not allow other cordless
> phones by accident or on purpose, to listen in to my conversation,
> or to bill their call to my phonebill (by their phone getting a dial
> tone or connecting to/from my cordless' base)

Most newer cordless use a security feature to lock out "roamers," by
giving both the handset and the base unit a random security code that's
changed each time the handset is replaced in the base.

As for overhearing, I think the 900 MHz cordless digitals are as immune
to snooping as any consumer-grade gadget gets.

> ASAP ... 220v would be greatly appreciated.

Most cordless units use a plug-in power transformer, and finding or
making a 220V replacement should be trivial.


| James Gifford                                 |
| Associate Editor, Computer Telephony Magazine |
|  =  Speaking only for myself in this case  =  |

------------------------------

From: support@sellcom.com
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Help Wanted
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 17:20:31 GMT
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com


dlore@iname.com spake thusly and wrote:

> Please suggest a cordless phone that does not allow other cordless
> phones by accident or on purpose, to listen in to my conversation,
> or to bill their call to my phonebill (by their phone getting a dial
> tone or connecting to/from my cordless' base)

> ASAP ... 220v would be greatly appreciated.  

You might want to look at the Siemens 2420 at http://www.sellcom.com
however there are many (if not most all) of the modern cordless phones
on the market with the features that you require.


Steve 
http://www.sellcom.com (Opinions expressed, though generally
wise and accurate are not officially positions of SELLCOM)

Telecom and internet networking hardware / Security products
Cyclades / Siemens (May REBATE) / Y2K ODIU support / Zoom / Palmer Safes
(Tech assistance provided without warranty express or implied)

------------------------------

Date: 2 May 1999 02:41:14 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Canadian Credit Card Phones
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> All of a sudden, a "few" years ago, *every* payphone was replaced with
> the new "Millenium Phone" model, which includes a card reader which
> not only will read/accept prepaid "phonecards", but which will also
> accept the "generally more expensive (i.e. *very* more expensive)"
> credit cards.

More expensive for you, perhaps, not for use US-ians.  The last time I
was in Toronto, I called home a few times and used a variety of pieces
of plastic in those phones.  I used my LEC calling card, my Sprint
foncard, and my Visa card, each to make a call home of about three
minutes.  The LEC card was billed by AT&T on my local phone bill as a
calling card call for about four bucks.  The Sprint call showed up on
my Sprint bill (printed specially for the occasion since I don't
otherwise make any Sprint calls these days) for three and change.  The
Visa card showed up on my statement for about 81 cents.  Quite a
difference, eh?


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson)
Subject: Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising
Date: 2 May 1999 16:34:11 GMT
Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS


Thanks for posting that bit of MCI History.  Very interesting and
informative.

In recent years, I read in the newspaper (buried in the back of the
business page) about how MCI was cited by the FCC or FTC for unfair
business practices.  Their ads and billboards often are deceptive, not
fully quoting the price of service, or including minimum charges buried
in fine print.  I think even their current TV campaign still does that.

I also know that MCI got a lot of business through lawsuits.  They would
demand to be included in a service arrangement with govt agencies or
threaten to sue for unfairness.  It was easier for the Telecom
coordinators to give in and avoid the aggravation.

------------------------------

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: 4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go)
Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 12:51:16 PST
Organization: Shadownet


John David Galt <jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com> writes:

> Quoth John R. Levine:

>>> http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

>>> VERY informative ... they now project total exhaustion between 2006
>>> and 2012, with their best guess being 2007... 8 1/2 years to go! NO
>>> FCC action recommended regarding 10-D or 11-D dialing yet. No timetable
>>> for expansion yet. No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing
>>> patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
>>> deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

>> Of course it won't be the solution.  There are plenty of unused ten
>> digit phone numbers. 

> I like the idea of a 12 digit total length, but it seems to me it
> would make sense to make each of the parts variable-length.  If we
> allow (for example) either 2+10, 3+9, or 4+8, then major cities can go
> 2+10, allowing everyone to keep their existing 10-digit numbers (while
> still having all _kinds_ of room for expansion).

There's *already* an expansion plan, and has been for some time. The
N9X codes are reserved for this expansion. 

All NXX codes will be converted to 4 digits by adding a 9 as the second
digit. That is ABC will become A9BC. This will provide almost 8000 new
area codes (A[0-8]BC). 


Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com	<--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com	<--last resort

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 16:47:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jon Solomon <jsol@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Star TAC 3000 Loses!!!!!


<FLAME ON>

This is about the third time I have had to have my Star TAC fixed
for pixel problems. What goes on is that the "8" appears without the top
pixel ... "on" appears the same way ...

SNET tells me that Motorola should give me a new phone, but I haven't 
seen that ... 

At the least, Motorola pays the FEDEX bill both ways ...

I remember someone else having problems with Motorola cellular
phones ...

Just thought I would add that to the fire ...

<FLAME OFF>

The good side to this is that SNET has offered to temporarily suspend
my phone service during the time that the phone is in Motorola's
hands. Way to go SNET.


 --jsol

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #69
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue May  4 00:07:15 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA15011;
	Tue, 4 May 1999 00:07:15 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 00:07:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905040407.AAA15011@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #70

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 May 99 00:07:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 70

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #181, May 3, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Book Review: "High Noon on the Electronic Frontier", Ludlow (Rob Slade)
    Slamming or Honest Mistake? (Andrew Hoerter)
    Re: A New SPAM Problem (Tara D. Mahon)
    Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines (Herb Stein)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Dave Garland) 
    Archives Update: Opera Browsers Now Included (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 3 May 1999 12:11:18 -0400
From: Angus TeleManagement <angus@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #181, May 3, 1999


************************************************************
*                                                          *
*                      TELECOM UPDATE                      *
*    Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin    *
*                  http://www.angustel.ca                  *
*                 Number 181:  May 3, 1999                 *
*                                                          *
*    Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by     *
*             generous financial support from:             *
*                                                          *
*  AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/   *
*  Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/         *
*  Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/       *
*  MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/     *
*  Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ *
*  Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/       *
*  TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/    *
*                                                          *
************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE: 

** Shaw Buys Fundy Cable Operations
** ISPs Demand Cable Access, Charge Bad Faith
** CRTC Cautions Payphone Suppliers
** Nortel Says Canada's Taxes Drive Out "Scarce Skills"
** Mobility Companies Pass Three Million Subscribers
** BCE Buys Infosat
** Losses Grow at Iridium
** Clearnet Raises $729 Million
** CRTC Exempts Local Resellers From Equal Access
** Telehop to Sell Optel Local Service
** Number Portability For 500, 900 Service Codes
** Bell Pay Equity Hearing Ordered
** Open Text Ups Its Bid for PC Docs
** QuebecTel Restructures Local Rates
** Macdonald Dettwiler to Operate BC OnLine
** NBTel Employees Authorize Strike
** Consultants Elect New Officers
** First Quarter Financial Results
      BCE
      Nortel
      MetroNet
      MTT
** Secrets of Call Center Outsourcing

============================================================

SHAW BUYS FUNDY CABLE OPERATIONS: Fundy Communications has agreed to
sell its New Brunswick/Nova Scotia cable television business (192,000
subscribers) and fiber network to Shaw Communications for $460
Million.

** Fundy shareholders have formed a new company, C1 
   Communications, which will continue Fundy's commercial 
   telecom business in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia and 
   extend it to Quebec and Ontario. C1 Communications has 
   rights to use 50% of Fundy's former fiber capacity. 

ISPs DEMAND CABLE ACCESS, CHARGE BAD FAITH: The Canadian Association
of Internet Providers has asked the CRTC to order cable TV companies
to stop offering Internet service unless they allow other Internet
Service Providers to use their facilities by June 1.

** In July 1998, the Commission ordered cablecos to allow 
   third party access "as soon as possible." CAIP charges the 
   Canadian Cable Television Association with deliberately 
   delaying the process and negotiating in bad faith.

CRTC CAUTIONS PAYPHONE SUPPLIERS: Noting that it has received hundreds
of complaints and inquiries about the tactics of competitive payphone
suppliers, the CRTC has issued a checklist of the payphone rules and
consumer safeguards set by Decision 98-8. (See Telecom Update #140)

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/news/releases/1999/r990426e.htm
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1998/8045/D98-08.doc

NORTEL SAYS CANADA'S TAXES DRIVE OUT "SCARCE SKILLS": Nortel CEO John
Roth says that while Nortel remains committed to Canada, high taxes
make it hard for the company to attract and retain scarce skills.

** The company has appointed former U.S. Defense Secretary 
   Frank Carlucci as Chairman and changed its official name 
   from Northern Telecom Ltd. to Nortel Networks Corp. 

MOBILITY COMPANIES PASS THREE MILLION SUBSCRIBERS: The Mobility Canada
companies report 109,000 net activations in the first quarter, up 79%
from last year, raising their wireless subscriber total to
3,098,000. Mobility pagers now total 841,000, a 13% increase.

BCE BUYS INFOSAT: BCE Media Business Solutions is paying $25 Million
to buy Infosat Communications, a Vancouver-based provider of mobile
and fixed satellite services. BCE says it will retain Infosat's
President (Brian Nixon), staff, and brand.

LOSSES GROW AT IRIDIUM: Iridium posted losses of US$505 Million in the
first quarter on sales of US$1.45 Million. The satellite phone
supplier has 10,000 customers worldwide; its head of marketing, Mauro
Sentinelli, is leaving the company.

CLEARNET RAISES $729 MILLION: Clearnet Communications has raised an
additional $730 Million in debt, increasing the total raised in equity
and debt since 1994 to $2.75 Billion.

CRTC EXEMPTS LOCAL RESELLERS FROM EQUAL ACCESS: In Telecom Order
99-379, the CRTC exempts resellers of local phone service from the
requirement to offer equal access to all long distance providers.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0379.htm 

TELEHOP TO SELL OPTEL LOCAL SERVICE: Telehop Communications, a
Toronto-based long distance carrier, has signed an agency agreement to
offer local line service from Optel Communications to its customers.

NUMBER PORTABILITY FOR 500, 900 SERVICE CODES: CRTC Public Notice
99-12 sets a framework for a CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee
study of number portability for Canadian 500 and 900 Service Access
Codes. To take part, register by May 10.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-12.htm

BELL PAY EQUITY HEARING ORDERED: The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
has ordered hearings into a pay equity dispute between the
Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union and Bell Canada. Bell
had asked the Tribunal to delay action until the Supreme Court rules
on its application to have the case dismissed.

** Bell and its striking employees, members of CEP, will 
   resume bargaining today, under a media blackout.

OPEN TEXT UPS ITS BID FOR PC DOCS: Open Text Corp, a Waterloo,
Ont.-based software maker, has increased its bid for PC Docs Group
International to $205 Million. Hummingbird has also bid for the
Toronto firm, which makes information management software. (See
Telecom Update #173)

QUEBECTEL RESTRUCTURES LOCAL RATES: CRTC Telecom Order 99-378 approves
restructured QuebecTel local rates of $23.50 (residential), $49.50
(business), $66.50 (business multi- line), and $46 (Centrex plus).

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0378.htm

** Overruling objections from Videotron, the Commission has 
   deregulated Quebec-Telephone and Telebec's Datapac, X.25, 
   packet data, and frame relay services. (Telecom Order 
   99-392)

   http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0392.htm

MACDONALD DETTWILER TO OPERATE BC ONLINE: MacDonald Dettwiler is
paying the BC Government $55 Million for a 10-year license to operate,
develop, and market BC OnLine, the government's electronic information
and payment system.

NBTEL EMPLOYEES AUTHORIZE STRIKE: Members of the Communications,
Energy and Paperworkers Union at NBTel, now negotiating a new
contract, have voted to authorize strike action.

CONSULTANTS ELECT NEW OFFICERS: On April 30, the Canadian
Telecommunications Consultants Association (CTCA) elected new officers
for the 1999-2000 year. Henry Dortmans (Angus Dortmans Associates) is
President; Jeff Laskoski (Sierra Systems Consultants) is
Vice-President; and Teresa Eng (Sovereign Technologies) is
Vice-President and Secretary- Treasurer.

http://www.ctca.ca

FIRST QUARTER FINANCIAL RESULTS:

** BCE: BCE reports baseline earnings of $367 Million, up 14% 
   from last year. Revenue (excluding Nortel Networks) rose 
   7%. Bell Canada's revenue from data services was up 16%; 
   from long distance, down 9%; from local services, up 
   marginally, based on a 3% increase in total lines. BCE 
   Mobile revenue per subscriber dropped from $60 to $50 per 
   month, in part because of difficulties with prepaid 
   billing.

** Nortel: Nortel Networks' net income from operations rose 
   59% to US$222 Million, offset by a US$692 charge related 
   to the Bay Networks purchase. Sales increased 26% to US4.4 
   Billion; sales in Canada rose 3%.

** MetroNet: Compared with the previous quarter, access lines 
   in service increased 51% to 89,700; revenue increased 17% 
   to $41 Million; EBITDA losses declined 2% to $9.06 
   Million.

** MTT: The Nova Scotia telco (formerly MT&T) posted net 
   income of $12.0 Million, down 26% from last year. Revenues 
   rose 2.3% to $173.4 Million; long distance revenues fell 
   14%

SECRETS OF CALL CENTER OUTSOURCING: The May issue of Telemanagement,
available this week, reports front-line experiences in building
effective partnerships with call center outsourcers. Also in
Telemanagement #165:

** Rob Slade examines what we have learned -- or failed to 
   learn -- from the Melissa computer virus.

** Henry Dortmans tells how Yogi Berra helped him set right 
   a puzzlingly dysfunctional call center.

To subscribe to Telemanagement call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 
or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html.

============================================================

HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE

E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca

FAX:    905-686-2655

MAIL:   TELECOM UPDATE 
        Angus TeleManagement Group
        8 Old Kingston Road
        Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7

===========================================================

HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE)

TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There 
are two formats available:

1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World 
   Wide Web on the first business day of the week at 
   http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html

2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of 
   charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to 
   majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should contain only the two words: subscribe update

   To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail 
   message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address]

===========================================================

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus
TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further
information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please
e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225.

The information and data included has been obtained from sources which
we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no
warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy,
completeness, or adequacy.  Opinions expressed are based on
interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If
expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a
competent professional should be obtained.
============================================================

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 08:30:43 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "High Noon on the Electronic Frontier", Peter Ludlow
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKHGHNON.RVW   990320

"High Noon on the Electronic Frontier", Peter Ludlow, 1996,
0-262-62103-7, U$32.50
%E   Peter Ludlow ludlow@well.com
%C   55 Hayward Street, Cambridge, MA   02142-1399
%D   1996
%G   0-262-62103-7
%I   MIT Press
%O   U$32.50 800-356-0343 manak@mit.edu www-mitpress.mit.edu
%P   536 p.
%T   "High Noon on the Electronic Frontier"

I found Ludlow's account of the creation of this volume very
interesting.  Wanting material for a course on philosophical issues in
cyberspace, he turned first to the more academic readings in computer
ethics.  Having read most of these myself, I am not surprised that the
project was not a raging success.  Undaunted, he turned to a very
interesting source for content: the net itself.  Actually, the
versions appearing in the book primarily appeared in print journals of
one sort or another, but usually developed drafts on the net first.
In any case, the authors all have direct experience of online life,
and opinions that are generally more passionate than academic.

The material covers many points of view, and, where possible,
contrasting positions are presented.  For example, a well researched
and articulate couple of papers, one an official institutional brief,
is just slightly less impressive when someone comes along and points
out that the quotations cited are taken very much out of context. 
Because of the personal nature of many of the documents, they are much
more readable and interesting than "surveys" or "position papers" with
all the juice drained out.  Given the informal nature of the texts,
Ludlow has done a very superior job of collecting the most articulate
of the available content, although, in an attempt to represent all
points of view, a few less convincing voices are included.  Not all
the articles are that good, but the number of pedestrian items of
standard magazine fodder are few.

The essays are grouped under the topics of intellectual property and
rights, system intrusion, encryption and privacy, censorship, and the
self online.  Intellectual property and system intrusion are covered
very well, with good presentations for opposing positions.  Encryption
is rather one sided, and the additional topic of privacy is not
addressed terribly well.  Censorship is likewise viewed from a single
perspective.

The section on self is the weakest in the book.  Most of the pieces
are personal, as might be expected, but also tend to deal only with a
single system, and do not get into larger, more conceptual, issues. 
Two do stand out: Julian Dibbell's rather classic "A Rape in
Cyberspace" and James DiGiovanna's excellent "Losing Your Voice on the
Internet" that deserves to be more widely known.

While there are some gaps that could be filled, overall this serves
the purpose very well: it is a good series of discussion starters,
written by people who know the online world well.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKHGHNON.RVW   990320


======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
           GOVERNMENT.SYS corrupted, reboot Ottawa? (Y/N)
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

From: ahoerter@netcom.com (Andrew Hoerter)
Subject: Slamming or Honest Mistake?
Organization: Netcom
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 14:28:56 GMT


Recently I got an up-close and personal view of just how tangled this
"consumer choice" idea has become in the telecom world ...

Prior to the 4th of April, I received both local and long distance
service from one company, which I'll call Company A.  On the 28th of
April, I received a phone bill from Company A with $5 of change fees
to alter my interstate and intraLATA carrier, which had suddenly
become Company B.

Having given no verbal or written authorization for this change to
take place, I called Company A to inquire what had happened.  They
informed me that on April 4th a letter of authorization was received
from Company B ordering the transferral.

Upon calling Company B, I learned that it wasn't really Company B's
problem, but rather Company C's (apparently C purchases trunk space or
billing services from B).  C's service department was closed over the
weekend, so this morning I called and finally got someone who agreed
to look into the matter.

After a three-way conference call between myself, the rep from C, and
another rep from A, it transpired that my phone number had somehow
become attached to a local business in my prefix which had an account
with C.  C's rep claimed that this must have been a mistake on A's
part for not realizing that my line was residential, while the A rep
contested that they were merely acting on the LOA from B, and that the
transfer charges on my bill were being charged by proxy on behalf of
C.

I never said the word "slam" once, but the reps from A and C proceeded
to argue (with me on the line) about what had happened, whose fault it
was, and whether or not I had in fact been slammed.  Finally the rep
from A decided to be more professional and simply asked for my desired
carrier, saying that she would take it from there.

I'm still not sure what happened or whether I was slammed, but I
definitely gained some insight into the degree of squabbling and
infighting between carriers for each customer dollar.  Perhaps placing
a freeze on my account would prevent this in the future, but I'm
unsure as to whether even that would protect against a LOA that
appears to be valid.


 -andrew | amh@pobox.com

"Head transplantation is not theologically inconsistent with any of the
 Catholic Church's tenets."
       -- Robert West

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A freeze would be a good way to start;
like so many other things relating to the telephone network these days
it would probably work most of the time, enough that you would not
have to worry about every agressive telemarketer that called you. Things 
are agressive and tough in the telecom business these days. Regardless
of how big the pie might have been to start with, I am thinking maybe
they have cut too many slices out of it now. Too many carriers, with
all their marketing services working for them, grabbing customers from
each other as quickly as they can. Prices have come down so much that
very few customers see any significant difference, regardless of which
carrier, sub-carrier, marketing agency or MLM 'downline' they go through
to purchase their long distance service. 

In another related item, I see where Qwest Communications in Denver,
and its recently acquired LCI International are being sued for about
25 million dollars by National Communications Network in Chattanooga,
TN, based on allegations by NCN that Qwest stole thousands of their
customers by illegally converting them from being NCN customers serviced
by Qwest to direct accounts of Qwest itself. I'll say more about this
in a day or so here. The lawsuit was filed in mid-February.   PAT

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 11:13:21 -0400
From: Tara D. Mahon <tara@insight-corp.com>
Reply-To: tara@insight-corp.com
Organization: The Insight Research Corporation
Subject: Re: A New SPAM Problem


Ben Bass <bbass@net.bluemoon.net> wrote:

> My employer received a number of unsolicited, junk faxes this
> morning.

Earlier this year we received a phone call from someone claiming to be
the "International Business Directory" asking us if we wished to
"renew our listing."  (Renew?  We never listed in the first place.  A
similar squirrel-y sales pitch for photocopiers begins like this:
"could you go over to your copier and check the model number for
me...".  Both sales geniuses expect a receptionist or intern who don't
necessarily know any better to answer the phone and give them the
information they need to make their pitch.)

When we asked several questions to probe further, we found out that
this is a directory of fax numbers and it costs around $144 to be
listed for two years.  The price includes a copy of the directory.  We
said no, immediately remove us from your directory entirely.  The
calls are definitely being made from a large call center operation,
you can hear the monotonous script echoing.

Then a few weeks later, we became innundated with unsolicited faxes.
Realtors, travel agents, vending companies, MLMs, work-at-home-get-
rich-quick etc.  They all go in the recycling bin.  Eventually, the
faxes thinned out and we receive maybe one fax per month now.

We have not been able to locate this fax directory, but believe our
information has been printed against our wishes.  If anyone is
familiar with this directory, please send me the details so we can
contact them.


Thanks,

Tara D. Mahon                   tara@insight-corp.com
The Insight Research Corp.  http://www.insight-corp.com    (973) 605-1400 phone


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh Tara, listen, by now some other
bunch of charlatans have purchased a copy of the book you were
asked to buy, and they are busy copying it all over so they can 
sell it as their fax directory. You will be listed forever in the
thing. About two years ago I found a copy of a fax directory that
someone had pitched in the trash as worthless, and took it home 
with me to look at. Guess what? It had an *old* fax number of mine
in it from six or seven years prior; a number that I had not had
for at least a few years. And as for the copy machine toner and
paper supply racket, I sure hope none of the readers here fall for
that one. Talk about social engineering!  The receptionist at a
large company gets a phone call that goes like this:

'Oh hi, honey, this is mumble.I handle the toner and paper purchases
for the copy machines.' (implying, but not actually stating at the
large company). 'Would you do me a favor and go get the serial number
and model number from the copy machine for me? I need to make sure
we have the right kind of toner and paper in stock.' The receptionist,
probably not the brightest person in the world herself goes to get
the information and supplies it to the caller. The next day, or
maybe a couple hours later a call comes for the person in the company
who purchases copy machine supplies. The caller is already armed with
all the details, etc and delivers a pitch saying they have been
authorized by the company (where you got your copy machine) to provide
you with the 'surplus inventory' if you want it for some price. They
have been running that scam for at least twenty years. 

Then there are the compilers of toll-free directories who gather their
data by just dialing one toll free number after another in rotation,
and writing down whatever answer phrase was given; i.e. 'Good Morning,
this is the Acme Universal Corporation.' Usually they have an autodialer
make the calls and tape record whatever is said in the first twenty
seconds or so before hanging up and moving on to the next number.
Then later the names are punched into the computer by people listening
to the little twenty second taped replies one after the other. Naturally
some of the responses are unclear, or perhaps the number does not answer
or was busy. If repeated automatic attempts to get something fail, 
then a human bean works on the leftovers.  So if your 800 number rings
sometime, you answer, and an anonymous man on the other end demands
to know, 'who is this, what company did I reach?' you will provide an
appropriate answer phrase, I am sure. Try not to be too profane.  PAT] 

------------------------------

From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein)
Subject: Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 16:37:19 GMT
Organization: newsread.com ISP News Reading Service (http://www.newsread.com)


In article <telecom19.65.1@telecom-digest.org>, Curt V <curt@insnet.com> 
wrote:

> Hey, as long as you are talking about lines to a house, I have been
> trying to find one of the old devices that Bell used to use which
> allows two POTS lines to be muxed together over one pair of wires so that
> they could actually be used at the same time.  I have an application
> that doesn't allow me to use a digital line (e.g., ISDN BRI) and I
> can't pull another pair of wires into the location.  Anyone have any
> idea where I can find one of those?

There were/are various different type of hardware. AML (added Main
line I believe) was, I'm pretty sure, analog. Western Electric made a
SLC-1 which may have been digital. AFAIK, Southwestern only uses
digital stuff today.

There was also a couple of different type of 5 and 6 channel carrier
systems used in the rural areas to drop a circuit at widely seperated
locations along a cable route. They were also probably analog.

I must be getting old. I used to design these things as an outside plant 
engineer with SWBT but that was 20 years ago.


Herb Stein
The Herb Stein Group
herb@herbstein.com
314 215-3584

------------------------------

From: dave.garland@wizinfo.com (Dave Garland)
Date: 02 May 99 22:44:50 -0600
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Organization: Wizard Information


Robert Eden <rmeden@yahoo.com> asked:

> UUCP    - (anyone update the maps lately?)

Still in occasional use.  This post will leave my server by UUCP.
There's a mailing list I can't unsubscribe from because the list
manager software looks in the header and retrieves a bangpath address
(wizinfo!dave.garland@inet-serv.com), then says it can't unsubscribe
me because I'm not subscribed under that name.

 RE> FIDONET - BBS network ...

Still around, though ailing. (I run one myself.) Remember when a
Fidonet address was the Internet's email gateway to most of Africa?


Dave  dave.garland@wizinfo.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I sure do remember when Africa was
served by Fidonet and as a sort of flip-flop to how things were
usually done with everyone coming into Internet gateways to send
email, we had to come to you guys to get email to Africa. It left
a situation where if someone on Bitnet wanted to send email to
Africa, they had to come through the Bitnet gateway to Internet,
*use the first line of the text area as an additional address line*
and there, give the Internet gateway address to Fidonet and the
appropriate Fidonet zone and node information. 

Regards your inability to get off the mailing list because of the
way the list software handles your request, I would suggest in this
one instance try writing the moderator or maintainer of the list
personally and ask if he would force it out for you. Or perhaps a
note to postmaster@inet-serv.com asking if he would kindly reformat
your address in a way his list server software would understand
and then just 'drop it in the top' ... I used to get that sort of
thing frequently for the Telecom Archives Email-FTP server where a
so-called 'smart mailer' along the way somewhere would see a UUCP
'bang' address and re-arrange things to suit itself as the mail was
passed along. The person would never get a reply from the archives
because my scripts could not understand who to respond to. But when
mail daemon returned it to me undeliverable, (I use extensive filter
rules saying what I want done with email from 'postmaster' 'mail daemon'
and several other automated things) I could generally look at the log
where his original entry was, and reconstruct it enough to make up
his request myself. Then, since my scripts for the server sit right
in one of my own directories, it was simple enough to just cat my
reconstructed file of his request down the pipe into the top of the
script. The script saw no difference between his stream and mine, it
just started filling the order. The only difference is I had to forge
his address to it, taking care to backslash or escape anything in
the address that might have had special meaning to the shell or caused
the script or shell to become confused. Then the log entry would say
response to (whoever) forced by ptownson and the date, etc. None of
that happens much now, with standarized addresses for most people.

Your example is one reason I *refuse totally* to automate the mailing
list for TELECOM Digest. Oh yes, I have some small scripts called 'add'
and 'delete' which do as they imply by appending $1 and $2  to the
list, as in 'add joeblow@spamhive.com "Joe Blow 050399". It automat-
ically mails out new user files, resorts the list in a way that 
sendmail seems happiest with, etc. If I say 'delete joeblow@spamhive.com'
that script will do grep - v the mailing list, meaning find everyone
on the list *but* Mr. Blow, leave him out of it, get rid of the empty
line where he used to be, show me who you deleted to make sure it is
correct, then cat my goodbye letter piped through sendmail to Mr. Blow
and be sure to add an X-warning saying that 'user ptownson set -f to
editor@telecom-digest.org'. Oh how I hate that and wish LCS/MIT would
quit doing it. The old version of sendmail never did it. I think
some sites are around that sit there watching for X-warnings that
'user set -f' (meaning a user forced sendmail to change his name and
address for that mailing, as I do when I sent things to you) so that
they can bounce the mail to postmaster@lcs.mit.edu to snitch on me
saying 'we do not accept spam mail'. I should not complain too much
I guess, I am the guest of LCS, not the other way around. 

I even got automated email once sent to abuse@telecom-digest.org and
cc'd to postmaster@telecom-digest.org asking them to 'make your user
ptownson quit spamming us every day'. I wrote back (forcing sendmail
to refer to me as 'abuser@telecom-digest.org') to tell the site I
would take care of it immediatly. "I will close Mr. Townson's account,
tar up his directories and send them to him in South America, where he
went when he ran off with all the money sent to him by people reading
Usenet. He Made Money Fast on the Web you know ... "  At the bottom of
the email I added a bogus little anchor to a non-existent link which
said 'click here to enter your credit card information'.

I got email back from a live person saying, 'something does not sound
quite right here ...'   I said, 'oh really?' ...

I do not want my mailing list automated. Too many things can go wrong.
I want it where I can see it, and look for problems with it and the 
people on it, even if I do have to administer it with scripts which I
manually start. I read add and delete requests from readers closely. PAT]

------------------------------

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Archives Update: Opera Browsers Now Included
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 23:00:00 EDT


As of today, the script which drives /telecom-archives/index.html
has been adjusted so that users of Opera 3.0 or later browsers can
participate. Any other browsers I should consider? I would think
that IE4/5, Netscape 4 or better, Opera 3.0 and Lynx would cover
almost everything. Should I look at Mosaic also? Feel free to dump
the script to your end if you want to look at it or consider it for
use on your own sites, etc. There are still a few buggy things in it;
I will discuss those later.  When I say /telecom-archives/index.html
of course I am referring to directories here on massis which answer to
calls made to http://telecom-digest.org

PAT

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #70
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue May  4 18:49:26 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA25339;
	Tue, 4 May 1999 18:49:26 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 18:49:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905042249.SAA25339@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #71

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 May 99 18:49:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 71

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Area Code For Wireless Urged (Monty Solomon)
    Telrad Key BX Info Needed - REWARD OFFERED! (Bruce Bergman)
    South America Question (Paul A. Rosenberg)
    Companies That Ignore Online Security Are Risking Customers (Monty Solomon)
    90# "Feature" on Your Phone? (Jeff Wu)
    Re: 4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go) (John David Galt)
    Re: 4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go) (Linc Madison)
    Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman)
    Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call (Linc Madison)
    Re: A New SPAM Problem (Pete Weiss)
    Employment Opportunity: Researcher-Broadband Wireless-Greece (J Dermousis)
    Last Laugh! No Sex, Please, We're Saudi Arabian (Mike Pollock)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Area Code For Wireless Urged
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 16:30:41 -0400


Mercury News ...

PUC: It's seen as an option for cutting `the number crisis.'

BY DEBORAH KONG
Mercury News Staff Writer

Fed up with the constant stream of new area codes, Californians have
repeatedly asked why state regulators can't just establish a separate
area code for wireless phones and pagers.

The answer: The federal government wouldn't allow it.

But now, in an effort to gain control of what it calls ``the ongoing
number crisis we face,'' the California Public Utilities Commission is
asking the Federal Communications Commission to waive its ban on
establishing different area codes for different technologies or
services.

While the request doesn't guarantee the PUC will adopt the
wireless-only area code idea, it would give it a chance to at least
consider the option, officials said.

It's one of several potential solutions being considered to stem the
tide of new area codes that have coursed into California in recent
years.

Area codes were first used here in 1947 -- the initial three were 415,
916 and 213. The number grew to 13 by 1997, when the demand for new
phone numbers exploded.

That year the number of area codes jumped to 18. Later this year, it
will hit 26. Officials predict the state will need another 15 by the
end of 2002.

As more and more people snap up wireless phones, pagers, fax machines
and second phone lines, the supply of numbers dwindles. Competition
has also meant that more companies are requesting numbers to serve
customers, but those numbers are only parceled out in blocks of 10,000
 -- even if the carrier has just a few customers.

No one happy

So far, the methods of introducing new area codes have pleased almost
no one.  Splits, which divide an area into two geographic portions and
assign one part a new code, have been used for the most part. Recently, 
the commission has also approved a handful of 'overlays,' including
ones in 408, 650, 510 and 415, which assign a new area code to most
new numbers and require 11-digit dialing on every call.

'Our staff daily field hundreds of communications via e-mail,
telephone and letters from members of the public complaining bitterly
about the number and pace of area code changes taking place in
California,' state officials said in the petition to the FCC. 'Without
additional authority from the FCC, we cannot develop a broad slate of
solutions to address the problem.'

An area code just for wireless phones or pagers, could 'reduce the
rate of demand that wireless carriers have on the existing area code,
and you might be able to slow down the rate at which you add new area
codes,' said Natalie Billingsley of the commission's Office of
Ratepayer Advocates.

The PUC request did not specify how such a plan would work. It would
probably apply to new numbers only.

Wireless carriers have opposed the idea of a wireless-only area code,
saying it could confuse customers and put companies at a disadvantage.
For example, a business person with a few mobile phones could buy some
more after the new code was introduced, and the new phones could be in
a different area code, said Tim Ayers of the Cellular Telecommunications
Industry Association.

'We don't seen any indication it's going to benefit either our
customers or the general public,' said Josh King, general counsel at
Cellular One, noting that a wireless-only code would be akin to
segregating companies into a 'substandard caste.'


Other carriers opposed

Officials at GTE Wireless and Pacific Bell Wireless, two other Bay
Area carriers, also said they were against the idea.

But the concept is one that makes sense to Los Gatos resident Bob
Lipp, particularly because of the mobile nature of wireless phones.

"The way it's going more and more with cell phones, you don't even
have to associate it with an area anymore," said Lipp, whose family
has two cellular phones. "Cell phones have nothing to do with
geography."

Others apparently have the same idea. At public meetings throughout
the state, one or more speakers invariably ask why state officials
have not created an area code just for faxes or wireless providers.

Setting up a separate area code for fax machines is impossible since
the telephone network can't tell the difference between a voice call,
which carries conversations and a data call, which carries
information, Billingsley said.


Previous requests

If FCC history is any indicator, the state's request may not be
granted. The commission has rejected previous requests for waivers to
the policy. One wireless-only area code, 917, exists in New York City,
but that existed before the ban, an FCC official said.

The PUC's Billingsley estimated it could be six to 12 months before
state regulators get an answer.

A national industry task force report has suggested other solutions,
such as mandatory 10-digit dialing everywhere. Another way to reduce
the need for new area codes is revise the way blocks of phone numbers
are handed out to telecommunications companies.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here we have a man (Billingsley) saying
the telephone network cannot tell the difference between a voice and
a data call, yet others such as Sprint claim that the distinction is
easy to make, regards prohibitions on using their least expensive 
rates on weekends for data calls.  So which is it?    PAT]

------------------------------

From: bbergman@my-dejanews.com (Bruce Bergman)
Subject: Telrad Key BX Info Needed - REWARD OFFERED!
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 23:35:12 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


I just recently picked up a Telrad Key BX system.  Yes, I know it's
old. ;-)

I'm looking for any source of installation and programming manuals for
this system.  I understand it is compatible/the-same-as a Symphony II
system, is this true?  How available are spare parts (boards,
desksets, etc)?

If anyone is willing to sell me their manuals, or knows of a place
where I can purchase them, or is even willing to photocopy them at my
expense, I'd really appreciate a lead.

Barring that, I have a couple immediate questions that someone might
know the answer to:

1) What is the pinout for the CO/trunk card connectors?

2) What is the pinout for the station card connectors?

3) What does the INIT switch do?  It's labeled only in one direction.
I presume that it puts the system in programming mode when up, true?

4) How do you get the attention of the programming monitor?  I've got
a terminal hooked up to the comm board, and I get SMDR output when I
reset the unit, but I can't seem to get into the programming mode.
What keystrokes are needed?  What about comm settings?  I'm using
1200/7/1/N right now.

Any help is greatly appreciated!  If you can answer questions 1, 2 or
4 and your info proves correct, I'll send you a $10 bill for your
time.  First person with correct info only!


Thanks everyone!

bruce
(here or at bbergman@bridgemedical.com)

------------------------------

From: Paul A Rosenberg <PROSENBERG1@prodigy.net>
Subject: South America Question
Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 20:03:11 -0500
Organization: Prodigy Communications Corp


I am looking for info on the communication systems of South America
for an investor project. Can you point me to sources of information? I
am looking for info on the design of current systems, coverage and
services, and the regulatory environment.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks,

Paul Rosenberg

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 03:45:20 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Companies That Ignore Online Security Are Risking Customers


By BOB TEDESCHI 

Companies That Ignore Online Security Are Risking Customers

To placate those who worry about how secure it is to shop online,
companies typically proffer the idea that buying on the Internet is no
more risky than giving a credit card to a waiter in a restaurant.


http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/05/cyber/commerce/03commerce.html

------------------------------

From: Jeff Wu <jeffwu@bigfoot.com.nospam>
Subject: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone?
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 17:01:01 GMT


I received this from a friend of mine.  I didn't even know this 90#
"feature" existed.  Are there other "features" like this on my phone
that I need to know about?

On the flip side, how do you go about using this feature in a legitimate
setting?  Can you use it in an emergency setting somehow?

I received a telephone call last evening from an individual
identifying himself as an AT&T Service technician who was conducting a
test on telephone lines.  He stated that to complete the test I should
touch nine(9), zero(0), the pound sign (#), and then hang up.
Luckily, I was suspicious and refused.

Upon contacting the telephone company, I was informed that by pushing
90#, you give the requesting individual full access to your telephone
line, which enables them to place long distance calls billed to your
home phone number.

I was further informed that this scam has been originating from many
local jails/prisons.

I have also verified this information with UCB telecom, Pacific Bell,
MCI, Bell Atlantic, GTE, and NYNEX.  Please beware.

DO NOT press 90# for ANYONE.  The GTE Security Department requested
that I share this information with EVERYONE I KNOW PLEASE pass this on
to everyone YOU know.  If you have mailing lists and/or newsletters
from organizations you are connected with I encourage you to pass on
this information to them, too.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Noise, Caused by Head Banging Against the Wall:

Dear Mr. Wu, thank you, and I know you meant well. For all intents
and purposes, the above scam does not exist. *If* you are on a centrex
type phone system, such as at a large company, or *if* the PBX at your
company is configured to allow 'call transfer' by flashing, dialing
a number and disconnecting, then *if* the telecom admin at that place
has not corrected the problem, then it is possible, but not probable
that *if* the 'prisoner' somehow connected to the extension phone of
a dim-witted person who knew no better (probably the only part of my
scenario so far with any real likelyhood of occurring -- the presence
of a dim-witted person, I mean) that person could be pursuaded to
do as told. And very few are the phone systems which sit there listening
for tones so that a mere 90# -- without flashing and bringing up new
dial tone first -- is going to accomplish anything. 

So let us assume the above events all happen, then the 'prisoner' will
be connected to a local telco operator (the 9 brought an outside line
at the company and the 0 raised the local operator, and the carriage
return or # at the end told the network to time out and not wait for
further digits, meaning instead of the zero serving as a flag that
some alternative billing method was being passed next, it was a signal
to raise the operator instead, you see) and this local telco operator
will proceed to run interference with whatever diabolical plans the
'prisoner' has to commit toll fraud.  The likelyhood of this happening
is only slightly greater for the receptionist or telephone operator
for a company, since they will see the call first most of the time and
most of the time the 'prisoner' will speak to the first person answering.

This will not happen on your home telephone, Mr. Wu, since residence
lines rarely are equipped with the feature allowing one to flash, dial
something and disconnect, transferring the caller elsewhere. There
*was* a few years ago a sort of hybrid centrex -- a special 'flavor'
offered to residential subscribers marketed under various names. I do
not think any telcos offer it any longer at all, not so much because
they were worried about the crafty prisoners, but because few people
bought it, and I think they ran into tariff problems in a couple
places; whatever ...  hanging up your receiver will just disconnect
your caller as well, so not to worry that you will get in trouble for
doing what the nice man on the phone asks you to do.

There is one other small problem with the scenario, Mr. Wu. In almost
all cases now, the only phones prisoners can use -- with the exception
of the few who run the prison's administrative functions, i.e. work in
the warden's office or the records department, etc (and they know full
well the consequences if *they* get caught screwing around, believe
me) are 'coinless payphones'. Mostly now from the local telco, instead
of a private company as they were until recently, the only dialing
option the prisoner has to dial zero plus ten digits. Period. An robot
asks his name, splits the connection so the inmate cannot hear or
speak, and annouces to the called party, "This is a collect call from
(recorded name), an inmate at the (name of prison or jail) in (town)"
... pause ... (recorded name), an inmate at (prison name) is calling
you collect. Will you accept the charges? Press one to accept, hang up
now to refuse, or hold for operator assistance." If the called party
accepts the call, the robot resumes the connection and annouces to
all, "go ahead with your call please". If the party refuses, the robot
breaks the connection and returns to tell the prisoner it was refused.

Aside from being humiliating to the inmate, which may or may not be a
good idea, the robot warns the called party of what is happening. So
effectively in fact, that even the dumbest of the dum-dums who sit
reading {Modern Romance Magazine} and painting their finger nails or
toe nails while waiting for a phone call to pass on to their boss or
co-workers isn't likely to misunderstand what is happening.

Given all those stumbling blocks, can 'prisoners' or others play this
little game? Yeah, I suppose so. I suspect it happened once, and some
frantic person circulated the original memo to the net of which you
passed along the umpteenth copy, Mr. Wu. Really, it all comes down to
social engineering as we like to call it, and the fact that from the
beginning, the telephone has always been an easy way to hide (even
telephones attached to computers!) while the caller says things and
acts out in ways he would not have the courage to do if all transactions
had to be handled in person where you were required to look at the
other person in his face, announce your intentions, and shake his hand.
A better memo to circulate is one saying, 'Always be in control of
your phone calls. Take control when the phone rings, and stay that way.
Do not let someone on the phone frighten you or influence you into
obeying them.'

Thanks for writing, Mr. Wu, and please don't be offended. I am like
this to everyone.  

So!! How come no one has sent me a copy of that memo warning employees
to never respond to messages on their pager from 212-540 numbers for
a couple years now. I used to see that one every week or so also.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: John David Galt <jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com>
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society
Subject: Re: 4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go)
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 18:11:17 GMT


You wrote:

> There's *already* an expansion plan, and has been for some time. The
> N9X codes are reserved for this expansion.

That's partly true.  The N9X codes are reserved for expansion.
However, to my knowledge that is the ONLY decision about expansion
that has been made so far.  Even the new length (and whether it will
be a fixed total length) are not yet known.

> All NXX codes will be converted to 4 digits by adding a 9 as the second
> digit. That is ABC will become A9BC. This will provide almost 8000 new
> area codes (A[0-8]BC).

Linc Madison proposed that plan and has been talking it up on his
areacode-info.com site to try to get people behind it.  That does
not make it official.  To my knowledge he has no connection with
Lockheed-Martin NANPA, which (or its successor) will make the actual
decisions.

The point of this is not to denigrate Mr. Madison or his plan, but
to open up a reasoned debate of how to minimize the confusion and
inconvenience to end-users that will result from any expansion.
Telling people that this debate is closed, when it's not, is
counterproductive to that end.


John David Galt

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 02:50:58 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: 4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go)
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.69.11@telecom-digest.org>, shadow@krypton.rain.com
(Leonard Erickson) wrote:

> John David Galt <jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com> writes:

>> Quoth John R. Levine:

> >>> http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NANP_Exhaust_Study.pdf

> >>> VERY informative ... they now project total exhaustion between 2006
> >>> and 2012, with their best guess being 2007... 8 1/2 years to go! NO
> >>> FCC action recommended regarding 10-D or 11-D dialing yet. No timetable
> >>> for expansion yet. No FCC mandate for implementing expanding dialing
> >>> patterns from 3+7 to 4+8 with a deadline for launch. How about
> >>> deciding IF 4+8 will be the solution?

> >> Of course it won't be the solution.  There are plenty of unused ten
> >> digit phone numbers. 

>> I like the idea of a 12 digit total length, but it seems to me it
>> would make sense to make each of the parts variable-length.  If we
>> allow (for example) either 2+10, 3+9, or 4+8, then major cities can go
>> 2+10, allowing everyone to keep their existing 10-digit numbers (while
>> still having all _kinds_ of room for expansion).

> There's *already* an expansion plan, and has been for some time. The
> N9X codes are reserved for this expansion. 

> All NXX codes will be converted to 4 digits by adding a 9 as the second
> digit. That is ABC will become A9BC. This will provide almost 8000 new
> area codes (A[0-8]BC). 

No, there is not already an expansion plan that has been decided upon.
The only thing that has been decided upon is that the N9X range is
reserved for future expansion.  The specifics of how that expansion
will proceed have not been finalized.

In particular, I would certainly hope that we will not be foolish
enough to go from 3+7 to 4+7.  Why?  Think "Los Angeles County."
Already has almost all of six area codes and good-sized chunks of
two more, not counting codes that haven't yet come into effect.
I think it would be much more sensible to "freeze" Los Angeles for
a while with the 20 or 30 or 40 area codes it will have by the time
the NANP runs out of 3-digit NPAs, rather than watch its NPA tally
climb into triple digits.  (Hey, how about a separate country code
just for Los Angeles??)

In short, when we get down to lengthening numbers in the NANP, I
believe we have no reasonable choice but to go to 4+8 instead of
4+7.  We can use whatever padding digit we please on the CSOD; I
use 3 for the mnemonic "add 9 and 3 to make 12!" but that's an
arbitrary selection.  Thus, ABC-DEF-GHIJ becomes A9BC-3DEF-GHIJ.

Of course, I also believe that we should all do whatever we can
to encourage the appropriate federal and state officials to do
something *NOW* about number pooling, so that the 2006 - 2012
date for longer numbers slips out a decade or several (depending
on which estimate you believe).


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Suffolk County, Long Island, NY
Organization: Excelsior Computer Services
From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman)
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 12:27:17 GMT


On Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:42:46 GMT, in comp.dcom.telecom
wdag@my-dejanews.com (W.D.A. Geary)wrote:

> I also think that we will _soon_ have to go to either 8-digit
> local numbers or _variable length_ numbers (terminating dialing

Here in Cambridge, Mediaone has 8-digit customer support phone
numbers.  Dialing the 8th digit is the same as dialing the first seven
digits, and then dialing the last one in response to the phone menu.
(E.g., 800/123-45678 is the same as dialing 800/123-4567 and then
dialing "8" in response to the first phone menu.) I don't know how it
works.


Joel Hoffman

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 02:18:27 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call!
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.66.1@telecom-digest.org>, Arthur Ross
<a.ross@ieee.org> wrote:

> (Moderator's Note describing a method of using 'international' codes
> for various sections of the USA deleted).

> Pat -

> If I'm not mistaken, this is quite similar to the way France works now.
> Local calls are 8 digits, first nonzero. Leading zero indicates "not
> local". Country is divided into zones (6, I think). To get another zone
> internally is "0N"(zone) + eight digits. Outgoing international is
> something like "00"+country code+local number. Incoming international is
> your own international access code+33(France)+N(zone)+eight digits.

You are indeed mistaken.  Local calls in France are 10 digits.  Calls
within any one of the five geographic zones in France are 10 digits.
Calls to other parts of France are 10 digits.  The leading '0'
indicates "place this call using France Telecom," but says nothing
about local or non-local.  It is analogous to a 101XXXX code in the
U.S., except that you must dial one for every call.


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Linc, what is your feeling about my
suggestion that we start using two or three different 'country codes'
instead, which would double or triple the supply of area codes while 
causing no major programming headaches, and allowing people to
continue dialing their local or 'semi-local' calls in the way they
have become accustomed?     PAT]

------------------------------

From: pete-weiss@psu.edu (Pete Weiss)
Subject: Re: A New SPAM Problem
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 11:39:39 -0400
Organization: Penn State University -- Office of Administrative Systems


On Mon, 03 May 1999 11:13:21 -0400, Tara D. Mahon <tara@insight-corp.com>
wrote:

The subject of SPAM (actually anti-SPAM) is the domain of the email
list SPAM-L

FAQ -- http://WWW.CLAWS-AND-PAWS.COM/spam-l/
mailto:SPAM-L-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM


Pete 

------------------------------

From: John Dermousis <derm@iit.demokritos.gr>
Subject: Employment Opportunity: Researcher 'Broadband Wireless' in Greece
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:13:39 +0300
Organization: NCSR "Demokritos"


The Institute of Informatics & Telecommunications of the National
Center for Scientific Research 'Demokritos' has an opening for a
position of Researcher B' (Senior) in the area of 'Broadband Wireless
Telecommunication Networks.

For more information:

English: http://www.iit.demokritos.gr/announce/Thesis99en.htm
Greek: http://www.iit.demokritos.gr/announce/Thesis99el.htm

------------------------------

From: Mike Pollock <pheel@sprynet.com>
Subject: Last Laugh! No Sex, Please, We're Saudi Arabian
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 14:43:48 -0400


RIYADH - (Reuters) Saudi Arabia has restricted dialling to more than
50 phone-sex services and was using a new technology to identify and
disconnect pornographic calls, a Saudi official said.

"We have implemented a new technology which makes it possible to
prevent and disconnect calls to these numbers," al-Eqtisadiah
Arabic-language daily quoted Saudi PTT Minister Ali bin Talal
al-Jehani as saying.

"We started monitoring these numbers six months ago and will continue
fighting this phenomena," Jehani, who is also Saudi Telecommunications
Co (STC) chairman, said.

Jehani said tracing the numbers of phone-sex services was a time-
consuming and complicated task, but added that it was worth it to
protect Saudi youth. The newspaper said Arab and Western satellite
television channels often advertise telephone numbers of phone
pornography services as "friendship lines."  It quoted a PTT official
as saying that telephone bills of some Saudi youths have skyrocketed
since television channels started running these commercials.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #71
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Thu May  6 01:24:03 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA28063;
	Thu, 6 May 1999 01:24:03 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 01:24:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905060524.BAA28063@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #72

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 6 May 99 01:24:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 72

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    17th Annual ICFC Conference (David Loomis)
    Re: 4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go) (Jim Bellaire)
    The Vortex Daily Reality Report and Unreality Trivia Quiz (L. Weinstein)
    Any Guesses as to What This All Meant? (phs3@watvm.uwaterloo.ca)
    The End of Privacy (Monty Solomon)
    Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone? (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Archives Update: Opera Browsers Now Included (Andy McFadden)
    Employment Opportunity: Switch Manager (David Eide)
    Re: Last Laugh! No Sex Please - We're Saudi Arabian (Majdi Abuelbassal)
    Re: Last Laugh! No Sex Please - We're Saudi Arabian (Mike Pollock)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 10:02:41 -0700
From: David Loomis <dloomis@ilstu.edu>
Subject: 17th Annual ICFC Conference


17th Annual ICFC Conference:

An International Communications Conference for Marketing, Forecasting, and
Demand Analysis

"Challenges for the New Millennium: Implications of Global Alliances and Local
Competition"

HOSTED BY ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY & THE INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS
SOCIETY (ITS)

SPONSORED BY NATIONAL ECONOMIC RESEARCH ASSOCIATES & PNR AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

June 15-18, 1999
Denver, Colorado USA
Conference website: http://www.icfc.ilstu.edu  (Preliminary Agenda Posted)

The ICFC Conference is an international communications conference for
marketing, forecasting and demand analysis.  The ICFC provides
state-of-the-art information and analysis of existing and emerging
issues as they pertain to communications forecasting, planning, demand
analysis, market research and cost analysis.

The ICFC is designed by industry experts specifically for Communications
 Professionals. The theme of the 1999 conference is Challenges for the
New Millennium: Implications of Global Alliances and Local Competition. 
In 1998 alone, proposed U.S. telecom mergers included Bell
Atlantic/GTE, SBC/Ameritech, AT&T/TCI and MCI/Worldcom.  Global
alliances included AT&T with British Telecom and Sprint with Deutsche
Telekom and France Telecom SA.  In addition to these strategic events,
competition has accelerated on the local level.  In the U.S., the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 and subsequent orders from the Federal
Communications Commission have laid the ground rules for local
competition.

In Europe, national carriers lost their monopoly status on January 1,
1998. These changes have far reaching effects on the industry and on
professionals in telecom and internet marketing, forecasting and
demand analysis. The 1999 ICFC is the ideal forum for understanding of
these issues in up-to-date research presentations by professionals in
communications marketing, forecasting, and demand analysis. If you
want one cost-effective conference this year targeted to your needs-
this is it!

INTERNATIONALLY KNOWN SPEAKERS

William J. Stewart, Vice President - Retail Market Strategies, US WEST
"The Evolution of Local Network Services"

Commissioner Martin Bangemann, Member of the European Commission
"Globalization and the Information Society: Impacts on the Economy and
Politics"

Henry R. Carabelli, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, ICG
Telecom Group, Inc.
"Market Opportunities For Emerging Communications Providers"

James H. Alleman, Professor - Telecommunications Economics, University of
Colorado "Implication of New Valuation Techniques on Estimation"

Dave Helmkamp, Technical Manager, Bell Labs
"A Futuristic Look at Residential Telecommunications Demand"

ORGANIZED BY REPRESENTATIVES FROM:

ADC Newnet
AT&T
Ameritech
Bell Atlantic
Bell Canada
Bellcore
BellSouth
Cincinnati Bell
Eurodata Foundation
GTE
ICG Telecom Group
Korea  Telecom
Lucent Technologies
MCI-Worldcom
Nokia
SBC Communications
Sprint
Telstra
US WEST 
WIK (Germany)


David G. Loomis                Email:  dloomis@ilstu.edu
Illinois State University           Voice:  (309) 438-7979
Department of Economics        FAX:  (309) 438-5228 
Campus Box 4200              
Normal, IL 61790-4200             
Web Site: http://www.ilstu.edu/~dloomis/

------------------------------

From: bellaire@tk.com (James Bellaire)
Subject: Re: 4+8? (was Re: The NANP Has 8+ Years to Go)
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 17:04:44 GMT


It was Tue, 04 May 1999 18:11:17 GMT, and John David Galt
<jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com> wrote in comp.dcom.telecom:

>> All NXX codes will be converted to 4 digits by adding a 9 as the second
>> digit. That is ABC will become A9BC. This will provide almost 8000 new
>> area codes (A[0-8]BC).

> Linc Madison proposed that plan and has been talking it up on his
> areacode-info.com site to try to get people behind it.  That does
> not make it official.  To my knowledge he has no connection with
> Lockheed-Martin NANPA, which (or its successor) will make the actual
> decisions.

Actually Linc Madison runs WWW.LINCMAD.COM , John Cropper and Eric
Morson run AreaCode-Info.com .

And I once got the credit for suggesting nxx -> n9xx , although that
seems too simple for anyone to take credit for.  Linc does deserve
the credit for expanding it out to 9+3=12.

I would also support a nxx -> n9nxx or n9nx-x type of transfer.  The
second pattern wouldn't work well if 'local' area codes didn't end
with different numbers - and we've already broken that possibility.

Still waiting for an 'official' decision - LM may get to make it,
but IIRC it isn't their responsibility to plan expansion - just
to assign numbers based on industry plans.


James Bellaire
Telecom Indiana
http://tk.com/telecom/

------------------------------

Subject: "The Vortex Daily Reality Report and Unreality Trivia Quiz"
Date: Wed, 05 May 99 00:14:56 PDT
From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@vortex.com>


Greetings.  As you might expect, I get a lot of e-mail, tending to run
the gamut in a variety of ways ... One frequent class of received
messages is requests for comments or advice on matters concerning not
only privacy but also a variety of related (and sometimes unrelated)
fields.  Since there tends to be considerable overlap between many
such requests, suggesting common points of interest, I've now launched
the audio program with the long name:

"The Vortex Daily Reality Report and Unreality Trivia Quiz"

It's available via RealAudio over the net, and is updated each day
from Monday through Friday.  Essentially, it's a daily brief blast of
(my) opinionated commentary, focusing on exposing the fallacies of
muddy thinking, crazy ideas, misguided concepts, and other related
areas that seem to be sending the signal/noise ratio of our society
down the drain.  As you can imagine, privacy issues are included, but
are but one of the topic areas covered.  These short (just a minute or
two) audio reports tend to be more opinionated than my National Public
Radio commentaries, and cover a much wider range of subjects.

Each of these short audio reports also includes an "Unreality Trivia
Quiz" question (and the answer to the previous program's question).
What's an "unreality" question?  Try it and see ...

These daily features can be heard via a link at the main PRIVACY Forum
page:

   http://www.vortex.com/privacy

or can be played directly via the RealAudio file URL:

   http://www.vortex.com/reality.ram

Please feel free to forward this announcement, or link 
to the associated program URLs, as you feel appropriate.

Comments, opinions, and ideas for segments are always welcome, of course!

Thanks very much.

 --Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
Moderator, PRIVACY Forum
http://www.vortex.com

------------------------------

From: <p.h.s.3@watvm.uwaterloo.ca>
Subject: Any Guesses as to What This All Meant?
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 08:13:49 -0400


Last Wednesday my wife called me to say that she couldn't make
outgoing calls.  Dialtone, yes; incoming, yes (we verified), complete
with CLID; outgoing would wait then get "Call did not go thru"
intercept.  She *was* able to dial the operator (for those who were
wondering how she called me!), who put her through to me at the
office.

Called Hell Titanic, and they told me there was "a cable problem" and
that it would be corrected by COB the next day.

During the day, wife talked to various neighbors, some in our NNX,
some not.  None had a problem. Finally we called repair again that
night to ask if this was reasonable, were assured that (a) it was, (b)
both our lines were shown as being affected, and (c) it was a
far-reaching problem, including both 703 and 804 numbers.

Next afternoon, service returns. So far so good.  BUT ... no CLID.  We
call, and nobody can verify that we had had an outage!  But they agree
(finally, grudgingly -- they seem to think it's likely to be dead
batteries in all 4 of our CLID boxes at once.  Curious.) to open a
trouble report, to be worked on the next day (Saturday).

Saturday AM bright and early, tech calls, says he's out at the crossbox,
and thinks it's a card problem.  Throughout the morning, he calls
various times, tries various things, no dice.  Finally he decides to
turn it over to another guy, who decides it's a specific card, and
that it's "related to switching us from analog to digital lines".  But
he doesn't have the mapping for the ports, must wait until Monday.

Monday afternoon, CLID finally returns.  But now we can't get over
26.4Kbps from a V90 modem.

Any guesses, other than that the left, right, and center hands at BA
don't know what they're doing?


TIA
 ...phsiii

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 02:12:08 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: The End of Privacy

   	   	 
LEADERS

  REMEMBER, they are always watching you. Use cash when you can. Do
not give your phone number, social-security number or address, unless
you absolutely have to. Do not fill in questionnaires or respond to
telemarketers. Demand that credit and data-marketing firms produce all
information they have on you, correct errors and remove you from
marketing lists. Check your medical records often. If you suspect a
government agency has a file on you, demand to see it. Block caller ID
on your phone, and keep your number unlisted. 

Never use electronic toll-booths on roads. Never leave your mobile
phone on-your movements can be traced. Do not use store credit or
discount cards. If you must use the Internet, encrypt your e-mail,
reject all "cookies" and never give your real name when registering at
websites. Better still, use somebody else's computer. At work, assume
that calls, voice mail, e-mail and computer use are all monitored.

http://www.economist.com/editorial/freeforall/1-5-99/index_ld5357row.html

------------------------------

From: Terry Kennedy <terry@spcunb.spc.edu>
Subject: Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone?
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 11:30:30 GMT


Telecom Moderator writes:

 
> robot asks his name, splits the connection so the inmate cannot hear or
> speak, and annouces to the called party, "This is a collect call from
> (recorded name), an inmate at the (name of prison or jail) in (town)"
> ... pause ... (recorded name), an inmate at (prison name) is calling
> you collect. Will you accept the charges? Press one to accept, hang up
> now to refuse, or hold for operator assistance." If the called party
> accepts the call, the robot resumes the connection and annouces to
> all, "go ahead with your call please". If the party refuses, the robot
> breaks the connection and returns to tell the prisoner it was refused.

Furthermore, at least here in New Jersey, the announcement also says
"Note: do not use features such as 3-way calling during this call or
your call *WILL* be disconnected" (that's the way it's emphasized in
the recording). This is part of the initial "You have a collect call
from inmate <mumble>..." greeting. [I get a lot of wrong numbers.]


Terry Kennedy		  Operations Manager, Academic Computing
terry@spcvxa.spc.edu	  St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
+1 201 915 9381 (voice)   +1 201 435-3662 (FAX)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are some peculiar, but interesting
things which can be done for 'special subscribers', especially very
large ones, which telco will not always admit to. Your example above
of 'use 3-way and you will be cut off' is one. Have you ever heard the
intercept message which says, "the number you have dialed can only be
reached from within the subscriber's premises". Some very large centrex
systems have certain extensions just used internally between various
departments, with no need for calls from outside and no desire to have
the line busy with an outside call. So somehow, the switch is able to
tell where it is getting the call from, and if it is not another exten-
sion on the same switch, off it goes for treatment and return to caller.
But the clever part is disallowing a call-transfer to that extension 
 from a phone that has an outside call on it. 

For example at the Fort Riley Army Base in Junction City, KS, a number
may be unreachable from anything but another 785-239 number. So you
dial the Fort Riley operator and ask for it. He cannot put it through
for you either, having picked you up on an outside trunk. He tries,
but it bounces back. So you call a friend at Burger King on their unlisted
239 number (239 is military only; 'tenants' at Fort Riley have 784
numbers but some of the tenants, like Burger King who do delivery service
on the base have a 239 number through some long standing arrangement
but they are all non-pub; the tenant's listed number is 784-xxxx) ...
you ask your friend, do me a favor please, transfer me to extension xxxx.
He tries, but guess what, the call bounces again. 

Now walk across the street to the north side of Eighteenth Street,
where Fort Riley officially starts, into the parking lot of the Amoco
station, where in a cluster of pay phones is one cubicle with just a
regular wall-mounted phone, *highly restricted* in where it can call,
only to other 239 numbers, no outside line, etc. and try it from there,
your call goes through fine. Try dialing the number on that phone from
a 238 Junction City pay phone in the stall right next to it, and 'the
number you have reached is in service for outgoing calls only. Have
your friend at Burger King use his 239 number to call the 'convenience
phone' there at Amoco, his call makes it through. A little notice on
the convenience phone says 'dial 411 for Base Locator' (what we would
call 'information'). The little sign also notes, 'in any emergency,
dial 911'. Calls to 911 are answered by the 301st Company of the United 
States Military Police; ditto with calls to 911 from 784 'tenant' phones.
911 from the payphone next to it, or any 238 number gets you the
Junction City Police Department. I found out the reason they can go
with a three digit number '411' or '911' on their system is because
they have no *four* digit extensions numbered 411x or 911x.  Some
arrangements can be quite creative.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Andy McFadden <fadden@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Archives Update: Opera Browsers Now Included
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 11:43:41 -0700 (PDT)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had someone write me who was using
a 'web-tv' setup to read the Digest and the Archives. I was really
curious about his 'reception' and asked for a report.  PAT]

Pat Townson asked:

> I would be interested in knowing more about the web TV display.

> You should have gotten a box asking for your name, a box asking if
> you wanted music or not, a display that was sort of blue background 
> with green letters saying good afternoon, etc ...

> Did you also get the music?

> Were you able to see the short movie I made talking about the Digest?
>
> What about the Year 2000 countdown clock?

I compared Netscape 4.51 (under Solaris 2.5.1) to a WebTV Plus.

On both:

(1) Page title appears.
(2) Want musical background on page?  Hit OK, music works great on WebTV.
  Don't have music plugin for Solaris, so can't compare.
(3) Asked to enter a name.  On the WebTV, all I see is:

	Please type in the name you would like to use
	here.  I will remember it on your future visits.  If

(4) Rest of page draws.

I get the same color scheme on both.  Both show the same name I entered
in the previous dialog.  All of the animated GIFs are happily animating.

Selecting the "Audio-Visual Page" produces different results.  Under
Netscape, I get two dialogs at once, each of which is wider than my screen.
This might be a side effect of using a virtual window manager.

On the WebTV, I get two dialogs, one after the other, each with the full
text.

On Solaris, I get two big "Null Plugin" blocks, because I don't have the
audio/x-pn-realaudio-plugin installed.  On WebTV, there's simply nothing
between the "Autobiography" link and the horizontal line.  BTW, the
"to return to the archives, close this window" doesn't make quite as much
sense on a WebTV, since WebTV doesn't have windows or a notion of forking
off a second browser.  Hitting the "back" button does what you'd expect.

Y2K Countdown works fine on Solaris, but doesn't update often on WebTV.
About once a minute it will update.  (Actually, it appears to update once
every 66 seconds.)  The line appears as an input text field, and can be
selected as a link, though it just reloads the current page without
updating the time.  Attempting to modify the contents of the field or move
the text insert position around fails, just like it does under Solaris.

The "telecom-chat-2" works.  Java isn't supported by the current WebTV
boxes, so the other chat room was inaccessible.


Andy

Send mail to fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden)
CD-Recordable FAQ - http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/ (a/k/a www.spies.com/~fadden)
Fight Internet Spam - http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ & news.admin.net-abuse.email


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks very much for that report. I
notice that Opera 3 browsers, at least as they come new, right from 
the download site, are also unable to see the movie, and get the null
plugin message, but the various Netscapes I have tested such as not
only my own, but the one at the library terminals work okay. You see
folks, I *am* serious about this; I would like to bring telecom into
Century 21 with multimedia -- for those who want it, the Lynx people
will always get everything I have to offer also as will the users who
still prefer anonymous FTP -- but I may have back down a wee bit, eh,
or maybe at least stop while I am ahead of things. A line from Milton 
comes to mind, his poem 'My Mind to Me a Kingdom is, No Pleasanter 
Joys I Find' .. the line, "Oppressed am I by things undone, oh that my
thoughts and deeds were one!" My sentiments exactly, Mr. Milton.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: 915604@candseek.com (David Eide)
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 13:28:43 CDT
Subject: Employment Opportunity: Switch Manager


I represent a new and fast growing company in the Worldwide IP
Telephony Market. We are seeking a Switch Manager. The position
description and Minimum requirements are listed below:

Switch Manager Primary Job Description: Aid in the design and
utilization of the PSTN Switched network.  The individual will have
telecommunications design skills and will be able to help bridge the
gap between the traditional PSTN world and the new IP telephony world.
Successful candidate will have management responsibility of all
equipment, circuitry, and facilities related issues at remote
location.

Minimum Qualifications: 4+ years switch experience 

Working knowledge of switch engineering Design and implementation
Multiple platform experience 
Routing table design Ability to operate
PSTN circuit test equipment Line configuration Desirable

Qualifications: Excel ISOS Software SS7 PRI/ISDN BS in
Telecommunications related field or technical equivalent IP telephony
exposure We offer a competitive compensation package (up to $80,000
plus bonus) Excellent benefits and an opportunity to get in on the
ground floor of a rapidly expanding business

Geographic Location of Position: New Jersey

If you know anyone that might be interested, please 
forward this to them or contact:

Dave Eide
Quest_IT
Voice: 609-584-9000 ext 273
Fax: 609-584-9575
Email: 915604@candseek.com

------------------------------

From: Majdi Abuelbassal <mabuelba@dnaent.com>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! No Sex Please - We're Saudi Arabian
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 11:34:09 -0500


I always enjoyed a touch of humor often in your posts, but the subject
title that you posted the above mentioned news item is totally
tasteless and lacks the respect that should be applied when handling
diverse cultures.

I know such a measure (taken by the Saudi Arabia telecom authority)
would not agree with the US traditional culture current norms. But,
you have to remember that this is a difference culture. Sex and Porno
business is not tolerated in those communities and authorities are
obligated to protect the society, especially, the youth from such
exposure. That what his parents expect. They might be not aware of
such a measure, but they do expect that their officials are doing
their jobs.

The same problems face my US community. The family puts a block on the
(900) lines to protect their youths and filter these sources. The idea
of sex has several meanings depending where you live in this globe. 
And believe me, there is sex in Saudi Arabia, but the context of sex,
there, happens within a matrimony. Between a husband and a wife, which
is the norm for THAT society, not the norm of THIS society.

I'm engaged to be married, and do not have children, BUT, I respect
the norms of my society (regardless if I'm Muslim, Christian, or a
Jewish) in the same time I live in a different society and respect
this society. And I'm all hopeful that we all have the same attitude.

The subject title reflected a stereotyping though that I think at this
time of social conflicts in the same society and across society, we
can do without.

I enjoyed the articles and exchanges on this forum. And as I said, the
frequent touches of humor that get posted, But, the subject title does
not reflect any of this but rather a misconception and stereotyping.


Majdi Abuelbassal            Phone:  (972) 671-1972
DNA Enterprises              Fax:    (972) 671-1581
Lead Design Engineer         Pager:  (214) 899-7884
1240 E. Campbell Road        Email:  mabuelba@dnaent.com
Richardson, TX 75081         www:    http://www.dnaent.com/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for writing. I really do
appreciate your feedback. I remember in high school (what a long
time ago!) that some guys would tell jokes which always began,
'What did Confucious say about (whatever)', and of course the punch
line was always something obscene or ridiculous.  Then one day a
student who was an immigrant from China asked everyone present,
How would you like it if I told some stories which always began,
'What did Moses (or Jesus) say about something', and then give some
idiotic or lewd reply to answer the question? Or suppose I asked
you why, if Jesus was born in Bethlehem, his mother gave him a
Mexican name? ... No one had any answers for him, not suprisingly.

I am getting to be an old man, Mr. Abuelbassal, but not too old to
learn new things once in a while. Thanks again for writing.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Mike Pollock <pheel@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! No Sex Please - We're Saudi Arabian
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 14:07:42 -0400


Gentlemen,

May I direct your attention to the following URL
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0070450 -- the relevant contents of which I will
summarize:

"No Sex, Please - We're British" -- a film released in 1973.

Directed by Cliff Owen

Writing credits Brian Cooke and Johnnie Mortimer

My title for the submitted article was merely a humorous play on
words, wherein I simply substituted "Saudi Arabian" for "British." I'm
a comedy writer. That's my job. No disrepect was intended nor should
be implied.


Mike

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #72
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat May  8 06:05:32 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id GAA10154;
	Sat, 8 May 1999 06:05:32 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 06:05:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905081005.GAA10154@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #73

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 8 May 99 06:05:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 73

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Government's Secret Y2K Plans (Babu Mengelepouti)
    Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising (William Brownlow)
    Telecom Firms Rush to Help Oklahoma Tornado Victims (Tad Cook)
    Book Review: "Telecom and Networking Glossary", Aegis (Rob Slade)
    Book Review: "ATM for Public Networks", Ronald H. Davis (Rob Slade)
    Re: Any Guesses as to What This All Meant? (W.D.A. Geary)
    Re: Any Guesses as to What This All Meant? (James H. Cloos Jr.)
    Re: Any Guesses as to What This All Meant? (LARB0)
    Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone? (Terry Kennedy)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 06 May 1999 02:18:25 -0700
From: Babu Mengelepouti <dialtone@vcn.bc.ca>
Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca
Organization: US Secret Service
Subject: Government's Secret Y2K Plans


If you are a student of history you will remember Jack Anderson broke
the Pentagon Papers/Daniel Ellsberg Story.

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, I remember that, and I remember
also several government high-ups claiming what a liar he was until
it got to where the government was not in a position to call anyone
a liar any longer ... but on with the current item of his, which 
appeared in several papers a couple days ago.  PAT]

http://www.desnews.com/cgi-bin/libstory_reg?dn99&9905030384
The government's secret Y2K plans 
By Jack Anderson, and Jan Moller 

The story our government doesn't want you to know was broken not by a
major TV network or national newspaper. It was encapsulated instead by
a front-page picture, which ran in February on the front page of a
small Virginia paper called "The Potomac News."

Captioned "Y2K riot training," the photo depicted a Marine private
trying to "force herself backward through a line of Marines during a
civil unrest exercise at Quantico Marine Corps base" outside
Washington.  In this case, unfortunately, a picture was not worth a
thousand words. In fact, a Quantico spokesman denied the story and
says the Marines were not, in fact, preparing for civil unrest. But
the reporter (and photographer), Dave Ellis, stands by his story.

"They told me what the exercise was about and then asked me not to
report it," he told us. "(The Marines) were worried that people would
think they were painting helicopters black and training for a huge
government crackdown at the millennium."

Such is the great dilemma behind preparation for the phenomenon know
as Y2K: No one knows exactly what will happen to our technologically
dependent lives when computer dates roll forward from "99" to "00" at
midnight on Dec. 31. Yet planning for the worst-case scenario carries
the danger of inciting panic and becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy.

This might explain why most military folks we talked to claimed no
knowledge of any Y2K-specific preparations. But we have learned that
the U.S. military is quietly planning a sophisticated social-response
network in case civil unrest should erupt. It was confirmed to us
recently by Sen. Robert Bennet, R-Utah, who chairs a special Y2K
Technology Problem Committee.

"This problem is everywhere and nowhere all at once," Bennett told
us. "We can only take a snapshot of portions of infrastructure and
attempt to provide the most accurate information we can. But there is
simply not sufficient time to understand where all the problems are
going to surface, so we must be practical and prepare for the worst."

In the worst-case scenario, public alarm spreads rapidly as vital
services such as health care, public safety and utilities are
temporarily disrupted by computer breakdowns. The stress, of course,
is on "temporary." Most experts suggest that people prepare for Y2K
like they might prepare for a winter storm.

Thomas Barnett, director of the Y2K security project, says his team
has been coaching every branch of the military -- indeed even the
Marines -- since last fall, planning drills and simulating Y2K
breakdowns. Just this week, Barnett plans to take some military and
FBI people to the World Trade Center to develop possible responses to
a stock market crash.

Later this month, the Federal Emergency Management Agency will also
hold a national "table top" simulated scenario drill -- similar to the
"war games" played out in the military -- which will pull together all
emergency and military resources. FEMA, along with the National Guard,
is responsible for coordinating state and local responses to Y2K
problems while the State Department will cover international social
problems.

But it is a small agency within the FBI, quietly created by Janet Reno
recently, that will be the federal authority for any national Y2K
repercussions. The agency, The National Domestic Preparedness Office,
is now up and running -- and preparing -- despite the fact they don't
officially exist; Congress has yet to approve its budget.

United Feature Syndicate Inc.

            -------------------------------------

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On more than a few occassions such as
the Pentagon Papers during Vietnam days Jack Anderson has correctly
told where things are at with our government. I believe him this time
also. I suspect they know by now that many government computer systems
are hopelessly screwed up and will never be fixed in time. Consider
just the IRS as one example: they have some well-publicized internal
problems of their own they are having a lot of trouble curing; stuff
like employees who steal from them (in effect the taxpayers); most of
their huge staff either flunking or getting barely passing grades on
tests of their knowledge of the monster-like tax code in the USA; I am
told the morale of IRS employees is slightly better than that of an
average postal employee (we have not yet heard of anyone 'going IRS'
however :) )... I suspect next year will be one of their worst years
ever at collection and compliance. Most people will realize they don't
have to pay and that for many months at least, there will be little or
nothing the IRS can do about it. I am *not* saying don't pay your taxes,
just that after the commmotions at the end of this year that go on
into next year and the number of instances in which records are wrong
or unavailable, etc I suspect many folks are going to be rethinking
a lot of what has traditionally been required of them by the government.

Perhaps you read recently that an IRS employee intercepted several
checks in the mail payable to 'IRS' and forged them to read 'I.R. Smith'
then cashed them. Now the hundred or so people whose checks were
cashed in that way have lawsuits pending against Internal Revenue
Service alleging fraud by the agency saying that the agency failed to
properly supervise its employee and thus is responsible for his actions.
I am told IRS has settled out of court with a couple of them, but has
a few others that are being quite stubborn about settling. Not only
IRS, but I would expect that many law enforcement computer systems are
going to be in a shambles early next year also. On the one side, false
arrests based on bogus information; on the other side, people getting
out of jail free. The thing is none of them would listen to anyone
five or ten years ago warning them repeatedly about this. I guess that
is not surprising though; I have never really expected anyone in the
government or at a large corporation to ever listen to or take advice
 from the people they serve. No reason they should start now.

And really, there is no reason they have to. After all, they have
those big tough Marines and lots of guns and things. You will do as
you are told next year, computer or no computer.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: wbrownlo@my-dejanews.com (William Brownlow)
Subject: Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 19:02:42 GMT


In article <telecom19.68.1@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote:

> Someone asked me to repeat this, so here it is. I originally wrote
> about this in {Telephony Magazine}, the journal which was very popular
> among telco employees until at least sometime in the early eighties. I
> do not hear much about them these days.

> Anyway, MCI, which means (M)icrowave (C)ommunications, (I)nc. first
> went business in the 1960's, under a different name. It was a small,
> storefront operation in Joliet, IL in the business of selling and
> repairing microwave communications gear. Then Bill McGowan got into
> the business, and partnered with the fellow who owned the little shop
> in Joliet, and the whole nature of their business changed in the next
> few years. A lot of you already know that part of their history.
>
                   <<BIG pair of scissors>>

> How SPRINT (S)outhern (P)acific (R)ailroad (I)nternal (N)etwork (T)elecom
> got its start is an interesting story also for another time. It
> literally consisted of three or four people who maintained the
> telecom department of the railroad back in the late 1960's, and a
> modernization of the phone network which left a lot of excess
> capacity the railroad decided to sell to other large businesses.
> Sprint got started about three or four years after MCI was established.

I remember SP Comm from the mid 70's.  Around '74 - '76 the computer
company I was working for sold Key-to-Disk systems to them for
billing.  If I remember correctly, you could only make calls to cities
that were served by Southern Pacific Railroad.  Signals traveled over
microwave along their railroad right- of-way.  It was sometime between
'76 and '78 they became known as SPRINT.


William "Bill" Brownlow
"While my employer has their opinions, I have mine.  Occasionally they
converge"
"Wise men are not wise at all time."  Emerson, The Conduct of Life, 1860


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, something like that. Sprint first
had service to about five or six big cities going south and west of
Chicago on the way to Los Angeles. In the olden days, when wires ran
on poles next to the railroad track, all major locations for Southern
Pacific Railroad were connected through a switchboard via those wires
along the tracks, strung for miles on end. SP comm sold its excess
capactity to companies in those areas only at first; then they decided
to call it Sprint a few years later as you pointed out. And Sprint
only served those same cities with business customers. Maybe it was
about 1980 that Sprint started accepting some residential customers.

They used the same kind of crude dialup system that MCI used. You had
to dial a seven digit number, get their dialtone and take it from 
there. They soon learned not to complete calls to 976 numbers also. :)
Both Sprint and MCI had 950 numbers also? Anyone remember those? They
were intended for use at payphones so the caller did not have to use
coins to reach the Sprint or MCI switches.

                        ---------------------

Want to hear something REALLY hysterical? Sprint is now mailing out
its bills in certain parts of the country (the bills issued by their
office in Tyler, Texas) with a slogan on the front of the envelope
saying 'Celebrating 100 years of service' ... yes, you read that
correctly ... Sprint is claiming to be one hundred years in business.

I received a copy of it the other day, the envelope with Sprint's
name and address in Tyler, Texas on the envelope and the '100 years'
comment on the front of the envelope. I am going try and scan it in
and put it on a web page. I thought it was just a riot that they can
lie about something ***that obvious*** and not get called to account
for it. If I can get it scanned in correctly I bet that web page
will get a huge number of hits. Watch for it soon; I will announce
it again when I get it online. A hundred years in business, geeze. PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Telecom Firms Rush to Help Oklahoma Tornado Victims 
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 08:29:43 PDT
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)


By D.R. Stewart, Tulsa World, Okla.
Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News

May 7--In the wake of storms that left more than 2,000 people homeless
in central Oklahoma, several telecommunications companies rushed in
Wednesday and Thursday to plug the breach in communications, company
officials said.

Nearly three days after tornadoes hit the area, some cellular phone
disruptions still were being reported, although much wire-based
service was said to be functioning.

New Jersey-based AT&T Corp. is donating phones, money, long-distance
calling cards and free operator assistance to help tornado victims,
while Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. and MCI WorldCom Inc. have
established emergency relief and communications centers at various
locations in the Oklahoma City area. GTE Corp., which has 113,000
access lines in the state, donated $20,000 through an affiliated
foundation to help disaster victims in Stroud.

"Our network is still performing. It has actually done quite well,"
said Southwestern Bell spokesman Karen Kay Speer. "The morning after
the tornado, we had six central offices (out of 275 in the state) at
Moore, Mulhall, Fort Gibson, Copan, Red Rock and Bennington operating
on (diesel generator) backup power. All except Mulhall are operating
today on regular power."

Southwestern Bell has established customer service centers at the Red
Cross Command Post at the First Baptist Church of Moore, 316 N.E. 27th
St.; and in Del City at the Del City High School at the intersection
of 32nd Street and Sunny Lane.

At the customer service centers, Southwestern Bell representatives are
offering, free of charge, the use of several pay phones, 300 wireless
phones, telephone number transfers, number cancellations, call
forwarding and call notes, company executives said.

"The only customers without service are the ones who don't have
homes," said Southwestern Bell spokesman Sue McCain. "We are
estimating 1,500 to 2,000 homes destroyed."

Southwestern Bell also moved four mobile cellular telephone towers
into the Oklahoma City area to expand the company's cellular
network. The cell towers have been placed at the First Baptist Church
of Moore; the intersection of 15th Street and Air Depot Road in
Midwest City; the intersection of 44th Street and Center Road in Dell
City, and the intersection of 125th Street and South Penn at the
Church of the Rock.

A mobile phone bank that includes 23 phone lines and one fax line in a
54-foot trailer was moved by MCI WorldCom to a disaster command post
at the intersection of Interstate 35 and 27th Street North in
Moore. Equipped with satellite uplink capability, the portable
communications center is permitting disaster workers, tornado victims
and emergency services providers to make free long-distance telephone
calls.

"In the wake of these devastating tornadoes, MCI WorldCom is glad to
be able to assist Gov. Keating's disaster relief efforts by offering
support to those who have been affected, helping connect them with
friends and family, insurance companies and relief agencies," said
John Barnett, president of wholesale services for MCI WorldCom, which
has 4,500 employees in Oklahoma.

MCI WorldCom's mobile telephone facility is self-sufficient, with
onboard generators that provide electricity, heating and cooling. The
trailer can provide emergency communications through its own satellite
hook-up.

Developed originally to assist victims of Hurricane Andrew in Florida,
the mobile rig has been used to assist victims of the Oklahoma City
bombing and the Northridge earthquake in Southern California.

AT&T donated 120 cellular phones and unlimited air time to the
American Red Cross chapters in Oklahoma City and Wichita. The company
also donated 600 pre-paid calling cards to the Red Cross to be
disbursed to victims in Oklahoma, Kansas and DeKalb, Texas, which also
was struck by a series of tornadoes.

Additionally, the AT&T Foundation and Pioneers contributed $25,000 to
support disaster relief efforts of the Red Cross and other agencies.

Within areas struck by the storms, AT&T Wireless and the AT&T Network
Disaster Recovery Team set up mobile calling centers in Oklahoma City
to permit victims to make free local and long-distance calls. To
assist people outside the disaster areas reach relatives and storm
victims, AT&T is waiving its normal operator service charges to
consumers having difficulty completing calls to Oklahoma and Kansas.

In Stroud, which also was hit hard by the tornadoes, GTE Corp.'s GTE
Foundation, based in Irving, Texas, donated a $20,000 check to the
American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund. The money will help families
and communities affected by a series of storms that swept through
central Oklahoma.

Out of 2,400 GTE customers in Stroud, 1,000 lost services.

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 08:32:14 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Telecom and Networking Glossary", Aegis
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKTLNWGL.RVW   990402

"Telecom and Networking Glossary", Aegis, 1999, 1-890154-09-1, U$9.95
%A   Aegis
%C   796 Aquidneck Avenue, Newport, RI   02842-7246
%D   1999
%G   1-890154-09-1
%I   Aegis Publishing Group Ltd.
%O   U$9.95 401-849-4200 fax: 401-849-4231 aegis@aegisbooks.com
%P   141 p.
%T   "Telecom and Networking Glossary"

The book is intended for non-technical newcomers to the telecom
industry, such as new hires, managers, suppliers, vendors, policy
makers, decision makers, investors, or anyone else.  (Why all of these
people are considered non-technical is a bit beyond me.)  Neither the
introduction nor the material itself seems to present a clear picture
of a specific area of concentration, yet the content is too narrow to
cover the full range of telecommunications.

Some terms, such as "accounting rate," are quite terse and rely on
undefined terms ("call termination charge") for full understanding. 
Others, such as "asynchronous transfer mode (ATM)," carry paragraphs
of trivia, but do not provide the promised "big picture"
understanding.  ISDN (integrated services digital network) gets a two
page editorial.  Some are missing obvious, but perhaps non-essential
details: why does ARDIS expand to Advanced National Radio Data
Service?

While relatively few entries are affected, it is worth noting that
numbers are spelled out and listed in alphabetical order, so that
"eight hundred (800) service" appears in the "E" section.  (There is
no entry for "toll free.")

The book contradicts itself in a number of places.  Application
program interface (API) is defined properly on page 14, but is clearly
misused in the discussion of Internet telephony.  We are told that
X.25 "data packets vary [in size] during the course of a transmission"
on page 16, but that "packets on an X.25 network are fixed in length"
on page 64.  (Neither of these statements is really accurate.)

A significant number of the terms are either relatively archaic (in a
fast moving industry) or probably outside the range of non-specialist
experience or operation, such as AUTODIN.

Acronyms usually are not defined, but point to the expanded phrase for
the explanation.  Not all acronyms are included, however.  For
example, synchronous digital hierarchy is listed, and the acronym SDH
is noted for it, but there is no entry in the glossary for SDH.  On
the other hand, "MIS" is simply defined as "Abbreviation for
management information system."

The choice of slang terms for inclusion is odd.  "Cells on wheels"
probably won't ever be used or heard except by cellular network repair
people.  "Choppiness" is both obvious and unimportant, as is "dial-a-
porn."  The only computer or Internet related slang is "spam."

As noted in a number of places above, definitions of computer or
Internet terms suffer in accuracy even in comparison to the rest of
the book.  The explanation for "Universal Resource Locator" (and the
more common expansion of URL uses "uniform") only refers to Web sites,
whereas the really important aspect of a URL is that it presents a
consistent addressing format for almost all Internet applications. 
(And there is no entry for "virus.")

Even given its advantages in size and price, I find it hard to think
of anyone who would benefit from this glossary.  I remember the days
when works of similar size and scope were handed out by the boxload as
freebies from networking and communications companies.  I don't recall
them being either this limited, or this error prone.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKTLNWGL.RVW   990402

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
            Real programmers use: COPY CON PROGRAM.EXE
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 08:40:57 -0800
Subject: Book Reviedw: "ATM for Public Networks", Ronald H. Davis
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKATMFPN.RVW   990404

"ATM for Public Networks", Ronald H. Davis, 1999, 0-07-134476-4,
U$59.95
%A   Ronald H. Davis
%C   300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario   L1N 9B6
%D   1999
%G   0-07-134476-4
%I   McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne
%O   U$59.95 905-430-5000 800-565-5758 905-430-5134 fax: 905-430-5020
%P   384 p.
%T   "ATM for Public Networks"

The book is aimed primarily at technical managers and communications
engineers.  It is technical and somewhat demanding, but not beyond the
reach of those without an engineering background.

Part one presents a general, conceptual picture of ATM (Asynchronous
Transfer Mode).  Chapter one gives a clear explanation of both circuit
and packet switching, the relative strengths and weaknesses, and the
need for integration.  The relation between ATM and a physical layer
such as SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) is described well in
chapter two, but the connection between ATM and B-ISDN (Broadband
Integrated Services Digital Network) is not quite as clear.

Part two deals with specific protocols within ATM.  Chapter three
gives an overview of the data and cell formats of the ATM layer, and
the various sublayers of the ATM Adaptation Layer (AAL).  ATM
signalling is described in chapter four.  The provision for operations
administration and maintenance is explained in chapter five.  Chapter
six looks at traffic management, with analysis of quality of service,
delay, and variation.

Part three examines the means of interconnection with existing
networks and services.  Circuit, trunk, and framing emulation for
existing services is reviewed in chapter seven.  Chapter eight
discusses IP over ATM while nine deals with TCP level functions.  The
Internet and its requirements are analyzed in chapter ten with a view
to the benefits ATM can provide as an underlying layer.  The chapter
concludes with a comparison of IP/SONET versus IP/ATM/SONET, but the
material is limited by the fact that IPv6 has not been used
significantly in the overview.  Chapter eleven covers voice and other
constant bit rate traffic carried over ATM.

Part four consists only of chapter twelve, looking at the future of
ATM with particular reference to coming technologies.

Resources for further study are given at the end of each chapter.  In
addition, the figures and illustrations are worthy of note.  All too
often, graphics are introduced either because they are expected, or as
space fillers.  The illustrations and tables in this work, while not
universally clear, generally do contribute to understanding of the
material.

At first glance, a lot of the content is full of equations and
alphabet soup.  That should not, however, scare you off.  The
intelligent reader, with a bit of telecommunications background,
should be able to gain a reasonable understanding of ATM, its
implications, and its use in heterogeneous networks.  "Hands On ATM"
(cf BKHDOATM.RVW) and "Understanding ATM" (cf. BKUNDATM.RVW) are both
good, but this is a very serviceable guide, and worthy of serious
consideration.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKATMFPN.RVW   990404

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com

------------------------------

From: wdag@my-dejanews.com (W.D.A. Geary)
Subject: Re: Any Guesses as to What This All Meant?
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 21:27:04 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


In article <telecom19.72.4@telecom-digest.org>, <p.h.s.3@watvm.
uwaterloo.ca> wrote:

> Last Wednesday my wife called me to say that she couldn't make
> outgoing calls.  Dialtone, yes; incoming, yes (we verified), complete
> with CLID; outgoing would wait then get "Call did not go thru"
> intercept.  She *was* able to dial the operator (for those who were
> wondering how she called me!), who put her through to me at the
> office.

> Called Hell Titanic, and they told me there was "a cable problem" and
> that it would be corrected by COB the next day.

> During the day, wife talked to various neighbors, some in our NNX,
> some not.  None had a problem. Finally we called repair again that
> night to ask if this was reasonable, were assured that (a) it was, (b)
> both our lines were shown as being affected, and (c) it was a
> far-reaching problem, including both 703 and 804 numbers.

> Next afternoon, service returns. So far so good.  BUT ... no CLID.  We
> call, and nobody can verify that we had had an outage!  But they agree
> (finally, grudgingly -- they seem to think it's likely to be dead
> batteries in all 4 of our CLID boxes at once.  Curious.) to open a
> trouble report, to be worked on the next day (Saturday).
 ....
> and thinks it's a card problem.  Throughout the morning, he calls
> various times, tries various things, no dice.  Finally he decides to
> turn it over to another guy, who decides it's a specific card, and
> that it's "related to switching us from analog to digital lines".  But
> he doesn't have the mapping for the ports, must wait until Monday.

> Monday afternoon, CLID finally returns.  But now we can't get over
> 26.4Kbps from a V90 modem.

> Any guesses, other than that the left, right, and center hands at BA
> don't know what they're doing?

Sounds like they cut your two real direct-copper-to-CO lines over to one
pair-gain adapter, in order to "free up" lines in your neighborhood for more
customers: Wednesday: They cut it over, but did not correctly provision the
pair-gain line card at the CO, so you had incoming service but no outgoing
service. Friday: They reconfigure the adapter, but now forget to enable CLID.
Monday: Enable CLID. Wednesday+: Pair-gain link unit is performing multiple
A/D/A conversions (or is older unit using with crummy bandwidth), so kiss V90
goodbye. Wednesday+: Hell Titanic's usual BS aimed at unknowledgeable sheep -
er, customers. You are royally screwed. Bell makes no claim that lines can
support more than "voice and FAX". Recommendation: Order ADSL on both lines
(to get clean copper), then cancel it. 


W.D.A.Geary  Wardenclyffe
Microtechnology Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana.

------------------------------

From: James H. Cloos Jr. <cloos@jhcloos.com>
Subject: Re: Any Guesses as to What This All Meant?
Date: 06 May 1999 17:47:19 -0500
Organization: Illuminati Online


|> Finally he
|> decides to turn it over to another guy, who decides it's a specific
|> card, and that it's "related to switching us from analog to digital lines".
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> But now we can't get over 26.4Kbps from a V90 modem.
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The former probably is the cause of the latter.


James H. Cloos, Jr.  <http://www.jhcloos.com/cloos/public_key> 1024D/ED7DAEA6 
<cloos@jhcloos.com>     E9E9 F828 61A4 6EA9 0F2B  63E7 997A 9F17 ED7D AEA6

------------------------------

Date: 6 May 1999 13:57:58 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
From: larb0@aol.com (LARB0)
Subject: Re: Any Guesses as to What This All Meant?


Sounds like they switched you to another pair -- of poor quality which
won't support higher bit rates ...

------------------------------

From: Terry Kennedy <terry@spcunb.spc.edu>
Subject: Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone?
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 07:56:42 GMT


Telecom Digest Editor noted:

> Have you ever heard the
> intercept message which says, "the number you have dialed can only be
> reached from within the subscriber's premises". Some very large centrex
> systems have certain extensions just used internally between various
> departments, with no need for calls from outside and no desire to have
> the line busy with an outside call. So somehow, the switch is able to
> tell where it is getting the call from, and if it is not another exten-
> sion on the same switch, off it goes for treatment and return to caller.
> But the clever part is disallowing a call-transfer to that extension 
> from a phone that has an outside call on it. 

  Another reason for that is to negotiate away the "FCC Subscriber
Line Charge" -- if the line is in fact not connected to the PSTN, then
you can apply for a waiver of the SLC for the line.

> A little notice on
> the convenience phone says 'dial 411 for Base Locator' (what we would
> call 'information'). The little sign also notes, 'in any emergency,
> dial 911'. Calls to 911 are answered by the 301st Company of the United 
> States Military Police; ditto with calls to 911 from 784 'tenant' phones.
> 911 from the payphone next to it, or any 238 number gets you the
> Junction City Police Department. I found out the reason they can go
> with a three digit number '411' or '911' on their system is because
> they have no *four* digit extensions numbered 411x or 911x.  Some
> arrangements can be quite creative.   PAT]

  Here at SPC, Centrex outside number access is with 8+ instead of 9+
- we got the 9xxx range on a newly-opened prefix (201-915) under
"special terms" because we wanted a block of numbers and were willing
to use a non-standard outside number access prefix (9 is the common
one). Since then we've expanded and have Centrex extensions on at
least two other prefixes.

  We can also dial 5 from any phone for campus security emergencies,
though this was added much later. I wanted to use 911, but other folks
didn't want to renumber the existing 911x range of extensions and deal
with the mis-dials. So all of our phones (including the ones behind
PBX's and key systems, where it doesn't apply) have big red-and-white
stickers on the handset that say "IN EMERGENCY DIAL 5".


Terry Kennedy		  Operations Manager, Academic Computing
terry@spcvxa.spc.edu	  St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
+1 201 915 9381 (voice)   +1 201 435-3662 (FAX)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #73
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat May  8 22:17:44 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA09584;
	Sat, 8 May 1999 22:17:44 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 22:17:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905090217.WAA09584@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #74

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 8 May 99 22:17:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 74

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    150K by 2034: That Was a Typical Too-Conservative Opinion (Paul Robinson)
    Anouncement: Teletraffic Congress (David Songhurst)
    Beware of Primus Telecommuntications! (sroyjnospam@yahoo.com)
    Wanted: Repair Rhetorex & Dialogic Boards (Joseph Elichaa)
    Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged (Dave Close)
    Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Government's Secret Y2K Plans (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising (Danny Burstein)
    Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: User Commands For Supplementary Services on Analog Lines (L. Erickson)
    Backround on Networks (Juan Zilveti)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: rfc1394a@aol.com (Paul Robinson)
Date: 08 May 1999 14:41:36 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Subject: 150K by 2034: That Was a Typical Too-Conservative Opinion


Recently, Moderator Pat opined that by 2034 we could expect standard
communication speeds of 150K for communications.  Implicitly, this
would mean that is what you can normally buy for the current
equivalent of a phone line cost and the capital cost of the purchase
of a modem.

Current telephone line pricing for residential service has been almost
constant over the last ten years in the Washington DC area as being
about $20 for unlimited local service.  Over that same period of time,
an analog modem has stayed at about $80 to $100.

So basically his opinion is that in 34 years we could see 150K
communications speeds on lines that cost the current equivalent of $20
using modems that probably cost about $100.

Oh please.  In maybe 15 years I've owned my own computer -- 1984 to
1999 -- I've seen the minimum speed go from 1200 baud to 56000, a
factor of more than 40 times.  Just using this figure as an estimate,
figuring the original base figure of 1200 baud and doubling every three
years, on average should give us a much higher rate than that.  Taking
the figure of 1200 baud and giving ten generations of doubling gives us
"only" 1228800 bits/second, or about the equivalent of a T1 line.

I want to simplify the math, so I'm going to use 30 years, this way I
can use 10x figures and so on.  Note that these numbers are all
theory, and reality will probably be wildly different.  But let's see
how close using this formula of doubling of capacity in telecommunications
data rates every three years fits:

If you take 1200 baud and assume the current speed doubles every three
years, taking 1984 as the base year, by 1999 the current speed of
available modems for $100 or less should be 57,600bps.  Current modems
using telephone lines can do 56K (and are throttled by law at 53K to
prevent overloading the telephone system) Thus this rough estimate is
almost exactly right.

Thus the estimate of a mere tripling of today's capacity is too
conservative.

But, absent throttling of technology because someone -- government or
telecommunications companies -- intervenes to force some "solution"
that makes people use slower speeds, we should see ever faster and
faster rates come out.

Technology causes other technology and reduces the cost to develop it.
This either causes a vicious circle or a feedback loop -- depending on
whether you see developments as good or bad -- which means that new
technologies can be developed because of the technologies that have
been developed in the past making other things cheaper to implement.

The retail price of a good compiler to create programs is below the
$100 mark (Delphi, Visual Basic), or even free if you use Microsoft's
Control Creation Edition.  There are two things you can do with these:
write application programs to allow people to do things, or you can
also create "components" that allow other people who write programs to
do things.

Those who create applications automate the work of people who use
them.  Those who create components automate the work of people who
create programs that automate other people's work.  This, therefore,
can increase the development of technology, which because of mass
sales, becomes more affordable, making even more development possible,
which feeds on itself.

We have inexpensive software applications because so many copies of a
program can be sold that the cost of development can be amortized over
several hundred thousand or several million users, as opposed to
several hundred, which is why accounting programs sold to a few
hundred banks and insurance companies in the 1960s and 1970s cost tens
or hundreds of thousands of dollars and accounting programs sold to
hundreds of thousands of small businesses today cost tens or hundreds
of dollars.

The late Robert A. Heinlein wrote that most people who predict future
technologies tend to be too conservative, and think of a graph in
which the future trend is that of a line where we are with a slight
upward movement, a very small change.  But, for most technologies, the
correct graph should be a very sharp upward curve, getting steeper as
time progresses.

If in 15 years we have already seen a 40-fold increase in communications 
speeds, from 1200 to 56000 baud, then the minimum we should expect to
see in 30 or so is an 80-fold increase from current speed, not a
three-fold, Pat.

80-fold from 56K is 4800Kbps, roughly the equivalent of 4 1/2 T1s,
let's be a bit less conservative and call it 5 megabits/second by
2034.  This is what the average consumer will be able to get for
two-way communications for the current equivalent of $20 or so.  That
the modem will cost, again, the equivalent of $100 today.

But that's still almost a straight line figure, and may be too
conservative.  I'm going to go out on a limb and predict much higher
numbers.  I'll go OC3.

I'll spell that out in simple terms.  The average two-way communications 
line for in-home use will be the equivalent of 44megabits/second by 2034.
And cost the equivalent of $20 a month, capital cost of $100.

It won't happen all at once.  First someone will have to pay the high
price when it first comes out, then as the product is sold in large
quantities, it will become a lot less expensive.

First the business market will be saturated as companies buy video
telephones to allow their employees to do face-to-face communication
with other people without having to spend a lot of money on travel.
As the high-end business users get saturated, the not-so-high end
businesses will be able to afford it, and as the cost of developing
the technology is amortized, it will become cheap enough to sell it to
residential customers for chump change.

This prediction presumes that companies that have a vested financial
interest in selling bigger and bigger pipes to residential and
business customers will be able to do so, not cut off at the knees by
regulatory restrictions or by telcos who want to keep pretending that
physical plant which should have been depreciated to zero value long
ago and thus really has a value of zero has value they should be able
to include in the rate base and keep prices high and competition out.

I'll bet that in places like New York and Chicago, wire loop which was
installed 30, 50, 60, maybe even 80 or more years ago is still being
carried on the books of the telephone company as having some value and
thus entitled to be included in the rate base for setting costs.

Phone companies are still -- weakly -- pushing ISDN, which was
probably an excellent solution in 1970.  Today, it's ridiculously
overpriced compared with competitive alternatives.  (See below).

However, If restrictions are reimposed like they were back before
deregulation we may not even see a tripling of current capacity by
2034.

I saw a sign on a bus yesterday on the way to work advertising DSL.
It said, "ISDN was a great idea in 1984.  Then again, so was the
Macarena."


Paul Robinson

------------------------------

From: David Songhurst <Songhurst@btinternet.com>
Subject: Announcement: Teletraffic Congress
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 11:35:20 +0100
Organization: BT Internet


The 16th International Teletraffic Congress (ITC16) will take place in
Edinburgh, UK, 7-11 June 1999.

ITC deals with performance issues in communications networks, including
traffic and reliability, network design and optimisation, and
pricing. ITC16 has a full programme reflecting current research in
design and performance for Internet, mobile, and broadband
multiservice networks. Invited speakers include Scott Shenker,
Francois Baccelli, Martin Cave and Alastair Urie. An additional
tutorial programme on Sunday June 6 covers Business Perspectives, Web
Cacheing, Network Pricing, and Wavelets.

Advance Programme and full information on registration are available at
http://www.iee.org.uk/Conf/ITC16


Dave Songhurst
UK representative, ITC Council

------------------------------

From: sroyjnospam@yahoo.com
Subject: Beware of Primus Telecommuntications!
Date: 8 May 1999 00:00:15 GMT
Organization: Web America Networks


Beware of Primus Telecommunications Inc.!!!!  After calling to take
advantage of an offer advertised in the January edition of Filipinas
magazine I started getting billed at more than double the advertised
rate.  After almost three months and dozens of phone calls to Primus to
correct this problem, it is still on-going.  Primus is refusing to
correct the bill and are demanding payment at a higher rate.

I don't even know what they are charging me now because they also are
refusing to put anything in writing so I can see how the bill is being
adjusted, but I know it is well above the advertised rate.  I have
started receiving demand letters and harassing phone calls at work
demanding payment.  Doing business with them has been a nightmare and
I would discourage anyone from doing business with them.  There are
other companies offering similar rates that know how to treat their
customers!  If you have had a similar experience with Primus, or know
someone who has, please email me (remove the nospam from address).
And please, warn your friends!


Roy


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If they do not understand what you are
talking about, you may have to just wait until it goes to collection
(if it ever does, there are so few collection agencies these days that
want to handle paper from the newer telecom outfits) and then try to
settle it at that level. In the meantime, I hope you have taken your
business elsewhere. 

I will tell you a carrier who is getting sued big time right now on
account of its unbusiness-like tactics: Qwest, the Denver-based bunch
which not long ago bought out LCI is being sued for $25 million dollars
by a marketing firm which used to bring them all their customers. LCI
seems to go up and down in the ratings, but it stays pretty much around
being the fourth largest LD carrier in the USA. Check out National
Communications Network vrs. Qwest Communications, International, docket
99-C-397 in Hamilton County, TN filed February 16, 1999 ... NCN says its
sales agents and reps got many tens of thousands of customers for Qwest, 
which then somehow 'forgot to pay' for them. According to NCN's claim,
Qwest issued 800 toll-free numbers to all those customers (as well as
signing them up for regular long distance service)  but then failed to
tell the customer what their new 800 number was, or indeed, that they
had even been given one. In addition, NCN states that Qwest was to 
issue each new customer a calling card which never went out. Instead
of the customary 10-14 days required to switch the customer's default
carrier at the local telco level, it was taking Qwest 30-60 days to
do so, and that several thousand such orders were lost and never put
through at all. When Qwest merged with LCI now about a year ago in
June, 1998, Qwest/LCI absolutely insisted to NCN that 'things will get
better', but instead they only got worse, if such is possible. NCN
was for all intents and purposes, almost put out of business as a
result of the several fiascos in the way Qwest handled their customers,
and now they are suing because of it. I may have more to report on 
this sometime soon.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: Joseph Elichaa <joee@mainresource.com>
Subject: Wanted: Repair Rhetorex & Dialogic Boards
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 10:29:39 -0400
Organization: TWC Portland, Maine


I am looking for some one who can repair Rhetorex or Dialogic Voice cards.


Thanks,

joee@mainresource.com

------------------------------

From: dave@compata.com (Dave Close)
Subject: Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged
Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 07:56:11 GMT


Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> writes (quoting the Mercury News):

> An area code just for wireless phones or pagers, could 'reduce the
> rate of demand that wireless carriers have on the existing area code,
> and you might be able to slow down the rate at which you add new area
> codes,' said Natalie Billingsley of the commission's Office of
> Ratepayer Advocates.
 .....
> But the concept is one that makes sense to Los Gatos resident Bob
> Lipp, particularly because of the mobile nature of wireless phones.

> "The way it's going more and more with cell phones, you don't even
> have to associate it with an area anymore," said Lipp, whose family
> has two cellular phones. "Cell phones have nothing to do with
> geography."

> Others apparently have the same idea. At public meetings throughout
> the state, one or more speakers invariably ask why state officials
> have not created an area code just for faxes or wireless providers.

Of course, the public thinks a separate code for wireless would solve
the problem. The telcos have repeated the lie, that the problem is
caused by the proliferation of such devices, so much that most people
believe it. But since that is around ten percent of the problem, the
remaining ninety percent being competitive carrier assignments, such a
code won't make a significant dent in the problem.

The public has also noticed that wireless companies use different rate
centers than wireline companies. They assume this is inherent to cell
phones, but they're wrong. There's absolutely no reason that wireline
companies can't change their rate centers, if the CPUC would let them.
If competition were more robust, some of them probably would.

Local telcos are now blaming their refusal to pool numbers on the Y2K
issue. They allege they don't have time to work on pooling because all
their resources are devoted to solving Y2K. In the meantime, they
repeat the lie about the causes of new area codes, hoping the public
will not realize that they really deserve the blame themselves.


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

------------------------------

From: rfc1394a@aol.com (Paul Robinson)
Date: 08 May 1999 04:57:25 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Subject: Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability


oldbear@arctos.com (Will Roberts) writes black@csulb.NOSMAP.edu
(Matthew Black) writes:

>> GTE California has started billing this residential customer $0.38 for
>> local number portability.  I never requested any such service and am
>> curious if this is some new universal fee.

> Local Number Portability (LNP) is the FCC-mandated ability to keep 
> your same telephone number even if you switch Local Exchange 
> Carriers.  The idea is that no one would leave the incumbent RBOC if 
> they had to change to a new phone number. I'd guess that this charge 
> is a result of GTE attempting to recover the cost of providing LNP.  I'd 
> be curious if this is an across-the-board charge on all customers or 
> something related to your having taken your phone number to a 
> different local telco.

I have not had phone service with Bell Atlantic since July of 1998
when it became possible to switch.  I switched over to Starpower, a
CLEC which is 50% owned by PEPCO, the Washington, DC electric utility.
I kept my phone number, which was a Maryland 301 exchange.  When I
moved to Virginia a few months ago, I decided to get my service from
Starpower as I had decided to tell Barf Atemetic where to go, in at
least one small way.

I am also being charged about 29c a month for LNP, in addition to the
"usual and customary" charges such as 911 tax, TDD tax, local tax,
Federal Subscriber Long Distance access charge and so on and so forth.
I'm sure BA customers are charged LNP fees too, just probably charged
more for them.


Paul Robinson
Formerly PAUL@TDR.COM, TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM, FORYOU@EROLS.COM

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock)
Subject: Re: Government's Secret Y2K Plans
Date: 8 May 1999 20:16:16 GMT
Organization: Net Access BBS


First, allow me to address the _real_ risk of the Y2k problem:

People are worried about disaster at 12:01 am on Jan 1, 2000.
But the risk is NOW.

Right now, companies are hell bent fixing their computer systems.
(The buzzword is "remediation").  Companies are using inexperienced
programmers working on complex and undocumented unfamiliar systems.
The risk is that during the fixup, they'll introduce new errors
in systems otherwise working ok.

Further, any business transaction that has a future date in it is
at risk now.  For example, if you open a bank Certificate of Deposit
(CD) (or savings bond or Treasury Bill) that will mature in the future,
if the system handling your account is not Y2k complaint now, you can
have trouble.

My advice to people is simple:  check your business transactions
carefully.  While this isn't as glamorous as stocking water and
crackers and opening up your 1960s fallout shelter, it is important.

Every month, balance your checkbook carefully.  Keep all banking and
credit card receipts and balance against the statements.  Make sure
you didn't get charged twice for a check.  Check service charges
(banks are really hitting consumers hard with these lately, make
sure you're not being overcharged.)  Of course check all credit card
statements.

While calculating interest is cumbersome, it is wise to spot check
your accounts (either loans you have or savings accounts).

A lot of consumers don't like to bother with this stuff, especially
with this kind of detail, but with Y2k it is especially important to
do so.

Unfortunately, if you find an error, dealing with bank customer service
centers can be maddening.

Regarding Y2k panic:

I think by nature people respond more to glamour news issues rather
than substance.  It's more exciting for people to talk about a
doomsday scenario than balancing their checkbook.  The local six
o'clock TV news show will show someone's old fallout shelter before it
shows someone balancing their checkbook carefully -- they know what is
boring to viewers.

> midnight on Dec. 31. Yet planning for the worst-case scenario carries
> the danger of inciting panic and becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy.

The act of planning in itself does not incite panic.  It was the
act of the disclosure that would do so.

Like it or not, the government constantly has to play "what if?" games.
Many of the scenarios are pretty outrageous, others are disturbing.

But if there is civil unrest, do we want it handled the way the cops
did at the Chicago Democratic convention in 1968?

Our government is not perfect.  But in this particular case, I'm glad
they are practicing, just in case.  It might save some lives and
property.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On more than a few occassions such as
> the Pentagon Papers during Vietnam days Jack Anderson has correctly

It was the Pentagon Papers that brought down the Nixon Presidency.
Even though the Papers dealt mostly with screwups by prior Democratic
administrations and not his own, Nixon was furious at their release.
Although Daniel Ellsberg (who released them) was being prosecuted,
Nixon set up special units (the "Plumbers") to deal with him.
The Watergate affair dealt more with covering up the Plumbers and
their antics rather than the actual specific Watergate break-in.

> are hopelessly screwed up and will never be fixed in time. Consider
> just the IRS as one example: they have some well-publicized internal
> problems of their own they are having a lot of trouble curing;

Whatever problems the IRS has won't affect Y2k.

> next year will be worst ever at collection and compliance.

The IRS already has to reprogram its computers every year because of
tax code changes, so this won't be anything unusual for them.  I don't
see next year as being any different than prior years for them.

> Perhaps you read recently that an IRS employee intercepted several
> checks in the mail payable to 'IRS' and forged them to read 'I.R. Smith'
> then cashed them. 

How many employees does the IRS have?  I can't help but suspect any
large private company (and not so large companies) have had the same
problem.

> going to be in a shambles early next year also. On the one side, false
> arrests based on bogus information; on the other side, people getting
> out of jail free. 

In New Jersey state government, the Governor has taken an active role
in ensuring that all systems will be up and running.  Generally the
deadline is June 30 for full compliance.  For critical systems, there
are backup plans being instituted.

I understand in Pennsylvania the state government is full converted.

------------------------------

From: dannyb@panix.com (Danny Burstein)
Subject: Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising
Date: 8 May 1999 11:25:39 -0400


In <telecom19.73.2@telecom-digest.org> wbrownlo@my-dejanews.com
(William Brownlow) writes:

> I remember SP Comm from the mid 70's.  Around '74 - '76 the computer
> company I was working for sold Key-to-Disk systems to them for
> billing.  If I remember correctly, you could only make calls to cities
> that were served by Southern Pacific Railroad.  Signals traveled over
> microwave along their railroad right- of-way.  It was sometime between
> '76 and '78 they became known as SPRINT.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, something like that. Sprint first
> had service to about five or six big cities going south and west of
> Chicago on the way to Los Angeles. In the olden days, when wires ran
> on poles next to the railroad track, all major locations for Southern
> Pacific Railroad were connected through a switchboard via those wires
> along the tracks, strung for miles on end. SP comm sold its excess
> capactity to companies in those areas only at first; then they decided
> to call it Sprint a few years later as you pointed out. And Sprint
> only served those same cities with business customers. Maybe it was
> about 1980 that Sprint started accepting some residential customers.

> They used the same kind of crude dialup system that MCI used. You had
> to dial a seven digit number, get their dialtone and take it from 
> there. They soon learned not to complete calls to 976 numbers also. :)
> Both Sprint and MCI had 950 numbers also. Anyone remember those? They
> were intended for use at payphones so the caller did not have to use
> coins to reach the Sprint or MCI switches.

When SP Communications came to the NYC area in about 1980, they
provided you with a card giving their two dozen or so dial-up numbers
throughout the country, along with a hefty pamphlet showing which
areas you could call. i.e. it would have a page with 'area code 212
(NYC)' on it, with the note that 'all numbers were served', and then
would have a page for '203' (State of Ct.) showing, perhaps, 75
prefixes.

Every couple of months they'd mail us updated cards and pamphlets.
Eventually they made two BIG changes:

a) they got a "free" '950' number, and standardized on it nationwide;

b) they added 'off net' outgoing calls to their system. So ... for
awhile there you _could_ call anywhere in the country; if the call was
handled by SPC's network it was at one rate, if it had to use AT&T you
got charged more. (A couple of years later they eliminated the surcharge.)

> Want to hear something REALLY hysterical? Sprint is now mailing out
> its bills in certain parts of the country (the bills issued by their
> office in Tyler, Texas) with a slogan on the front of the envelope
> saying 'Celebrating 100 years of service' ... yes, you read that
> correctly ... Sprint is claiming to be one hundred years in business.

Welll .... this brings to mind a news story from the early 1980s which
I wish I'd have clipped (sigh......). But I think I can rely on my
aging memory here. In the early 1980s one of the telcos (AT&T?) sued
SP Communications for exceeding its authority by providing phone
service.  

When they showed up in court, Southern Pacific brought in a copy of
its original charter from 1870 or thereabouts, which gave it
permission to 'operate a railroad' and 'provide communications
services' (the latter no doubt related to the telegraph). I distinctly
remember the article quoting the railroad gent as saying something
like 'we were in the communications business before any of the
telcos'...


Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe that is what they are trying to
say now, that the 'hundred years in service' they are touting on
the envelopes mailed to customers pertains to their old days in the
business of running a railroad. All I can say now regards their
current, rather peculiar at times, ways of handling long distance
is that it is 'a hell of a way to run a railroad' as the old saying
goes. PAT]

------------------------------

From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz)
Subject: Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone?
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 10:53:25 -0400


In article <telecom19.71.5@telecom-digest.org>, Jeff Wu
<jeffwu@bigfoot.com.nospam> wrote:

> I received a telephone call last evening from an individual
> identifying himself as an AT&T Service technician who was conducting a
> test on telephone lines.  He stated that to complete the test I should
> touch nine(9), zero(0), the pound sign (#), and then hang up.
> Luckily, I was suspicious and refused...
 ...
> DO NOT press 90# for ANYONE.  The GTE Security Department requested...

>[TELECOM Digest Editor's Noise, Caused by Head Banging Against the Wall:

> Dear Mr. Wu, thank you, and I know you meant well.

No, Mr. Wu did not mean well at all by plaigerizing the classic urban
legend prank (written as if his friend had experienced it, himself).
It's easily recognizable since it's missing a switchhook-flash to
reach the 9th level, and quotes GTE security, whose organization would
be the least likely to posses a switch that listens to digits on an
extended call without a switchhook flash.

> For all intents
> and purposes, the above scam does not exist. *If* you are on a centrex
> type phone system, such as at a large company, or *if* the PBX at your
> company is configured to allow 'call transfer' by flashing, dialing
> a number and disconnecting, then *if* the telecom admin at that place
> has not corrected the problem, then it is possible, but not probable
> that *if* the 'prisoner' somehow connected to the extension phone of
> a dim-witted person who knew no better (probably the only part of my
> scenario so far with any real likelyhood of occurring -- the presence
> of a dim-witted person, I mean) that person could be pursuaded to
> do as told.

Funny you should mention that, but one of my co-workers mentioned that
he once worked at a rather large upscale retail establishment that
routinely extended incoming calls from customers to outside trunks
without the answering party staying on the line.

------------------------------

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: User Commands For Supplementary Services on Analog Lines
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 18:39:54 PST
Organization: Shadownet


am354@torfree.net writes:

> Supplementary services like: Call Waiting, Call Hold, Call Conference/
> Transfer are available on variety of equipment: switches, PBX-es, key
> systems, ISDN TAs and access routers.

> I noticed that the user interface implemented on analog phone lines in
> order to support them (hook flash, double hook flash, various
> star/pound prefixed/postfixed numbers) is largely equipment dependent.

> Is there any kind of standard in this area?

> Is it a unique set of user commands in the case of an analog line
> connected to a 5ESS or a DMS100 switch or, to some degree, the command
> set is configurable by the switch operator?

There's a standard for the switched network. But not for things like
PBX systems. 

There's a list of "Vertical Service Codes" at www.nanpa.com.

*00  Inward Voice Activated Services (English)
*01  Inward Voice Activated Services (French)
*02  Deactivation/Activation of In-Session Activation (ISA)on a per
     line basis
*03  Deactivation of In-Session Activation (ISA) on a per call basis
*2X  Reserved for expansion to 3digit VSCs
*228 Over-the-Air Service Provisioning
*3X  Reserved for expansion to 3-digit VSCs
*40  Change Forward-To Number for Customer Programmable Call Forwarding
     Busy Line
*41  Six-Way Conference Calling Activation
*42  Change Forward-To Number for Customer Programmable Call Forwarding
     Don't Answer
*43  Drop last member of Six-Way Conference Call
*44  Voice Activated Dialing
*45  Voice Dialing Extended Dial Tone
*46  French Voice Activated Network Control
*47  Override Feature Authorization
*48  Override Do Not Disturb
*49  Long Distance Signal
*50  Voice Activated Network Control
*51  Who Called Me?
*52  Single Line Variety Package (SVP) - Call Hold
*53  Single Line Variety Package (SVP) - Distinctive Ring B
*54  Single Line Variety Package (SVP) - Distinctive Ring C
*55  Single Line Variety Package (SVP) - Distinctive Ring D
*56  Change Forward-To Number for ISDN Call Forwarding
*57  Customer Originated Trace
*58  ISDN MBKS Manual Exclusion Activation
*59  ISDN MBKS Manual Exclusion Deactivation
*60  Selective Call Rejection Activation
*61  Distinctive Ringing/Call Waiting Activation
*62  Selective Call Waiting
*63  Selective Call Forwarding Activation
*64  Selective Call Acceptance Activation
*65  Calling Number Delivery Activation
*66  Automatic Callback Activation
*67  Calling Number Delivery Blocking
*68  Call Forwarding Busy Line/Don't Answer Activation
*69  Automatic Recall Activation
*70  Cancel Call Waiting
*71  Usage Sensitive Three-way Calling
*72  Call Forwarding Activation
*73  Call Forwarding Deactivation
*74  Speed Calling 8 - Change List
*75  Speed Calling 30 - Change List
*76  Advanced Call Waiting Deluxe
*77  Anonymous Call Rejection Activation
*78  Do Not Disturb Activation
*79  Do Not Disturb Deactivation
*80  Selective Call Rejection Deactivation
*81  Distinctive Ringing/Call Waiting Deactivation
*82  Line Blocking Deactivation
*83  Selective Call Forwarding Deactivation
*84  Selective Call Acceptance Deactivation
*85  Calling Number Delivery Deactivation
*86  Automatic Callback Deactivation
*87  Anonymous Call Rejection Deactivation
*88  Call Forwarding Busy Line/Don't Answer Deactivation
*89  Automatic Recall Deactivation
*90  Customer Programmable Call Forwarding Busy Line Activation
*91  Customer Programmable Call Forwarding Busy Line Deactivation
*92  Customer Programmable Call Forwarding Don't Answer Activation
*93  Customer Programmable Call Forwarding Don't Answer Deactivation
*94  Reserved For Local Assignment
*95  Reserved For Local Assignment
*96  Reserved For Local Assignment
*97  Reserved For Local Assignment
*98  Reserved For Local Assignment
*99  Reserved For Local Assignment


Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com	<--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com	<--last resort


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards *97 in the above list, in 
Ameritech territory, that is a shortcut or 'speedial' way to reach
telco voicemail's front door. If you dial merely *97, your caller ID
is passed to voicemail so it knows how it ought to respond, i.e. by
telling you if you have messages, etc  rather than just a generic
greeting.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Juan Zilveti <jzilvet@entelsa.entelnet.bo>
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 17:06:10 -0400
Subject: Backround on Networks


Mr. Patrick Townson (Telecom Digest):

I was instructed to your web page by a co-worker of mine.  The
information I am interested in finding is the basic backround
(history) of networks.

Would you be kind enough to please instruct me on where I can find this
information.


Thanks in advance.

Sincerely,

Ing. Juan Pablo Zilveti O.
Proyectos Especiales
Direccin de Marketing y Ventas - Entel Mvil
Telfono : +591 (2) 313030 Int. 2381
Fax : +591 - 811-2136
Celular : +591 (15) 29027
E-Mail : jzilvet@entelsa.entelnet.bo


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would one or more of you kindly answer
this fellow for me please?  Thanks.   PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #74
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sun May  9 01:01:35 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA14464;
	Sun, 9 May 1999 01:01:35 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 01:01:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905090501.BAA14464@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #75

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 9 May 99 01:01:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 75

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Stop the Madness! Close Libraries; Arrest Librarians (Babu Mengelepouti)
    Re: The End of Privacy (Mike Riddle)
    24-Hour 4.8c Long Distance (Paul Robinson)
    UK Opportunity (vertexsolution@my-dejanews.com)
    Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call! (Arthur Ross)
    Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged (John David Galt)
    Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone? (Art Kamlet)
    Moderator Ahead of His Time, as Usual (Dale Neiburg)
    Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising (Rob McMillin)
    Re: Last Laugh! No Sex, Please - We're Saudi Arabian (Danny Burstein)
    Re: Last Laugh! No Sex, Please - We're Saudi Arabian (Craig Macbride)
    Correction: Website Authors (Eric B. Morson)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 08 May 1999 18:43:23 -0700
From: Babu Mengelepouti <dialtone@vcn.bc.ca>
Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca
Organization: US Secret Service
Subject: Stop the Madness! Close all Libraries, Arrest all Librarians


hahahahahahhahahahahah

  -- passed on, from wherever on the net --

  Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
  From: Cancer Omega <comega@dis.org>
  To: DC Stuff <dc-stuff@dis.org>
  Subject: Stop the Madness!

http://www.citypaper.com/columns/framecyb.htm

Stop the Madness!
Joab Jackson <joabj@charm.net>

It's not clear yet that either of the two Littleton, Colo., students
who unleashed their anger by firing on classmates and teachers
 ... were encouraged by any racist hate sites on the Web. But there
were indications that racism, hate, and the Internet played a role in
their crimes.  -"Internet Gives Youths Path To Hate Groups," The Sun,
April 22.

A foul influence has cropped up in our society, ladies and gentlemen.
It's a place that offers easy accessibility to violence and racist-
fueled speech, where grotesque ideologies and over-the-top hate
language flow freely.

Don't believe me? I did a sample expedition. Within 30 minutes of
searching, I came across these items: a piece of writing describing a
12-year-old girl tied to a bed and injected with drugs to keep her
sedated for multiple rapes; graphic photos of Nanking citizens killed
or horribly tortured during the Japanese aggression against China in
World War II; a vivid depiction of two blood-drenched women in a fight
(one is wielding a cleaver); and perhaps most disturbingly, Hitler's
anti-Semitic Mein Kampf-in its entirety!

I suspect most of you know where I found this material. But in case
you've lived underneath a rock for the past few years, I'll clue you
in: a library. A public library not three miles from my home.

It's not clear yet that either of the two Littleton, Colo., students
who unleashed their anger by firing on classmates and teachers were
encouraged by any racist hate material they found in their local
library. But there were indications that racism, hate, and libraries
played a role in their crimes.

The frightening fact is that any teenager can just walk into the
nearest branch of your government-funded public library and have
access to a wide range of material, some of it clearly unsuitable for
little minds. The barrier of entry is very low. Even those who can't
afford a computer to access the Internet can freely check out a book
filled with violence or hate speech! With no supervision! According to
a pro-book lobbying group called the American Library Association,
there are more than 120,000 libraries in the U.S. This should strike
fear into the hearts of every concerned adult. Just think:

   Computer-catalogue-savvy kids in search of outlets for anger and
   adolescent rebellion can find them on the book shelves-and
   reference-desk personnel are eager to help them.

Once upon a time, scholars sought out libraries to find volumes
otherwise unattainable. In this way, such services performed a
legitimate function.  Nowadays, book superstores are on almost every
corner, rendering the act of burrowing into the stacks a quaint,
outdated custom. Not that libraries today attract crowds so
scholarly. The sad truth is most of their patrons have spent more time
watching television than rigorously pursuing academic disciplines. How
can they be trusted to handle responsibly the material they find? Can
we be sure that every reader will achieve the contextual distance
needed to understand the violence in a Dean Koontz novel or, for that
matter, the perverted sexual mores espoused in Nicholson Baker's
latest? Of course, most who read something like Mein Kampf don't buy
into its absurd arguments. But a few do.

What's the answer? Unfortunately, doing away with libraries altogether
may be politically infeasible (though outright elimination certainly
would solve another huge problem associated with these "book lenders":
piracy.  Not only do libraries allow patrons to easily duplicate
whatever pleases them on conveniently located "copying machines," but
every time a book is checked out, the publishing industry loses a
sale. In this way, untold millions in royalties slip away each
year. Cash-poor authors are forced to teach, write advertising copy,
or hang out in seedy bars drinking cheap beer with wanton floozies.)
If we can't shut down libraries, we can work toward good stop-gap
solutions. How about holding librarians legally responsible for the
actions their books cause when they are loaned out? Is this too much
to ask? How about requiring libraries to remove books we find
indecent? Or at least restricting such materials to an "adults-only"
section of the library? Here is where we can all do our part. Each and
every one of us can pressure our elected officials to pass legislation
that will make our libraries safe for children.

Let me tell you a scary story: When I was 15 years old, I went to the
local library and, with no parental supervision, came across a copy of
The Satanic Bible, written by Anton LaVey. Curious, I checked it out
and took it home. Just like that! Although reading the book didn't
send me on a shooting spree, it might have if I'd also had access to a
trench coat, firearms, blood-spurting video games, and hate-filled
German industrial music.

Let's stop this chain of madness before it's too late. Ask not what
libraries can do to you, but ask what you can do to the libraries.

                      ----------------------

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the answer is very simple. The
Frightened Mothers in the USA need to work to get the libraries all
closed down, or at least severely regulated. Children should never be
allowed to go to the library by themselves; you never know what sort
of person the reference desk clerk is likely to be; they may actually
help your child find books like those described in the article above.

Furthermore, never allow your child sit in his room listening to the
radio. The radio should be out in the main part of the house where all
can use it together as a family activity. You never know when your 
child left alone like that may curiously tune the radio and hear Bill
Clinton speaking about his rationalizations for throwing bombs at
people in other countries. Then the first thing you know, your child
is going to want to experiment with the things that man told him about
and he is going to be throwing bombs at his school or planting one 
under his teacher's desk. At least if the radio is in the main room in
the house, Frightened Mothers can turn it off when that man is on the
air. But the main thing is, we have to get those libraries closed down
as soon as possible, and personally hold the librarians responsible
for each and every sentence in each and every book, the same as the
fine people who run our government would be more than happy to do with
the internet and the ISPs. They're just hoping you do not see the comp-
arison is all. 

                       -----------------------

A little bit related: did you see the editorial cartoon in the papers
the other day? Background is several television sets. One has a picture
of an airplane dropping a bomb. Next television has a picture of two
kids throwing bombs at a school which is blazing with fire as all the
teachers are running away trying to escape. Still another television
has a picture of a man beating his wife; others show a child with an 
axe busily hacking away at someone we presume is his mother; another
shows a police officer beating someone to death while other police are
watching and cheering him on ... etc.

In the foreground, a man with a striped suit and top hat, who looks
suspiciously like Uncle Sugar, our favorite public serpent, and as he
looks at the ground, averting his eyes in humiliation, a bubble message
next to him says, "My name is Sam, I am a Violence-aholic ... ". The
caption at the bottom says, "The first step to recovery is when you
admit you have a problem and ask others to help you." 

But those who have a problem and need help seldom ask for it until the
day comes they are laying in a gutter on the street in their own waste
and they have no where else to go but up ... and the USA has a short
distance to go yet before it hits rock bottom. Maybe Y2K will provide
the finishing touches; the icing on the cake so to speak.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Mike Riddle <mriddle@novia.net>
Subject: Re: The End of Privacy
Date: 7 May 1999 11:40:04 -0500
Organization: Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish & Short
Reply-To: mriddle@oasis.novia.net


Monty Solomon wrote:

> REMEMBER, they are always watching you. Use cash when you can. Do
> not give your phone number, social-security number or address, unless
> you absolutely have to. Do not fill in questionnaires or respond to
> telemarketers. Demand that credit and data-marketing firms produce all
> information they have on you, correct errors and remove you from
> marketing lists. Check your medical records often. If you suspect a
> government agency has a file on you, demand to see it. Block caller ID
> on your phone, and keep your number unlisted.

> Never use electronic toll-booths on roads. Never leave your mobile
> phone on-your movements can be traced. Do not use store credit or
> discount cards. If you must use the Internet, encrypt your e-mail,
> reject all "cookies" and never give your real name when registering at
> websites. Better still, use somebody else's computer. At work, assume
> that calls, voice mail, e-mail and computer use are all monitored.

> http://www.economist.com/editorial/freeforall/1-5-99/index_ld5357row.html

May 6, 1999, in Bernstein v. DoJ, the Ninth Circ. affirmed the
District Court's ruling that (in a nutshell) computer source code is a
form of speech, and that the Commerce Dep't's Export Administration
Regulations (aka EAR) are an unconstitutional prior restraint of
cryptography speech.

I expect that a few here may have already dissected the Opinion,
others may not care, but I thought that the Opinion, available at

   http://jya.com/bernstein-9th.htm

Or from the 9th Court of Appeals:

http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/web/newopinions.nsf/f606ac175e010d64882566eb0065
8118/febd2452a8a4d79b8825676900685b71?OpenDocument

contains a rather interesting judicial commentary on privacy as we delve
ever deeper in to the computer age:

"Second, we note that the government' s efforts to regulate and
control the spread of knowledge relating to encryption may implicate
more than the First Amendment rights of cryptographers. In this
increasingly electronic age, we are all required in our everyday lives
to rely on modern technology to communicate with one another. This
reliance on electronic communication, however, has brought with it a
dramatic diminution in our ability to communicate privately. 

Cellular phones are subject to monitoring, email is easily
intercepted, and transactions over the internet are often less than
secure. Something as commonplace as furnishing our credit card number,
social security number, or bank account number puts each of us at
risk.  Moreover, when we employ electronic methods of communication,
we often leave electronic "fingerprints" behind, fingerprints that can
be traced back to us. Whether we are surveilled by our government, by
criminals, or by our neighbors, it is fair to say that never has our
ability to shield our affairs from prying eyes been at such a low
ebb. 

The availability and use of secure encryption may offer an opportunity
to reclaim some portion of the privacy we have lost. Government
efforts to control encryption thus may well implicate not only the
First Amendment rights of cryptographers intent on pushing the
boundaries of their science, but also the constitutional rights of
each of us as potential recipients of encryption' s bounty. Viewed
from this perspective, the government' s efforts to retard progress in
cryptography may implicate the Fourth Amendment, as well as the right
to speak anonymously, see McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm' n, 115
S. Ct. 1511, 1524 (1995), the right against compelled speech, see
Wooley v. Maynard, 430 U.S.  705, 714 (1977), and the right to
informational privacy, see Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589, 599-600
(1977). 

While we leave for another day the resolution of these difficult
issues, it is important to point out that Bernstein's is a suit not
merely concerning a small group of scientists laboring in an esoteric
field, but also touches on the public interest broadly defined."

------------------------------

From: rfc1394a@aol.com (Paul Cook)
Date: 08 May 1999 04:57:24 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Subject: 24-Hour 4.8c Long Distance


I often wondered why someone didn't do something like set up the old
system of dialing a local number, handing you a dial tone and having
you punch in a pin code and then the number you wanted to call.

My thought was that the rate for such calls should be cheaper since
there would be no "equal access" or 800 fee.  And perhaps there would
be a calling card that wouldn't rip people off either by charging
enormous rates for connections or whatever miscellaneous call
surcharges are imposed.

Well, I found out someone had done such a thing in my area.  I live in
the Washington, DC regional area and a local company sells calling
cards at the rate of roughly 4.8c per minute.  I don't know what the
call setup charge is but it's probably 25c if anything.  They do
charge 35c if you call their 800 number from a pay phone.  They may
also have the typical 25c per month service fee once the card has been
used at all.

In any case, I bought a $10 card from the company and was satisfied
with it, enough that I bought a $25 card.  From Washington DC and
vicinity to Denver on a weekday is probably at least 10 and more
likely 14c.  So, you would expect to get perhaps, 4 hours.

So, when I first used it because I wanted to call someone in Colorado,
I dialed the local number, then the pin code and the 303 area code
number.  And I hear the announcement.

"On this call, you can talk for, TEN hours and SIXTEEN minutes."

------------------------------

From: vertexsolution@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Employment Opportunity in UK
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 10:53:35 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion


We are looking for Expert telecomm's C or C++ Software Engineers (three
years experience). As a senior Software Engineer (C, C++) you will
work at either embedded or front end level. You will be working within
the field of high speed data. The company is small enough to maintain
a very high tech approach yet large enough to offer good employee
support. Please contact me for further information, or check our web
site www.vertex-solutions.co.uk for more info.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 18:23:14 -0700
From: Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call!


Linc -

Indeed, I see you are correct, although it does take some kind of
prize for irrationality. Something that you ALWAYS have to dial could
have been omitted entirely without any loss of information. About the
only rational basis I can think of for this is that it gives something
that can be used from behind PBXs, unchanged, where the initial zero
DOES serve some purpose.

Some of my acquaintances who currently live in the Sophia Antipolis
(Cte d'Azur) area tell me that the scheme I described was indeed
the way it USED to work up until a few years, except that there was
only one zone (Paris, 01) and all the rest of the country was
zone-less -- eight digits was enough.

Only the French could come up with something this strange, I guess --
vive la France!


 -- Best regards,

 -- Arthur

PS: I REALLY DO believe that somehow, somewhere, some raving lunatic
entrepreneur will do something that WILL do away with the need for numeric
addressing. The world is a really interesting place these days,
telecom-wise!

   -- Dr. Arthur Ross
      2325 East Orangewood Avenue
      Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730
      Phone: 602-371-9708
      Fax  : 602-336-7074

------------------------------

From: John David Galt <jdg@rahul.net>
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society
Subject: Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 02:25:21 GMT


> BY DEBORAH KONG
> Mercury News Staff Writer

> Fed up with the constant stream of new area codes, Californians have
> repeatedly asked why state regulators can't just establish a separate
> area code for wireless phones and pagers.

> The answer: The federal government wouldn't allow it.

As I recall, the federal government's problem was that forcing users of
wireless phones, but not wired phones, to move to a new area code was
"discrimination."  To my knowledge, the question of whether you can
create a new all-wireless NPA *without* forcing anyone to use it has
never been addressed.

I for one would change to use such an NPA if it were offered.  It would
have several advantages, especially if it overlays a large area such as
all of California or even all of the US.

1)  I would know that I'll never have to change codes again (until the
length of numbers increases, anyway).

2)  Anyone calling this NPA would know they are calling a cellular.
Thus we could ban junk calls and make it stick.

3)  Calls to the cellular NPA would go immediately to a cellular
carrier, who would be responsible to forward it over their own network
to the cellular user.  Thus there would never be long distance charges
for calling a cellular; roamer access numbers would become unnecessary.
(If calling-party-pays cellular services exist, they would be an
exception to this, and so should have their own separate NPA.)


Comments?

John David Galt

------------------------------

From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet)
Subject: Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone?
Date: 8 May 1999 21:02:30 -0400
Organization: InfiNet
Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com


In article <telecom19.73.9@telecom-digest.org>, Terry Kennedy
<terry@spcunb.spc.edu> wrote:

> Telecom Digest Editor noted:

>> Have you ever heard the
>> intercept message which says, "the number you have dialed can only be
>> reached from within the subscriber's premises". Some very large centrex
>> systems have certain extensions just used internally between various
>> departments, with no need for calls from outside and no desire to have
>> the line busy with an outside call. So somehow, the switch is able to
>> tell where it is getting the call from, and if it is not another exten-
>> sion on the same switch, off it goes for treatment and return to caller.
>> But the clever part is disallowing a call-transfer to that extension 
>> from a phone that has an outside call on it. 

For example, lines to computers.

They are accessable only by dialing an access number which
prompts for login/passwd or even more, and then switches the call
to this unreachable-from-the-outside line.

>  Another reason for that is to negotiate away the "FCC Subscriber
> Line Charge" -- if the line is in fact not connected to the PSTN, then
> you can apply for a waiver of the SLC for the line.

Not necessarily,  The line may very well have dial-out capability.


Art Kamlet   Columbus, Ohio    kamlet@infinet.com  

------------------------------

From: Dale Neiburg <DNeiburg@npr.org>
Subject: Moderator Ahead of his Time, as Usual
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 13:04:52 -0400 


In TELECOM Digest Volume 19:Issue 68,  America's Moderator wrote:

[snip!]

> I was interviewed on National Public Radio one night
> in 1968 when we were having the worst of the riots -- that year! -- in
> Chicago. 

Pat, you were even farther ahead of your time than usual  :) .   National
Public Radio didn't exist until 1971.


Dale Neiburg  **  NPR Satellite Operations  **  202-414-2640

    I'm the guy...who put the "fun" in "dysfunctional"!

[America's Editor Note: You are right. The station was WBEZ in Chicago
which was at the time owned by the Chicago Board of Education and
which became an affiliate of NPR a few years later. At that time, WBEZ
had an agreement with WFMT (another Chicago station) to broadcast some
'national' programs which 'FMT did not want but WBEZ was happy to have.

That particular night, I think there had been nine or ten major riots
in the USA all at the same time in various cities around the USA from
the night before; all the military troops were gearing up to have another
big night of it. Some radio station on the west coast -- the Pacifica
organization comes to mind -- got a large number of radio stations on
a link together including WFMT in Chicago. WBEZ tapped the feed to 'FMT
as well. All the stations were telling people to please stay in their
houses and try to get through the night in peace. The west coast station
said they had heard that in Chicago the Army had put some tanks on the
street. I answered and said the military conveyances were in the parking
lot at the Museum of Science and Industry, more or less across the
street from where I lived. 

The next day a friend of mine said he had heard me 'last night on the
radio, on station KOA out of Denver ...' I was confused because
although I sometimes in those days called a talk show on KOA hosted by
a fellow named Bob Barker I had not done so the night before. KOA was
such a powerhouse that on a good night they boomed in quite well in
Chicago a thousand miles away. Then I realized he meant that KOA had
been on the national feed the night before when all the radio stations
were trying to get everyone to stay calm, even though it seemed like
the government was about to crush everyone who kept on objecting to
the war, with no regrets at all I suspect.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Rob McMillin <rlm@syseca-us.com>
Subject: Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 16:18:08 -0700
Organization: Netus Internetworking


PAT wrote:

> Want to hear something REALLY hysterical? Sprint is now mailing out
> its bills in certain parts of the country (the bills issued by their
> office in Tyler, Texas) with a slogan on the front of the envelope
> saying 'Celebrating 100 years of service' ... yes, you read that
> correctly ... Sprint is claiming to be one hundred years in business.

Yeah... I suspect that this is from their ownership of, say, United
Telecom, or some other little podunk outfit they bought.


Robert L. McMillin | Not the voice of Syseca, Inc. | rlm@syseca-us.com
         Personal: rlm@netcom.com

------------------------------

From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein)
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! No Sex, Please, We're Saudi Arabian
Date: 8 May 1999 17:38:19 -0400


In <telecom19.71.12@telecom-digest.org> Mike Pollock
<pheel@sprynet.com> writes:

> RIYADH - (Reuters) Saudi Arabia has restricted dialling to more than
> 50 phone-sex services and was using a new technology to identify and
> disconnect pornographic calls, a Saudi official said.

[snip]

> Jehani said tracing the numbers of phone-sex services was a time-
> consuming and complicated task, but added that it was worth it to
> protect Saudi youth. 

And naturally, the Saudi censors, in the name of protecting their
youth, have had to clench their teeth and painfully, and painstakenly,
dial up each and every one of these sex-lines. Repeatedly. After all,
you wouldn't want them to make a mistake and leave any of them
accessable.

Some sacrifices are more than a person should be asked to bear.


danny 'double pity for the ones who have to watch video monitors' burstein


Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Last Laugh! No Sex Please - We're Saudi Arabian
From: craig@glasswings.com.au (Craig Macbride)
Organization: Nyx Public Access Internet
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 07:24:25 GMT


Majdi Abuelbassal <mabuelba@dnaent.com> writes:

> I know such a measure (taken by the Saudi Arabia telecom authority)
> would not agree with the US traditional culture current norms.

It also doesn't agree with the idea of freedom.

> you have to remember that this is a difference culture.

Does that mean that witty titles should not be put on articles about the
politicians in that culture inflicting their will on private activities?

> Sex and Porno business is not tolerated in those communities

It's always amusing to see comments like this. Why is there such an
enormous and highly profitable demand for these phone "services" in
Saudi Arabia then? If everyone agreed with your view, there would be
no need to block those numbers whereas, from what I have read, there
have been numerous Saudis running up significant phone bills.

> and authorities are obligated to protect the society

Anything that involves inflicting a politician's will on private
citizens in their own home is not an obligation of any authorities
except dictatorships with no regard for basic civil rights. Whether
that is Saudi Arabia's phone blocking or the laws of some US states
against certain sexual practices, it deserves ridicule _at best_.

Our moderator's story of jokes being aimed at a prominant figure of
a particular race for no reason of his doing is quite different to
jokes being aimed at figures in a particular race because they are
doing something morally abhorent. Of course, if you do not believe
in personal freedom and self-determination, then it may be morally
fine by you, but also makes even the simplest conversation on such
topics meaningless, lacking any common ground.


	Craig Macbride <craig@glasswings.com.au>
   --------------------http://amarok.glasswings.com.au/~craig---------------
	"It's a sense of humour like mine, Carla, that makes me proud
		to be ashamed of myself." - Captain Kremmen

------------------------------

From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric B. Morson)
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 08:38:55 -0400
Subject: Correction: Website Authors


John David Galt wrote:

> All NXX codes will be converted to 4 digits by adding a 9 as the second
> digit. That is ABC will become A9BC. This will provide almost 8000 new
> area codes (A[0-8]BC).

> Linc Madison proposed that plan and has been talking it up on his
> areacode-info.com site to try to get people behind it.

FYI:
http://www.LincMad.com is operated by Linc Madison
http://AreaCode-Info.com is operated by Eric B. Morson & John Cropper


Eric B. Morson
Co-Webmaster
AreaCode-Info.com
(203) 348-3258

EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #75
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sun May  9 03:56:03 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id DAA20028;
	Sun, 9 May 1999 03:56:03 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 03:56:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905090756.DAA20028@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #76

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 9 May 99 03:56:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 76

Inside This Issue:                        Editor:  Patrick A. Townson
 
    The Day the Telephone Company Burned Down (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: Telrad Key BX Info Needed - REWARD OFFERED! (Brian Cox)
    Which Cellular Provider Allows US and European Connectivity? (Chas Conn)
    Ancient Sprint (John R. Levine)
    Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone? (Jeffrey M. Vinocur)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Craig Partridge)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 9 May 1999 02:13:21 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: The Day the Telephone Company Burned Down


Eleven years ago this week -- the second Sunday in May, 1988, also
commonly known as Mother's Day was the day that it happened. One of
the worst telecom disasters in history; the fire at the Ameritech
(then still mostly known as Illinois Bell) central office in Hinsdale,
Illinois.

Although the fire in New York City about 1974 was very bad also, the
central office there did not have as many functions and duties as
the one in Chicago.

Let's take a look at the Telecom Archives (http://telecom-digest.org)
and see what appeared in this Digest about the fire.

               -----------------------------

Below are issues of the Digest during May, 1988 which specifically
commented on the Illinois Bell/Hinsdale, IL fire on May 8, 1988 which
caused extensive damage to phone service in northern Illinois during
May/June, 1988.

Service was largely restored by the end of May. The digests below are
only the ones immediatly afterward. An occassional article appeared
during June as well.

TELECOM Digest                            Tuesday, May 10, 1988 8:04PM
Volume 8, Issue 75

Today's Topics:

               Re: (none) (really Maryland +1 dialing)
               Continuously Ringing Telephone (on VHF)
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                      Running out of area codes
                          Re: "Party" lines
                       Chicago telco disaster?
                            "Party Lines"

      --------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Chicago telco disaster?
Date: 10 May 88 16:40:10 GMT

I have been trying to call an exchange in Chicago for the past two days
to no avail.  A recording states that "Due to local telephone company
problems in the area you are calling, your call cannot be completed.
Please try again later".  After a few calls to the AT&T operator and
their long distance repair number, I finally found out that an
Illinois Bell building serving the Chigago area caught fire and there
was serious damage.  I'm told that hundreds of exchanges are affected. (!!)
Calls via MCI, Sprint, etc. also came up with similar results, just
different recordings.  From what I understand, Ill. Bell is working on
the re-routing of calls through the office that burned, and service
*may* be restored by Wednesday.
 
Anyone else have any info. regarding this?  Is this similar to the
fire that hit the CO in New York City a couple years ago?  I thought
that disasters like these were preventable to a large extent by using
halon and other measures...  How can something of this degree occur
with relatively modern equipment?  Enough questions, I'm just curious..

A posting to this newsgroup would probably be most appropriate for
discussion.  Thanks for sharing!

David M. Kurtiak
UNC - Greensboro
UUCP:     dmkdmk@ecsvax.UUCP  {decvax,rutgers,gatech}!mcnc!ecsvax!dmkdmk
Bitnet:   DMKDMK@ECSVAX.BITNET (mail ONLY)
Internet: dmkdmk@ecsvax.uncecs.edu

                      ------------------------------


TELECOM Digest                           Tuesday, May 10, 1988 10:36PM
Volume 8, Issue 76

Today's Topics:

                    Central Office Fire in Chicago
                            The Great Fire
             Re: Continuously Ringing Telephone (on VHF)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 From: Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com
 Subject: Central Office Fire in Chicago
 Date: Sun May  8 21:13:57 1988

A fire Sunday, May 8 caused severe damage at the Illinois Bell switching
center in Hinsdale, IL. Hinsdale is a western suburb of Chicago. As of
this posting (11:00 PM Central time) the entire center is off-line, and
nearly one hundred thousand subscribers in the west suburban area served
from the Hinsdale office are without phone service. There is no estimate
at this time as to when service to the affected communities will be
restored.

The Hinsdale office is also responsible for communications relating to air
traffic control between Midway and Ohare Airports in Chicago and the FAA
Center in Aurora, IL. Consequently, voice communications between control
locations which depended on landline phones has been severely disrupted.
Many airlines whose reservation systems are located in other cities also
have foreign exchange service through the Hinsdale office, and this has
been halted.

The fire was struck about an hour after it started, but damage estimates
are not yet available, nor specific plans made for the restoration of
service to the affected area.

Another update will be posted as soon as I have specifics. You can hear
more precise reports by calling the internal employee newsline at the
General Headquarters Building --
           The Illinois Bell Communicator - 312-368-8000

Calls to the affected area at the present time are being intercepted with
a recording 'all circuits are busy now'.

  ------------------------------

 From: Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com
 Subject: The Great Fire
 Date: Mon May  9 23:19:29 1988

In my earlier posting, details were very sparse and I was unable to be
specific in describing the disaster which struck us here over the weekend.
I now have a more detailed accounting for the net --

An extra alarm fire broke out Sunday, May 8 at 5:30 PM in the Illinois Bell
Central Office, 120 North Lincoln Avenue, Hinsdale, Illinois. At the time
of the fire, the Chicago area, and the west suburbs in particular, were
experiencing a very bad electrical storm. There had been a great deal of
lightning; rain was quite heavy, and winds were about 40 miles per hour.

Fire Departments from 15 nearby communities battled the blaze before bringing
it under control at about 8:30 PM. The fire was officially struck at 11:30 PM
Sunday night. Deemed the worst disaster in the history of Illinois Bell, and
one of the worst disasters ever in the telephone industry, the fire virtually
gutted the two story building.

The Hinsdale central office is a *major* switching center for the west
suburban area. In addition to serving ten prefixes covering various
communities including Oak Brook, Westmont, Darien, Hinsdale and others,
the office housed the Directory Assistance Data Base for downstate Illinois;
it served as the communications apex for air traffic control between Ohare,
Midway, and the Aurora, IL aviation center; it was the headquarters for a
majority of the cellular phone service in the greater Chicago area; *and*
it handled long distance calls in and out of most of Dupage County, Will
County and southern Cook County.

        *And the office is now almost gutted*

The reason for the fire has not been detirmined, but fire department officials
have reason to believe the building was struck by a tremendous bolt of
lightning during the worst of the electrical storm which was in progress when
the first fire alarms were called in at 5:30 PM.

The fire caused another problem: the emission of toxic fumes which required
the evacuation of several blocks of homes in the vicinity. These fumes came
from batteries described as 'highly toxic' which were stored in the premises
and a large amount of fiber optic cable. The Hinsdale office was very much
a fiber optic center in the area.

Because of the toxic release, at one point firemen working in the building
had to be called out, in the interest of their own safety, and as firemen
relieved each other working inside in ten to fifteen minute shifts, they
were required to strip to their underwear and be hosed down with a special
solution so that the contamination would not be carried elsewhere.

After the fire was first reported, Illinois Bell employees on duty at the
time followed company procedures by first notifying the Fire Department.
Others then began fighting the fire, and a few began a process known as
an emergency telephone tree, calling other employees and company management
at home to notify them of the circumstances. Each employee thus notified
was responsible for calling a few more employees.

Within about an hour, while the fire was raging at its worst, several dozen
employees had already gathered on location, waiting for a go ahead to begin
clean up and restoration work.

   *But no one dreamed it would be nearly as bad as it was*

Although the fire was struck at 11:30 PM, fire officials would not permit
anyone to enter the building for several more hours, pending exhaustion of
the toxic fumes. Illinois Bell employees were allowed access to the building
beginning at 4:00 AM to survey the damage.

Most of Monday was spent merely bailing out the water and removing the
rubble from the fire. Emergency lighting was installed and cleaning crews
began scrubbing soot from the walls, ceilings and floors. The cleanup was
still in progress late Monday afternoon.

At this writing (12:50 AM Tuesday, May 10), Illinois Bell has not announced
any date that service will be restored. It is estimated that it will be
at least 4-5 days before *emergency* service is restored. Hinsdale, you
see, is also the main center for 911 services in over a dozen west suburban
communities.

Ordinarily in circumstances like this, the phone company will set up special
phones in public areas. They will often times be mobile or cellular type
instruments available for the public to use for emergency calls. But since
Hinsdale *is* the cellular center for Chicago, even this option is not
available.

When the first firemen arrived on the scene, heavy black smoke was pouring
out of all the windows on the first floor. By that time, employees were
evacuating after having given up on their own emergency proceedures.

What we are faced with now is a *major* traffic jam on the network in the
Chicago area. Long distance calls in and out of the area are very sluggish
in getting through. Directory Enquiry in downstate Illinois is only able
to handle about ten percent of the calls they are receiving, those being
requests that are being searched manually through paper directories on hand
in the communities affected.

Hinsdale was the major center for MCI/Sprint long distance also....and those
services are severely crippled in the area. Obviously, data transmission
lines and the like are dead.

About 40,000 subscribers, representing 100,000 residents are without phone
service for the indefinite future. In Hinsdale and the other communities
affected, the Police Departments have stationed patrol cars a few blocks
apart on the street, and residents have been told to go to the nearest
police car to report emergencies.

Illinois Bell has not announced -- as of Monday evening -- any schedule
of priorities for restoration of service. Jim Eibel, vice president of
operations for Illinois Bell said emergency phones would be set up within
a day or two, when crews were able to reroute at least limited traffic
through the LaGrange, IL center. Of equal importance of course is the
restoration of 911 service, and the restoration of long distance service.
Eibel said restoring service to the ten prefixes in the area, which would
return regular phone service to local residents would probably not occur
for 'several' days. Naturally, cellular service also has to be placed in
the table of priorities somewhere. About fifty percent of the cellular
service in the entire Chicago area is out right now due to the fire.

Other Bell companies around the nation have responded by dispatching
emergency crews to come to the aid of Illinois Bell, and these out of
town crews will remain on site for several weeks as needed. In addition,
while the fire was in progress, executives from MCI and Sprint met with
their counterparts from Illinois Bell on location and immediatly offered
their full assistance and cooperation during the period of turmoil we
will be facing for the next several weeks.

For up to the minute announcements during the next several days, it is
recommended that you call a special recorded announcement service for
company employees. Called the 'Illinois Bell Communicator', this recorded
announcement will be updated 4-5 times daily, and can be recieved by
dialing 312-368-8000, a number at IBT Chicago Headquarters Building.

It goes without saying on this forum that everyone is requested to
avoid making all but emergency calls into the Chicago west suburban area
for at least the next several days. And if your call is met with an
'all circuits busy' message, kindly refrain from repeated dialing attempts,
as this simply clogs the network even worse.

A further update will be posted here when I have news available.

The last fire to occur in a telephone center was in Manhattan a few years
ago. You may recall the resulting damage and confusion from that situation.
The last fire *in the Chicago area* occurred in the River Grove, IL central
office in 1946...then an all manual exchange. Unlike that fire, considered
bad at the time, the fire in Hinsdale this past weekend was many times worse,
since Hinsdale is responsible not only for its local calling area but so
many of the overall network services for the Chicago area.

Patrick Townson


TELECOM Digest                           Saturday, May 14, 1988 1:31AM
Volume 8, Issue 78

Today's Topics:

                     Re: Chicago telco disaster?
                  link between internet and MCImail
                      Continuously Ringing Phone
             Re: Continuously Ringing Telephone (on VHF)
                 Re: (none) (really Maryland +1 dial


 From: netsys!len@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Len Rose)
 Subject: Re: Chicago telco disaster?
 Date: 12 May 88 00:15:27 GMT
 Reply-To: netsys!len@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Len Rose)


I also noted that many of our 800 calls are now being affected.
Repeated calls to the ATT repair line,have revealed that no one
knows when they will be back online.. So much for the damned
Bell System breakup..


Len Rose - len@ames.arc.nasa.gov

TELECOM Digest                             Monday, May 16, 1988 8:44PM
Volume 8, Issue 79

Today's Topics:

            proposed rate cut in western Fairfax Co., Va.
                             Fiber optics
                            Five-Year Plan
                          TOLLS/LOCAL CALLS
                                2600?
                  Hinsdale - Wednesday night update

    ----------------------------------------------------------------

 From: Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com
 Subject: Hinsdale - Wednesday night update
 Date: Wed May 11 17:14:34 1988

The cleanup and service restoration goes on, slowly it seems, yet an overview
shows tremendous progress at the Illinois Bell Hinsdale Central Office, in
the wake of the disasterous fire Sunday night which gutted what IBT has
termed 'one of the four super centers in the Chicago area'. Bell officials
have still given no date for the complete restoration of service. The closest
estimate is 'several days - perhaps another week'.

Wednesday brought these accomplishments --

Five additional emergency telephone centers were installed in various areas.
In addition to the center located outside the burned out building at 120 N.
Lincoln Street, the huge communication trailers have been moved into shopping
malls and near the City Hall. These centers are operating and attended 24
hours per day. Calls are placed free of charge for anyone with urgent business.
The calls are limited to a few minutes and two calls per person. The users
are then requested to go to the back of the line(s) and wait their turn
again. The one center open on Tuesday was literally swamped for hours with
hundreds of people waiting in several lines, snaking their way forward to
the phones. Illinois Bell attendants rushed around taking notes and helping
the customers establish connections. The five additional centers opened on
Wednesday should relieve the crowding.

Moving vans and trailer trucks blocked Lincoln for several blocks Tuesday
night and Wednesday. Each contained new equipment and supplies for the office
which is literally being built from scratch. As a truck was unloaded, another
vehicle moved up into its place. Two Greyound busses were parked nearby,
serving as places for employees to eat, rest and clean up between work shifts.

I was amazed to see a virtual ant-hill like atmosphere when passing by earlier
today. Dozens of people were busy at their assigned tasks. Some were painting
and cleaning. Others were installing lighting, air conditioning and such.
Carpenters were working to intall doors and windows. Several people were
working with circuit boards, assembly line fashion, passing them along to
others.

The main switch, which they had hoped to save, now looks like it will have
to be replaced -- if not in its entirety, then with virtually one hundred
percent new components. The corrosion and rust from the high humidity level
of Sunday night and Monday are very evident.

The work is going on 24 hours per day. Workers take breaks when they must.
When they quit after several hours, others who had been eating/sleeping in
the Greyhound busses take their places.

Directory Assistance has been restored for everyone except in the immediate
area. The data base was rerouted through another central office. Microwave
dishes have been installed and are being used by the hospitals, police and
fire departments in the troubled area. Although residents still have no
phone service and must go out into the street to locate police help,
the police are now able to communicate among themselves, as are the
hospitals.

On Tuesday and Wednesday, Illinois Bell employees visited schools and
shopping malls throughout the area. School children were given notices to
take to their parents giving the locations of the emergency communication
centers.

     *Do Bell employees have dedication to their calling?*

I would say so... the internal newsline for employees (Illinois Bell
Communicator 312-368-8000) on Wednesday asked that, 'employees not specifically
assigned to restoration should *NOT* come to the site to assist. The limited
working space was already overcrowded with people, working in some cases
only 2-3 feet apart from each other at their tasks.

Yet show up they did, by the hundreds if it was otherwise their day off
Tuesday or Wednesday. Some came after their regular work was done; some
to assist in the public communications centers; others to man the
rest/feeding busses.

How badly has the fire hurt folks?

Hardest hit are not the teenagers of the village of Hinsdale, as they
would claim (smile), but the businesses which relied heavily on data services.
400 agents of the Illinois State Lottery are off line....
Several dozen ATM's serving the banks are off line....
Two major telemarking firms have closed 'for the duration', idleing several
hundred employees....
Stock and Option guys are tearing their hair out.....
Radio Shack reports that several hundred cellular units have been sold in
the past two days...units that function on channels assigned to Bell's
competitor and are in service....

I'll have more news for you tomorrow, and will continue to provide updates
until the crisis has passed.

Patrick Townson

     ------------------------------
TELECOM Digest                         Wednesday, May 18, 1988 10:44PM
Volume 8, Issue 82

Today's Topics:

                      Hinsdale - Thursday update
                       Hinsdale Update (Friday)
                     Special Spkr Phone wanted...
                         More Fun With COCOTs

  

 From: Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com
 Subject: Hinsdale - Thursday update
 Date: Thu May 12 18:12:59 1988

Life goes on....

Jim Eibel, Vice President Operations for Illinois Bell announced a restoration
schedule for Hinsdale at a press conference on Thursday. While the news was
not pleasant, it probably is realistic. Until now, IBT had responded to
inquiries about service restoration by saying, 'in a few days'.

The switch has been abandoned. Due to extensive corrosion from the water
damage the night of the fire, the switch cannot be salvaged. Replacement will
take 10-14 days of technicians working around the clock. Residents of Hinsdale,
Clarendon Hills, Darien and Oak Brook who have no service should not expect
to have service restored until *near the end of the month*.  About 35,000
subscribers, representing a population of 100,000 people in those communities
will continue to use the emergency communication trailers set up about town
until further notice.

Most emergency requirements in the area have been met by rerouting through
the LaGrange, IL center. Emergency service for hospitals, police and fire
agencies and certain other government agencies is in place now, or will be
by the evening of May 15.

The long distance toll center operation at Hinsdale has been rerouted to
other centers for the most part, and residents of the several south suburban
communities who have been only able to make strictly local calls for the past
week will have their full service restored by May 15, albeit under somewhat
cramped network facilities.

Pagers, beepers, cellular service and similar functions are largely restored
and the restoration will be complete by the evening of May 15. Again, some
network congestion is to be expected for at least a couple weeks until the
Hinsdale office is fully operational once again.

WAS THE DAMAGE INTENSIFIED BY IMPROPER EMERGENCY HANDLING?

The [Chicago Sun Times] for Thursday, May 12 reported an interview with an
'unnamed executive of Bell' who gave a somewhat different accounting of the
tragic events last Sunday.

According to this source, the fire was first noted in Springfield, IL, when
an emergency alarm was automatically tripped by the Hinsdale office. This
was about 4:30 PM. A human being in Springfield called the duty supervisor
for Hinsdale to ask what was going on. According to the newspaper report,
by the time office personnell got around to calling the Fire Department,
*the lines had already burned out* -- making the call impossible. A supervisor
stuck his head out the door at a minute or two before 5 PM and told a passer
by to please go to the Fire Department immediatly. Apparently the person did
not do so. Finally someone -- as yet unknown or unnamed -- went to the police
station in Hinsdale to report the fire at about 5:15 PM...by that time, the
phones throughout the area had already been dead for half an hour. If this
report is true, then there need to be some very serious discussions at
corporate level to find out why local employees discovered the fire *after*
someone downstate manning a computer terminal, and why it took another 45
minutes for someone to go to the Fire Department personally if necessary,
to rouse the firemen.

Bell executives would not comment on the [Sun Times] report.

For most intents and purposes then, the word is that network services for
the greater Chicago area will be restored in total by Sunday evening. Local
residents will be brought up gradually over the next 10-14 days as the new
switch is installed.

Updates can be heard on the Illinois Bell Communicator: 312-368-8000

   ------------------------------

 From: Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.com
 Subject: Hinsdale Update (Friday)
 Date: Fri May 13 20:54:36 1988

The plot seems to thicken....

Illinois Bell has tossed in the deck and said rehab of the old switch is
impossible. Since they are getting a new one, they are going with a #5 ESS
from AT&T which was delivered to the site on Friday afternoon. Working
around the clock, they say it will be operational for most subscribers by
the end of May, and for all subscribers by mid-June.

Several additional emergency communication trailers have been installed in
the area, bringing to eight the number of such locations in the west suburbs
where calls can be made. In addition, various company facilities in the
area have opened their doors to the public and installed several lines where
calls can be made.

             (much information about timetable of Sunday deleted)


TELECOM Digest                             Sunday, May 22, 1988 7:33PM
Volume 8, Issue 84

Today's Topics:

                        Re: TOLLS/LOCAL CALLS?
                   Submission for comp-dcom-telecom
                         Re: Mass 550 numbers

     ---------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu May 19 17:12:36 1988
From: mordor!lll-crg!lll-winken!ddsw1!karl@rutgers.edu (Karl Denninger)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Chicago telco disaster?
Keywords: Great fire of '88??
Reply-To: karl@ddsw1.UUCP (Karl Denninger)
Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Mundelein, IL


In article <5058@ecsvax.UUCP> dmkdmk@UNCECS.EDU (David M. Kurtiak) writes:

> I have been trying to call an exchange in Chicago for the past two days
> to no avail.  A recording states that "Due to local telephone company
> problems in the area you are calling, your call cannot be completed.
> Please try again later".  After a few calls to the AT&T operator and

Well, we're on the outside of Chicago, and luckily a good ways from the hub
that burned.  Illinois Bell's central office facilities in Hinsdale were
nearly destroyed by fire May 8th.

The building was gutted, all the equipment (read: the switch) is being 
replaced.  They are currently re-wiring the building, top to bottom, and 
have stated that 30,000 of the 35,000 lines that were completely off the 
air now have a dialtone -- sometimes.  IBT also openly admits that service 
will be spotty and horrid in general for some time (probably mid-June).

The fire's exact cause is still undetermined, but it is believed that it
started in one of the racks on the lower floor.  In any event, it was 
over an *hour* from the time the first alarm was seen in Springfield's
monitoring station until fire equipment arrived on the scene!  The fire
alarm was not locally connected, there was no halon or sprinkler system, and
phones were already out by the time someone tried to call it in from the
local area (about 20-30 minutes after the first indication of a problem).

Our first indication that something was wrong was when we went to complete
a wiring job on that Sunday PM and found that the cellular phones didn't
work -- all throughout the city.  The real fun and games began Monday, when
we tried to contact some of our business customers -- and got nowhere.

The situation is not nearly back to normal yet -- several of our clients still
cannot dial or receive long distance calls, our service here (50 miles away)
is spotty as well.  It's very common to redial a call a dozen or more times
before it goes through; the remaining capacity is badly overloaded.

Today things seem better -- for the first time since the fire we got a
normal news feed, a good sign that our computers (and humans) can once again
reach each other by phone.  It also seems a little better -- calls that were
a "no chance" attempt a few days ago now go through after a half-dozen tries
or so.... And my car-phone is working properly again.

There are a few questions I want to ask of Illinois Bell:

1) Why was that building, which is (obviously) extremely important to the
   integrity of the network:
	a) Un-manned (a single person would have prevented this)
	b) Not have a fire alarm connected with local fire departments
	c) Have no fire-suppression system installed (yeah, Halon is
	   expensive.  How expensive is something like *this*?)

2) Who's going to pay for this obvious negligence.  We the customers?

3) What is IBT going to do to *prevent* future occurrances?

I believe that IBT should be forced to bear, without passing through, the
cost of this disaster.  As with other businesses who make mistakes, they
should have to pay out of their own pockets (and/or insurance, if there was
any -- somehow I doubt that there was considering that they didn't even
bother with a local fire alarm!)

             (much deleted in 1999 reprint)
Karl Denninger                 |  Data: +1 312 566-8912
Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. | Voice: +1 312 566-8910
...ihnp4!ddsw1!karl            | "Quality solutions for work or play"


TELECOM Digest                             Friday, May 27, 1988 1:00AM
Volume 8, Issue 87

Today's Topics:

                              Submission
                            Toll-free zone
                        Re: TOLLS/LOCAL CALLS?
                    Re: Hinsdale - Thursday update
                         Re: Explain why....
                   Re: Special Spkr Phone wanted...
         How are V&H Coordinates Computed, Who Computes Them?
                            Re: CCITT bis
                    Phone Company Billing Question
                            2 line wiring

     ---------------------------------------------------------------

From: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast)
Subject: Re: Hinsdale - Thursday update
Date: 24 May 88 23:48:29 GMT
Reply-To: lanai!gast@seismo.CSS.GOV (David Gast)


In article <8805121812.1.137@cup.portal.com> Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.COM writes:

> [discussion of the fire at IBT].
>Pagers, beepers, cellular service and similar functions are largely restored
>and the restoration will be complete by the evening of May 15.

It seems to me that order of the restoration of services is slightly
mixed up.  Certainly, emergency service should be restored first, but
why should cellular service get priority over regular phone lines?

IBT's primary responsibility is to provide telephone service to the
people and businesses within its service area.  The fire has obviously
disrupted its ability to provide telephone service.  Fixing competetive
service first seems to indicate further abdication of IBT's
responsibilities.  (No one on duty, no fire fighting equipment, etc are
others).  This abdication will be only more severe if IBT asks the rate
payers to pay for the damage.

I can see the next ad for IBT's cellular service:

		Buy a cellular phone today.  Don't be without service
		after the next fire.

If IBT does not fix cellular service, then cellular customers could
go to other companies, but regular customers do not have the option
of switching phone companies.  It seems unfair.

These opinions may only be my own, but I hope the Illinois Public
Service Commision (or whatever its name is) adopts similar feelings.

David Gast
gast@cs.ucla.edu
{ucbvax,rutgers}!ucla-cs!gast

TELECOM Digest                            Tuesday, May 31, 1988 6:42PM
Volume 8, Issue 88

Today's Topics:

                     New AT&T dialable countries
                  Why cellular was restored so fast
                            Re: Submission
                               Various
                 Three wire lines (was 2 line wiring)
                              mnemonics
                   AT&T announces new phone systems
                            speaker phones
                   Looking for an answering machine

    ----------------------------------------------------------------

From: covert%covert.DEC@decwrl.dec.com (John R. Covert)
Date: 27 May 88 07:10
Subject: Why cellular was restored so fast

Although the fact that cellular is a competetive service may have been
somewhere in the equation, the real reason cellular service was restored
so quickly is two-fold:

1. It allowed IBT to use cellular phones in emergency phone centers to
   provide temporary service to people whose service had not yet been
   restored.

2. Cellular service is really easy to restore.  The cellular switch
   for Chicago was not in Hinsdale; all that had to be done to restore
   cellular service was to reconnect the land-line facilities going through
   the Hinsdale office which interconnected the cell sites in the area.  If
   there actually was a cell site in Hinsdale, replacing it involved bringing
   in only about two or three new 19 inch racks, and hooking them up to
   power, trunk facilities, and the antennas on the roof -- something that
   can be done in just a few hours.

/john

    ------------------------------
TELECOM Digest                          Wednesday, June 1, 1988 8:28PM
Volume 8, Issue 89

Today's Topics:

                             Intellidial
                   Re: European billing and privacy
                    Re: Hinsdale - Thursday update
                         Re: Three wire lines
                       no 215-976 from Delaware
                         TT charges dropped.
         Re: Another reason why cellular was restored so fast
                      Re: TELECOM Digest V8 #88

  ------------------------------------------------------------------
  Subject: Re: Hinsdale - Thursday update
  Date: 1 Jun 88 05:38:48 GMT
  Reply-To: syap@tut.cc.rochester.edu (James Fitzwilliam)


In article <12629@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> lanai!gast@seismo.CSS.GOV (David Gast) writes:
*
*In article <8805121812.1.137@cup.portal.com> Patrick_A_Townson@cup.portal.COM writes:
*>
*> [discussion of the fire at IBT].
*>Pagers, beepers, cellular service and similar functions are largely restored
*>and the restoration will be complete by the evening of May 15.
*>
*
*It seems to me that order of the restoration of services is slightly
*mixed up.  Certainly, emergency service should be restored first, but
*why should cellular service get priority over regular phone lines?

One of the earlier articles on this (fascinating) topic mentioned that in
cases of wide service outage the telco often sets up cellular convenience
phones in the affected neighborhoods, but that in this case since the
cellular service was zapped in the same fire, this was not possible.  By
restoring cellular service first, IBT can set up emergency phone stations
pending full service restoration.

Disclaimer: This answer is based on what I've read on the subject, so if
I'm completely off target I welcome correction!

Another service this fire has interrupted that I haven't seen mentioned is
GEnie access in several neighborhoods; alternate numbers are being provided.

(My source is "New on GEnie")  I assume this also affects CompuServe, The
Source, etc. etc.  Hopefully this incident will prompt the telcos' insurance
carriers to apply pressure to get adequate fire protection installed for the
switching centers -- far less expensive than the losses that could occur.

                                               James

domain: syap@tut.cc.rochester.edu
  path: rochester!ur-tut!syap             "Piano is my forte"  (-:
 GEnie: FITZWILLIAM



 From: gatech!ihnp4!ihlpf!jjs@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (Sowa)
 Subject: Re: Another reason why cellular was restored so fast
 Date: 1 Jun 88 13:45:50 GMT
 Reply-To: gatech!ihlpf!jjs@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (54442-Sowa,J.J.)


In article <8805271115.AA08520@decwrl.dec.com> covert@covert.DEC.COM (John R. Covert) writes:
>Although the fact that cellular is a competetive service may have been
>somewhere in the equation, the real reason cellular service was restored
>so quickly is two-fold:
>
>1. It allowed IBT to use cellular phones in emergency phone centers to
>   provide temporary service to people whose service had not yet been
>   restored.
>
>2. Cellular service is really easy to restore.  The cellular switch
>   for Chicago was not in Hinsdale; all that had to be done to restore
>   cellular service was to reconnect the land-line facilities going through
>   the Hinsdale office which interconnected the cell sites in the area.  If
>   there actually was a cell site in Hinsdale, replacing it involved bringing
>   in only about two or three new 19 inch racks, and hooking them up to
>   power, trunk facilities, and the antennas on the roof -- something that
>   can be done in just a few hours.
>
>/john

1.  The Hinsdale, Illinois Office (does/normally should have) provided distribution
    services to both the wireline and non-wireline cellular providers. Even
    though from the location of the MTSO the wireline office was hit harder.

2.  The Ameritech Mobile Hinsdale cell site was reconfigured to provide service to
    the outage area. Cellular is used also by emergency services not only
    for the business class. Restoration service was enhanced by site personal
    having the ability to communicate with distribution services.

3.  Evan Richards, the Illinois Bell Telephone representative handling the
    disaster recovery for the Hinsdale office, recently lateraled from
    Ameritech Mobile Communications Inc. to the IBT side of the Ameritech Corporation.

4.  The level of service provided to cellular was not initially at normal high
    quality since it was only patched also. It is also easier to patch one or
    two light guide cables and get service restored faster then having to engineer,
    ship, install, test, and cutover new frames.

                                        Jim

                    ------------------------------

These were the articles during May, 1988. A few minor follow up
articles appeared in June, 1988. Most of the reports were written by
myself from  Portal Communications. As a resident in Chicago, I was
affected first hand by the fire, although my personal service was not
disrupted.

As a point of information, on May 18, 1989 (Thursday) -- about a year
later -- phones in the same area were down for four hours, from 9:30
AM until 1:40 PM due to some unidentified failure in the computer in
that phone office.  See Digest Volume 9 #170-171 and later issues for
this report.


Eleven years ago today! I hope you enjoyed this look at telco history.

Patrick Townson
TELECOM Digest Moderator

------------------------------

From: Brian Cox <exsmogger@***.com>
Subject: Re: Telrad Key BX Info Needed - REWARD OFFERED!
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 05:34:35 -0400
Organization: Atlantel Business Communications


Bruce Bergman wrote:

> I just recently picked up a Telrad Key BX system.  Yes, I know it's
> old. ;-)

> I'm looking for any source of installation and programming manuals for
> this system.  I understand it is compatible/the-same-as a Symphony II
> system, is this true?  How available are spare parts (boards,
> desksets, etc)?

For a manual try Manuals Plus in Marietta, GA at 770-438-0707.


Brian Cox
Atlantel Business Communications
1-800-637-9973

Call about upgrading your StarTalk A, B or C for Y2K compliance.
New hard disk installed, and your customer's database saved to
floppy disk.  One day turnaround guaranteed.

use mindspring instead of *** to reply by email

------------------------------

From: chuck7@erols.com (Charles Conn)
Subject: Which Cellular Provider Allows US and European Connectivity?
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 21:16:20 GMT


I am looking for a cell phone provider that allows me to do the
following:

Have a cell phone which works in the US, but when I travel to Europe,
it will ring there as well (when someone calls my US phone number).

I assume that I would have to call the cellular provider and inform
them of when I would be in Europe, and they would turn on service
during this window.  Is this how it works?

Any help on the type of phone needed (GSM etc), or a company that
provides similar  international service would be appreciated.


Charles Conn

------------------------------

Date: 8 May 1999 22:50:15 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Ancient Sprint
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


>> saying 'Celebrating 100 years of service' ... yes, you read that
>> correctly ... Sprint is claiming to be one hundred years in business.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Maybe that is what they are trying to
> say now, that the 'hundred years in service' they are touting on
> the envelopes mailed to customers pertains to their old days in the
> business of running a railroad.

Nope.  Recall that the current Sprint is the result of several
mergers, and the largest predecessor company was United Tel which was
and is the local phone company in a lot of places including
northwestern New Jersey and Disney World.  One of United's ancestor
companies, the Brown Telephone Company of Abilene, Kansas, dated back
to 1899, hence the century claim.  (I found this in five minutes on
Sprint's web site.)

And after all, they didn't say "100 years of GOOD service".


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I still think that is sneaky and very
deceptive. PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 00:17:03 -0400
From: jmv16@cornell.edu (Jeffrey M. Vinocur)
Subject: Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone?
Organization: Cornell University


> So!! How come no one has sent me a copy of that memo warning employees
> to never respond to messages on their pager from 212-540 numbers for
> a couple years now. I used to see that one every week or so also.  PAT]

I've never heard this one, and while I'm sure I could find it on the web,
you tell a good story ...


Jeffrey M. Vinocur   *   jmv16@cornell.edu
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/jmv16/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What happened briefly was this: In New
York City, a special exchange/prefix '540' is used for premium charge
services, stock market reports, horoscopes, etc. It functions a lot
like '976' in many places locally and like '900' functions nationally.

Quite a few years ago some joker figured out a way to make some quick
money. He started a number, 540-xxxx with some sort of totally worth-
less information, charging fifty cents or a dollar for it. Charges of
course went on the phone bill of the caller. To stir up business a
little, he left numeric messages on a few thousand pagers throughout
New York City.  A few people he paged unwittingly called back, not
realizing they were calling a premium charge service. New York
Telephone Co. billed the callers and paid this guy his money. There
was a big, big stink about it.

Memos began circulating all over in business places in New York from
telecom managers to employees warning them against returning calls to
540 numbers which had been left on their pagers. Unlike the 90# thing
which never worked at all or maybe worked once, the '540 scam' was 
real in New York, but instead of just telling people once, the same
tired old memo kept going around and around, even making it here on
the net at least a few times. Then the memo began showing up on the
west coast, in Chicago, and all sorts of places where it was totally
meaningless, since calls to 212-540-xxxx can only be dialed from the
212/718/914 area codes anyway! Instead of possibly doing some good by
having San Franciso employers tell their employees 'do not return 
calls to 415-976-xxxx which are left on your pager, they were busy 
telling them 'do not return calls to 212-540-xxxx.'

*The reason* calls to local premium charge numbers, i.e. 976 in most
area codes, 540 in New York cannot be dialed from outside the service
territory of the telco which owns them while the similar variety known
as 900-xxx-xxxx can be called from anywhere in the USA is sort of
technical and rather boring. If anyone is interested, the thread can
be continued. Suffice to say, it was a case of one chicken in a hen
house spotting a fox, or maybe getting eaten by the fox and the rest of
the chicken coop stayed in an uproar for months and years later,
thanks in large part to Usenet, where most urban legends live on in
infamy years after they have become mostly meaningless. I assume when
you dial 212-540-anything using MCI you still get the intercept saying
'MCI does not complete calls to 976 numbers at the present time.' My
assumption is equally great that at least someone on Usenet will post
something on it today implying it happened to a friend of a friend
just yesterday and you had all better watch out!   PAT]

------------------------------

From: craigp@world.std.com (Craig Partridge)
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: Sun, 8 May 1999 02:23:17 GMT
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die


Robert Eden <rmeden@yahoo.com> writes:

> How many networks made up the "Internet" in the 80's?

Don't forget CSNET - linking Computer Science Departments and also
research labs, some via TCP/IP and some via phonenet, to the Internet.
Until about 1987, joining CSNET was the only authorized way to have
access to ARPANET, other than being an ARPANET site yourself.  CSNET
and BITNET were about the same size -- UUCP was bigger.


Craig Partridge
former CSNET techie


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If anyone reads the history item I put
in today regards the Illinois Bell fire in 1988 with the articles from
this Digest which appeared at the time, you will see the articles are
just replete with all sorts of old, ancient addressing schemes we used
to use back then.  Have a nice weekend everyone!     PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #76
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon May 10 04:07:05 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA04377;
	Mon, 10 May 1999 04:07:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 04:07:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905100807.EAA04377@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #77

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 May 99 04:07:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 77

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Internet Pioneers/Internet History Site Now Open (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Malicious Hacker Steals Hotmail Passwords (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising (Chuck Till)
    FTC: Kids' Web Site Was Deceptive (Monty Solomon)
    AT&T Wireless: NYC System Down For Most of Today (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US/European Connectivity? (John Starta)
    Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged (L. Winson)
    Public Utility or Free Market? (L. Winson)
    Re: The Day the Telephone Company Burned Down (Alan Boritz)
    Mother's Day Phone and Internet Traffic (John Fricks)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 10 May 1999 03:24:28 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Internet Pioneers/Internet History Site Now Open


I am very pleased to announce that with considerable assistance from
John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> the Internet Pioneers and Internet
Historical Society web site is now open.

URL -- http://internet-pioneers.org   *or*  http://internet-history.org

will deliver you to John's site where qualified persons (i.e. a 'Pioneer'
netizen with at least fifteen year's presence on the net) can post
comments as desired.

ANYONE is free to visit the site and read what others have written.
Although it is pretty bare-bones as of today, Monday, it is my hope
that very soon there will be various links in place, as well as many
commentaries.

Posting is limited to only those persons who meet the criteria to
be a Pioneer  (see notes on the opening page there) however links
will be given to any related site which is involved in the preservation
of our early history. Occassionally an exception might be made for a
posting of importance from a person who is not a Pioneer.

Postings are not immediate. The site is moderated in a loose fashion,
and mail is examined to see if it is spam or commercial in nature
before it is released for viewing, hopefully within a few hours.

                       ---------------------

None of the messages in the 'Internet Pioneers' thread which appeared
here mostly in April are being carried over. The people who posted here
are certainly welcome and encouraged to post there instead, especially
to help get a discussion going.

                       ---------------------

Please visit http://internet-pioneers.org    http://internet-history.org
today, and I hope you will enjoy this new service to the net. Mail
should be addressed to 'pioneers@' (whatever).


PAT

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 18:40:24 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Malicious Hacker Steals Hotmail Passwords


By Paul Festa
Staff Writer, CNET News.com 
May 6, 1999, 12:55 p.m. PT 

Hotmail password-stealing exploits are no longer the sole province of 
bug-hunting, ethical hackers.

Microsoft's MSN Hotmail said it has implemented a patch to thwart a 
JavaScript exploit that snared the passwords of about ten users. 
Although Hotmail has faced numerous similar exploits in the past, they 
were merely demonstrations crafted by security-minded programmers 
anxious to expose security holes before they were exploited for real.

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,36213,00.html 


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not see what is new about this.
People have been stealing passwords for years, by running password
hacking programs, etc. Everyone should make a point of changing thier
password(s) on a regular basis. PAT]

------------------------------

From: ctill@mindspring.com (Chuck Till)
Subject: Re: Forcing MCI to Change Advertising
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 01:06:43 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Reply-To: ctill@mindspring.com


>> Want to hear something REALLY hysterical? Sprint is now mailing out
>> its bills in certain parts of the country (the bills issued by their
>> office in Tyler, Texas) with a slogan on the front of the envelope
>> saying 'Celebrating 100 years of service' ... yes, you read that
>> correctly ... Sprint is claiming to be one hundred years in business.

> Yeah... I suspect that this is from their ownership of, say, United
> Telecom, or some other little podunk outfit they bought.

Let's get the facts straight. United Telecom bought Sprint, not the 
other way around:

United Telecom had a long history of local telephone service. In 1982,
they made their first move into long distance by buying Isacomm, an
Atlanta reseller of SBS. (That's another story). Their next major move
was buying US Telecom, another reseller. Meanwhile, GTE had bought 
Sprint from the railroad. GTE and United Telecom pooled their long 
distance operations into US Sprint. GTE sold their share of US Sprint 
to United Telecom. US Sprint was renamed Sprint. Sprint outgrew 
United Telecom's local service operation, so United Telecom renamed 
itself Sprint. 

Sprint continues to be the local telephone provider in a number of
regions and has every right to proclaim its longevity in those
markets.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 21:11:15 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: FTC: Kids' Web Site Was Deceptive


By Tim Loughran, Reuters 
May 7, 1999 6:27 AM PT

WASHINGTON -- When Liberty Financial Inc. created its 
www.younginvestor.com Website in November 1996, the company said it 
wanted to teach children the rules of investing and economics. 

On Thursday, however, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said the 
Boston-based financial services company mishandled information gathered 
from the site and broke one admonition Liberty Financial executives 
should have learned when they were children: thou shall not lie. 

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2255023,00.html

------------------------------

From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz)
Subject: AT&T Wireless: NYC System Down For Most of Today
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 20:19:11 -0400


AT&T Wireless in the New York CGSA has been down for most of today. I
was passing through the Bronx just after noon and the system wouldn't
authorize my phone (couldn't reach the operator or customer service). 

Still no service anywhere from Nassau county through Hackensack, NJ,
as of an hour ago. In fact, there was no service outside of of the
AT&T Wireless headquarters office at the Mack IV office center, in
Paramus, NJ. A customer service rep told me (after I got to NJ) that a
weather-related incident caused it and they didn't have an estimate
for when the system would be back up.

(later update)

Fox News, on WNYW-TV, confirms that AT&T Wireless is experiencing a
serious system outage in the NYC area. Currently, there is no service
in Manhattan above 59th St., no service anywhere in the Bronx or
Brooklyn, or in southern Westchester. In the same news show, Fox also
reported on the three times this past month that the NYC E911 system
was down, the last time being this past Tuesday when all callers were
greeted by 30 seconds of silence.

I wonder if anyone will notice that with the AT&T Wireless system down
in NYC, and very few pay phones on the streets in the Bronx, Brooklyn
and Westchester, that there may be more people at risk than those who
AT&T are accommodating in storm-ravaged Oklahoma.

------------------------------

From: John Starta <starta@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US and European Connectivity?
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 21:47:11 -0700
Organization: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc.


Charles Conn wrote:

> I am looking for a cell phone provider that allows me to do the
> following:

> Have a cell phone which works in the US, but when I travel to Europe,
> it will ring there as well (when someone calls my US phone number).

> I assume that I would have to call the cellular provider and inform
> them of when I would be in Europe, and they would turn on service
> during this window.  Is this how it works?

> Any help on the type of phone needed (GSM etc), or a company that
> provides similar  international service would be appreciated.

Bosch makes the World 718 phone
(http://www.bosch.de/uc/eg/english/produkte/) which is capable of
operating on GSM 900 and 1900 bands. The latter is in use by a number of
PCS providers here in the states. (There's also the Iridium phone which
operates "everywhere" using satellites.)

Finding service is going to be a challenge; everyone I've approached has
said no thanks. Let me know if you have better luck.


jas

------------------------------

From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson)
Subject: Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged
Date: 9 May 1999 15:21:03 GMT
Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS


> Of course, the public thinks a separate code for wireless would solve
> the problem. The telcos have repeated the lie, that the problem is
> caused by the proliferation of such devices, so much that most people
> believe it. But since that is around ten percent of the problem, the
> remaining ninety percent being competitive carrier assignments, such a
> code won't make a significant dent in the problem.

This is not a "telco lie".  For years now the baby Bell's have stated
that new exchanges were needed as a result of local competitors needing
their own exchanges, even if only a few customers were served.  It took
for the news media to switch their "conventional wisdom" in their stories,
but it is reported now.

The question is who will pay to modify all the existing switchgear,
tamden routers, and billing centers to accomodate more flexibility
in number assignments?  The newcomers obviously want the baby Bells
to do it, and the baby Bells obviously don't.  I don't think they should.

Some people argue the Bells, having enjoyed monopoly protection, are
morally obligated to do so.  I don't see it that way at all.  While
the Bells had a monopoly, they also were tightly regulated and they
didn't get any benefits.

My feeling is, that if the newcomers think the local business is so
profitable, let them build their own exchanges and lay their own
cable.  Indeed, the newcomers argue Bell is costly, inefficient, and
technologically obsolete (using copper instead of fibre).  Well, given
that, they should be glad for the opportunity to build their own
modern and efficient systems.  If they want free enterprise, they have
to take the drawbacks, too.

Another problem I have with so-called "local competition" is that a
lot of companies aren't really "companies" but resellers.  They want
to come in and act as a middleman and resell Bell's services.  I can't
see how the customer would benefit from that -- to me it's like sleight
of hand card tricks.

I see it as this:  say Acme had a legal monopoly on town supermarkets.
The government says no more.  Well, let competitors build their own
supermarket across the street.  But they don't want to invest capital
and risk in doing that, rather, they are demanding the existing Acme
give them space in the parking lot and inside the store.

Years ago, the Holiday Inn chain pioneered the modern roadside motel
and was very successful at it.  Other business people, seeing that
success, came along and opened their own motels, often directly
across the street.  If they could run their hotel as well as the
Holiday Inn, they did well.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have used the same analogy as
yourself in the past when arguing that competitors should be
required to actually compete. Picture a store in which your comp-
etitor gets to purchase your products at a greatly reduced price
then stand the same store as yourself and sell them at a slightly
reduced cost to people who had been your customers until he got
a judge somewhere to agree that it was 'unfair' to make him build
his own store. He also uses your shopping carts and often times 
has your cashiers ring up his customer's sales and then remit to
him. If something goes wrong with the product he resells, or it
is unsuitable for the customer's needs, he blames you for it and
is continually sending his customers to see you, out of frustration
since he makes it difficult for the customers to get through to
him with complaints, etc. The above scenario is what 'local comp-
etition' in telephone service amounts to. 

When cable companies began getting the go-ahead to wire towns all
over the USA several years ago, look how fast they did it, and
in a usually very inconspicuous way. Within a year or two they
had even large cities like Chicago virtually wired, with cable
service available to everyone once the city council approved the
franchise.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson)
Subject: Public Utility or Free Market?
Date: 9 May 1999 15:29:04 GMT
Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS


With deregulation, the newcomers in the telephone industry make a very
big deal about it being a free market now, open to the wonderful world
of competition.  It's just like selling deorderant, tires, stomach
remedies, etc.

Of course, when it suits, them, they will suddenly claim to be a public
utility, not subject to the usual rules and limitations of the free
marketplace.

Omnipoint wants to put a cellular tower in the center of small towns.
The tower violates the town's historic district law and zoning laws.
Omnipoint says it is a public utility and thus exempt from all those
nasty little local restrictions.  It has taken small towns to court
to force themselves on them.  Unfortunately, small towns don't have
the money to pay for extended court fights, and Omini can win by
wearing them down in court.

Why?

If Proctor & Gamble wanted to build a soap factory or distribution
warehouse, it would have to comply with local zoning restrictions.
They couldn't say "well, we're the leading national manufacturer of
soap products, so we can supercede local rules".

Seems to me that the principle of deregulation that allowed Ominipoint
to get into business in the first place means that it has to play by
other regulations too.

------------------------------

From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz)
Subject: Re: The Day the Telephone Company Burned Down
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 20:58:49 -0400


In article <telecom19.76.1@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote:

> Eleven years ago this week -- the second Sunday in May, 1988, also
> commonly known as Mother's Day was the day that it happened. One of
> the worst telecom disasters in history; the fire at the Ameritech
> (then still mostly known as Illinois Bell) central office in Hinsdale,
> Illinois.

> Although the fire in New York City about 1974 was very bad also, the
> central office there did not have as many functions and duties as
> the one in Chicago.

 ...

With all due respect, I think you're way off base. Either the tandem
office in Brooklyn that burned in '87, or the office in Manhattan were
were far worse and affected many more people than the incident you've
documented.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, all those incidents are always very
bad news, and although the New York incident affected more people, I
do not think it took as long to repair, nor covered as many different
aspects of the network.  Reader comments?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: John Fricks <jfricksNOTelvis@bellNOSPAMsouth.net>
Subject: Mother's Day Phone and Internet Traffic
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 02:09:35 GMT


I remember that Mother's Day typically shows a major peak in AMA data
records as people make long distance calls to Mom.

My observation -- unscientific -- is that the opposite is true for
Usenet postings.


John


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sunday was a rather slow day in my
mailbox and at the telecom web site  http://telecom-digest.org ...
each got about half as much traffic as usual. You may have made a
valid observation.    PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #77
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon May 10 19:05:17 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA07822;
	Mon, 10 May 1999 19:05:17 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 19:05:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905102305.TAA07822@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #78

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 May 99 19:05:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 78

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #182, May 10, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged (Art Kamlet)
    Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged (John R. Levine)
    Internet Problem!!! (Peter Neidhardt)
    Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol (wsemenov@my-dejanews.com)
    Telecom Engineering Student Needs Help (Jacob Thakadu)
    Re: The Day the Telephone Company Burned Down (Herb Stein)
    Re: Mother's Day Phone and Internet Traffic (Christopher Wolf)
    Telecom Portal Updated (Fred@mac-addict.com)
    Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US-European Connectivity (Dave Farber)
    Re: Malicious Hacker Steals Hotmail Passwords (Ryan Tucker)
    Last Laugh! FCC Goes Ooops. (Paul MacArthur)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 10 May 1999 11:41:26 -0400
From: Angus TeleManagement <angus@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #182, May 10, 1999


************************************************************
*                                                          *
*                      TELECOM UPDATE                      *
*    Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin    *
*                  http://www.angustel.ca                  *
*                Number 182:   May 10, 1999                *
*                                                          *
*    Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by     *
*             generous financial support from:             *
*                                                          *
*  AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/   *
*  Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/         *
*  Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/       *
*  MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/     *
*  Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ *
*  Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/       *
*  TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/    *
*                                                          *
************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE: 

** SaskTel Joins Bell Camp
** Bell Strike Settled
** BCT.Telus Becomes Telus 
** Teleglobe Plans New Global Network
** Telemarketers Fined $1 Million for Fraud
** Manufacturing Snafu Hits Newbridge
** Amtelecom Up for Sale
** Court Sustains Look's Exclusive Apartment Access
** AT&T Canada Reveals $113 Million Loss
** Nortel Announces 1.6 Terabit Tranmission 
** Tigertel, Contour Join Forces
** Mitel Announces IP PBX Strategy
** Rogers Offers Multi-Computer Internet Access
** AT&T Buys U.S. Cable Giant, Allies With Microsoft
** Microcell, Royal Bank Join for Wireless Banking
** Videotron Sells U.S. Wireless Cable Holdings
** Lockheed Martin Plans Broadband Satellite Network
** President Resigns at PsiNet
** NBTel Introduces Internet VPN
** Phonettix in Merger Discussions
** MTT Phone Book Sparks Controversy
** First Quarter Results
      Island Tel
      Manitoba Telecom Systems
** Y2K in Canadian Telecom


SASKTEL JOINS BELL CAMP: SaskTel, the last remaining unaligned telco,
has signed a three-year alliance with Bell Canada. SaskTel will
distribute Bell Nexxia services in Saskatchewan.

BELL STRIKE SETTLED: The Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union
bargaining committee is recommending acceptance of a tentative
agreement with Bell Canada. The union says the deal includes
"significant improvements" in job security, salaries, and benefits.

BCT.TELUS BECOMES TELUS: BCT Telus Communications will operate
nationally under the brand name TELUS, and its official head office
will be in Vancouver. The company is expected to reveal details of its
national strategy at its annual meeting on Tuesday May 11.

TELEGLOBE PLANS NEW GLOBAL NETWORK: Teleglobe says it will spend US$5
Billion over the next five years to build what it calls "the world's
first globally integrated Internet, voice, data, and video network."
GlobeSystem, which will have direct access in 160 cities worldwide,
will increase Teleglobe's network capacity more than 180-fold.

TELEMARKETERS FINED $1 MILLION FOR FRAUD: A Quebec court has levied a
$1 Million fine against American Family Publishers, a Montreal-based
company convicted of telemarketing fraud.  This is the largest fine
ever imposed in Canada for this offense. (See Telecom Update #175)

MANUFACTURING SNAFU HITS NEWBRIDGE: Newbridge Networks has warned that
manufacturing problems prevented them from filling many orders
received in the quarter ended May 2.  Earnings for the quarter will
fall 30%-40% below analysts' previous estimates.

AMTELECOM UP FOR SALE: Aylmer-based Amtelecom Group, one of Ontario's
more active independent telcos, is putting the company's businesses up
for sale. Amtelecom's Board says that growth was blocked by limited
access to capital.

COURT SUSTAINS LOOK'S EXCLUSIVE APARTMENT ACCESS: A judge has given
Rogers Cablesystems 60 days to wind up service in three Toronto
apartment buildings whose owner has granted exclusive access to
wireless cable distributor Look Communications.

AT&T CANADA REVEALS $113 MILLION LOSS: An AT&T Canada circular to
MetroNet shareholders reveals that the company lost $113 Million in
1998, a year in which it had earlier predicted it would be
profitable. Revenue increased 13% to $1.07 Billion.

NORTEL ANNOUNCES 1.6 TERABIT TRANSMISSION: Nortel Networks has
introduced a technology that transmits over 160 parallel channels on a
single fiber, making total capacity 1.6 terabits (trillion bits) per
second. MCI WorldCom will begin a technical trial in the fourth
quarter.

TIGERTEL, CONTOUR JOIN FORCES: TigerTel Services, which provides long
distance, call center, and messaging, is merging with Contour Telecom
Management, which outsources corporate telecom services. TigerTel will
own 80% of the merged entity.

MITEL ANNOUNCES IP PBX STRATEGY: Mitel says its "No Compromise IP
Telephony Strategy" will deliver IP-based products with all of the
capabilities of current PBXs. The company plans to introduce IP
Ethernet phones for its SX-2000 for Windows NT system in the first
quarter of 2000. An IP version of the SX-2000 is scheduled for early
in 2001.

ROGERS OFFERS MULTI-COMPUTER INTERNET ACCESS: Rogers Cablesystems now
permits two or three computers on a home network to simultaneously
access its high-speed Internet service. Price: $9.95/month for each
additional computer.

** Rogers has also formed a joint venture with Excite to 
   supply Excite's Internet search engine and Internet 
   content in a "localized format."

AT&T BUYS U.S. CABLE GIANT, ALLIES WITH MICROSOFT: AT&T 
Corp. will buy U.S. cableco MediaOne for more than US$50 
Billion. The deal makes AT&T the largest cable company in 
the U.S.

** Microsoft has agreed to buy $5 Billion in AT&T 
   securities, convertible to a 3% stake in the company. 
   AT&T will buy up to 5 million more Microsoft digital 
   set-top boxes as well as other Microsoft software. 

MICROCELL, ROYAL BANK JOIN FOR WIRELESS BANKING: Microcell Solutions
and Royal Bank say they will allow Fido customers to access Royal's
banking services from wireless handsets by the end of the year.

VIDEOTRON SELLS U.S. WIRELESS CABLE HOLDINGS: Groupe Videotron has
sold its wireless cable (MMDS) operations in the U.S. to Sprint
Corp. for US$180 Million. The deal will give Sprint access to another
6.4 million homes.

LOCKHEED MARTIN PLANS BROADBAND SATELLITE NETWORK: Lockheed Martin has
formed a US$3.6-Billion joint venture with TRW Inc. and Telecom Italia
to build Astrolink, a satellite system that will transmit broadband
Internet and multimedia services. Service is to begin in 2003.

PRESIDENT RESIGNS AT PSINET: Nadir Desai, President of PsiNet in
Canada and Senior VP of the parent company, has left the Internet
provider to become CEO of American Gem, a Toronto-based company that
aims to set up an Internet brokerage.

NBTEL INTRODUCES INTERNET VPN: NBTel has launched Internet VPN, a
virtual private network service offering worldwide remote access via
the Internet.

** The New Brunswick telco has also adopted video streaming 
   technology from PixStream to supply video via ADSL. 

PHONETTIX IN MERGER DISCUSSIONS: Responding to a query from the
Toronto Stock Exchange, call center outsourcer Phonettix Intelecom
says it is in merger discussions with another company, but "there is
no assurance these negotiations will be successful."

MTT PHONE BOOK SPARKS CONTROVERSY: Cooperation between the Atlantic
phone companies was not advanced by the front cover of MTT's 1999
phone book, which displayed a map of Canada's Atlantic coastline that
omitted Newfoundland and PEI. "We are by no means insignificant," said
the Deputy Speaker of PEI's legislature.
 
FIRST QUARTER RESULTS:

** Island Tel: Net income increased 8% over last year to 
   $2.3 Million. Revenues rose 4% to $20.8 Million. Long 
   distance revenue fell 10%.

** Manitoba Telecom Systems: Net income rose 11.1% to $26.1 
   Million. Revenues edged up 1.6% to $175 Million. 

Y2K IN CANADIAN TELECOM: With the new millennium just a few months
away, what dangers remain for business users of telecom services in
Canada? Gerry Blackwell's four-part study of the readiness of
carriers, vendors, and business customers, originally published in
Telemanagement, is now posted on the Telemanagement Web site.

http://www.angustel.ca/reports/r-Y2K-i.html

** To subscribe to Telemanagement call 1-800-263-4415, ext 
   225 or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html.


HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE

E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca

FAX:    905-686-2655

MAIL:   TELECOM UPDATE 
        Angus TeleManagement Group
        8 Old Kingston Road
        Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7

HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE)

TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There 
are two formats available:

1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World 
   Wide Web on the first business day of the week at 
   http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html

2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of 
   charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to 
   majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should contain only the two words: subscribe update

   To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail 
   message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address]


COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus
TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further
information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please
e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225.

The information and data included has been obtained from sources which
we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no
warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy,
completeness, or adequacy.  Opinions expressed are based on
interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If
expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a
competent professional should be obtained.

------------------------------

From: kamlet@infinet.com (Art Kamlet)
Subject: Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged
Date: 10 May 1999 13:57:56 -0400
Organization: InfiNet
Reply-To: kamlet@infinet.com


In article <telecom19.77.7@telecom-digest.org>, L. Winson
<lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> The question is who will pay to modify all the existing switchgear,
> tamden routers, and billing centers to accomodate more flexibility
> in number assignments?  The newcomers obviously want the baby Bells
> to do it, and the baby Bells obviously don't.  I don't think they should.

The way number pooling and local number portability standards seem to
be moving, most of this argument changes.

And the argument being made about who furnishes the local loop is
irrelevant in a number pooling and LNP environment.

If I am a business customer who has had my phone number -- especially
my NPA -- for ages and the XYZ company wants me to switch to them, I
am going to insist on keeping the same number.

Ane most of the politicians seem to agree, and so the additional
expenses for SS7 node machines that track LNPed numbers.  This is true
regardless of who furnishes the local loop.

Once we move from NANP and towards IP addressing, or even IP+ (greater
than 32 bit IP addressing- not sure if there is an agreed upon name
for it yet) and billing systems get to understand IP addressing,
switching systems will already be there to accommodate them.  Not in
the next 5 years, I'll bet.  I can't beleive how long it is taking
just to get the industry to implement workable LNP.  Anyone want to
guess if there are more than 3 SCPs dedicated to supplying LNP numbers
yet?  And this is at least 5 years after the initial agreements?

Perhaps the telephone companies waited until they could collect LNP
fees from their customers before even buying their first LNP SCP?

And what about number pooling?  As far as I know there isn't a single
working N-P database machine anywhere.  So Little Billy's Telephone
Company will continue to glom 10,000 numbers at a time, and big
companies will shed their tears over these Little Billys and continue
to stall on N-P.  If a major phone company has implemented N-P in
their network, I will take back everything I just said about N-P, but
I'm not aware of any that have.

Maybe the companies are waiting to be allowed to collect N-P fees from
their customers before implementing N-P?


Art Kamlet   Columbus, Ohio    kamlet@infinet.com  

------------------------------

From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine)
Subject: Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged
Date: 10 May 1999 11:53:31 -0400
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


L. Winson <lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

> Some people argue the Bells, having enjoyed monopoly protection, are
> morally obligated to do so.  I don't see it that way at all.  While
> the Bells had a monopoly, they also were tightly regulated and they
> didn't get any benefits.

Of course they got benefits.  They got a guaranteed rate of return on
their investment, and the ability to set prices to get that rate of
return, regardless of what the market price would have been.  This is
a huge subsidy.

The theory behind resale is that the reseller bears the cost of
marketing and support, so the price they pay to the ILEC is discounted
to reflect that.  I agree that in practice it's not working out very
well, in part because the Bells have done their best to sabotage it.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: peterneidhardt@ica.net (Peter Neidhardt)
Subject: Problem With Netscape Browser
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 07:21:11 GMT


I am using a Pentium 200 with Windows 95 and a 33.6 modem with a
dial-up PPP connection to my provider.

My problem is this:

About a month ago Netscape stop working on my computer.  I could
receive and send email through the browser but nothing would happen
when i inputted an address and hit return.  Netscape did nothing.  I
could use telnet, ftp and other internet fuctions through my computer
but not Nestcaoe version 4.5.  I took it into my provider and they
tooled around for 60 minutes not knowing what was the problem.  They
installed Explorer 4.0 which worked fully but Netscape continued not
to work, even if I re-installed it and an older version.

Any ideas what is wrong?  Everything work with respects to the
Internet but not Netscape.


Thanks in advance,

peterneidhardt@ica.net

------------------------------

From: wsemenov@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 09:57:47 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.


Hi!

Can anybody help me? Where in I-net I can find specification of wink
robbed-bit T1 signalling protocol?


Thanks in advance,

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 11:29:41 +0200
From: Jacob Thakadu <ThakadJ@eskom.co.za>
Subject: Telecom Engineering Student Needs Help  


I am a part time student of Witwatersrand University in South Africa.
I am doing advanced engineering studies in Telecommunications. The
courses are block released after three weeks , i.e. we attend for one week
after which we are given a take-home exam which we can discuss with
any person. We hand in the exam after two weeks.

My problem is that I am very far from the University (about 500 km)
and there are no technical resources I can use around ( e.g libraries
[ the ones around are for general purpose], personnels etc). Do you
know of any discussion groups that I can E mail to. Please give any
help you can.


Regards,
Jacob Thakadu

JMM Thakadu
Engineer  Eskom
Bloemfontein
Tel : +27 51 404 2944
Fax : +27 51 404 2002
Email : THAKADJ@ESKOM.CO.ZA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: comp.dcom.telecom.tech, alt.dcom.telecom,
and any of the *.dcom.telecom.* newsgroups would be a good place to
start your inquiry.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: herb@herbstein.com (Herb Stein)
Subject: Re: The Day the Telephone Company Burned Down
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 17:16:52 GMT
Organization: newsread.com ISP News Reading Service (http://www.newsread.com)


I can't say as I recall the Brooklyn fire in '87 but I do recall the
2nd Avenue fire in Manhattan. Both it and the Hinsdale fire were major
disasters.  However, my recollection is that the 2nd Avenue fire
happened prior to divesture (Jan. 1, '84) and the (now) former Bell
system was able to marshall resources in a way that was impossible four +
years after divesture.

Western Electric CO switches coming out of manufacturing for delivery
to other parts of the Bell system were diverted to Manhattan. The same
thing happened with other hardware and equipment. CO technicians were
loaned from other Bell Systems companies to help with the cleaning and
restoration. It's what we in Southwestern Bell did for years on a
smaller scale every time a hurricane destroyed plant in Houston. I'm
sure that, although I'm now retired, the same thing is happening with
Oklahoma City.

You just don't get the same kind of prompt, efficient cooperation from 
competitors.

I'd find it difficult to pick a "most serious" disaster. I'm sure by
various different measures, each would qualify. Much more important is
"What did we learn from them?" and "What are we now doing differently
to prevent another one?"


Herb Stein
The Herb Stein Group
herb@herbstein.com
314 215-3584


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even four years after divestiture, there
were still enough fond memories of the old days along with 'friends
helping friends' that Illinois Bell did pretty well in marshalling the
ranks to get help in Hinsdale. The new switch they obtained from
Western Electric was one that WE diverted to it although it was 
intended for another telco. It was about 95 percent built, and WE
literally finished building it on its way to Hinsdale. A particularly
sad sight was when the new switch arrived over the weekend with a
team from WE Co. to help the IBT guys get it in place. The old switch
was hauled out first, and left sitting in the alley behind the office
at 120 North Lincoln, sort of the way one leaves a bunch of scrap
metal laying out in back for the junk man to get and carry off to a
dump, a recycling plant or wherever he can get the most money for it.
Later in the day, the WE guys were out there looking at it, pulling
out little pieces here and there. Parts they wanted, they would take
and put in a cardboard box they were carrying with them. They would
look at something they pulled out of the innards, have a discussion
about it, or sometimes just a cursory examination, then toss it in
the garbage dumpster. Some of it went in their cardboard box and
went back with them to wherever. PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 10:49:01 CDT
From: Christopher Wolf <wolf@ti.com>
Subject: Re: Mother's Day Phone and Internet Traffic


John Fricks <jfricksNOTelvis@bellNOSPAMsouth.net> wrote:

> I remember that Mother's Day typically shows a major peak in AMA data
> records as people make long distance calls to Mom.

> My observation -- unscientific -- is that the opposite is true for
> Usenet postings.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sunday was a rather slow day in my
> mailbox and at the telecom web site  http://telecom-digest.org ...
> each got about half as much traffic as usual. You may have made a
> valid observation.    PAT]

So what can we gather from this?

How about: Mothers, on Sunday busy talking to all their children,
actually make up most of the usenet and/or TELECOM postings.

 -W

------------------------------

From: Fred@mac-addict.com (Fred)
Subject: Telecom Portal Updated
Organization: fred
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 19:04:27 GMT


The Telecom Career Center, located at http://www.telecomcareercenter.com/,
is proud to announce the upgrading of its telecommunications portal and
career resource site.

TCC is a community committed to helping individuals gain employment,
knowledge, professional development and advancement in today's
telecommunications industry.

Pat Montani, President of TCC said, "The Telecom Career Center is unique.
There's nothing on the web that encompasses the resources and networking
ability that we provide. TCC is becoming THE centralized spot for
telecommunications resources on the Internet."

The Telecom Career Center is a multifaceted site, encompassing the fields
Telecom Career Resources, Education & Training, Finance & Investment,
Mentoring and Products & Services, to name a few. Each category in the
portal has an associated discussion group so that those in the
telecommunications industry can gather together in common areas. Daily,
targeted telecommunications news feeds are under development.

The Telecom Career Center is head-officed in British Columbia, Canada. To
contact TCC please call Pat Montani at 604-932-0939 or e-mail
tccsales@telecomcareercenter.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 08:16:30 -0400
From: Dave Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US and European Connectivity


At 04:07 AM 5/10/99 -0400, John Starta <starta@primenet.com> wrote:

> Bosch makes the World 718 phone
> (http://www.bosch.de/uc/eg/english/produkte/) which is capable of
> operating on GSM 900 and 1900 bands. The latter is in use by a number of
> PCS providers here in the states. (There's also the Iridium phone which
> operates "everywhere" using satellites.)

> Finding service is going to be a challenge; everyone I've approached has
> said no thanks. Let me know if you have better luck.

Omnipoint's SIM card works fine in the Bosch in Sweden, Singapore and
Hong Kong and they claim most other places. They require a positive
action to enable it but there is no fee for turning it on. ATT also
offers a CellCard service for $45 per year that does roughly the same
for ATT subscribers.


Dave

------------------------------

From: rtucker+from+199905@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker)
Subject: Re: Malicious Hacker Steals Hotmail Passwords
Date: 10 May 1999 10:04:21 GMT
Organization: TTGCITN Communications, Des Moines IA and Rochester NY
Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+199905@katan.ttgcitn.com


In <telecom19.77.2@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> spewed:

> Hotmail password-stealing exploits are no longer the sole province of 
> bug-hunting, ethical hackers.

> Microsoft's MSN Hotmail said it has implemented a patch to thwart a 
> JavaScript exploit that snared the passwords of about ten users. 
> Although Hotmail has faced numerous similar exploits in the past, they 
> were merely demonstrations crafted by security-minded programmers 
> anxious to expose security holes before they were exploited for real.

And now, for the REST of the story ...

See http://www.netspace.org/lsv-archive/bugtraq.html, specifically April
1999 week 4 (javascript hotmail password trap) and May 1999 week 1
(hotmail claims vulnerability patched, so here it is).

Anyway, stuff like this is amazingly common for Hotmail.  I'm
surprised news.com makes it sound like something incredibly new and
interesting :-)

If you aren't subscribed to Bugtraq, and you're interested in this sort
of stuff, you might want to subscribe.  If you're relying on the
vendor or the media to report security problems to you ... :)


Ryan Tucker <rtucker+17@ttgcitn.com>  http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/
President, TTGCITN Communications   Box 92425, Rochester NY 14692-0425
Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored.

------------------------------

From: Rtf_PJM@shsu.edu (Paul MacArthur)
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 12:48:17 -0500
Subject: Last Laugh! FCC Goes Ooops


The following three messages came courtesy of the FCC -- interesting since
they fine radio stations for indecency ...

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I refuse to print that item. To summarize,
first there were at least ten screens of email addresses as one person
passed it along to a hundred others; each of them in turn sending it
on and adding their own notes, etc. You know the routine. Pornographic
spam is bad enough without having each would-be mailing list maintainer
send it out with everyone's name listed in the 'To:' line and all
the people who saw it before him listed in the headers above that. Then
twenty minutes later, when you get all the way to the bottom, a few 
lines of the latest sixth grade, twelve-year-old boy's humor. A very
anti-Catholic story, this version had a bus load of Nuns die in a
crash, all get to heaven at once where they are requested to make a
final Confession and do penance. As to be expected in any story like
this, the Confession always has to do with some sexual indiscretion
or another, most typically involving that unsightly, shameful, never
to be touched or looked at if you can possibly help it part of the
anatomy which is unique to males. The penance of course involves Holy
Water, and how it is to be used in a cleansing ritual.

When *I* was in sixth grade it was not a bus load of Nuns dying in
a crash, it was various women who went to Confession; all with just
one variation after another on the type of 'sin' they committed in-
volving some man and his 'thing' ... there are variations on variations
of the story. In the past it was always females who had made physical
contact with one or more men; let's make them religious sisters if
you want to add a bit of shock value to it. Now in the more enlight-
ened times in which we live, variations on the story have gay guys
finding themselves in the same predicament: a Confession regarding
a sexual act has been given, penance has been prescribed by the priest --
a penace which always involves using Holy Water for cleansing -- 
and regardless of the gender or occupation of the several persons
making their confession, as this long line of people waits their turn
to rinse their hands or other appropriate body parts in the Holy
Water, someone at the end of the line invariably rushes forward and
insists on being first, 'since I have to gargle with that water
before the rest of you have gotten it filthy.' 

Ah, where would we be if we had no shame regarding our sexual and
bathroom activities ... I told you it was pretty gross ... anyway,
some joker slipped it into the queue going out to a mailing list
maintained by the FCC ... (really!) ... their version of the story
was not quite as genteel as I must make my telling in this family-
oriented Digest I send out ... now, a thousand email addresses later,
numerous header diagnostics and prefacing remarks removed, and the
penance for the nuns, and the strenuous objection of the one who
was told to gargle comes this reply from someone at FCC who appar-
ently moderates the list as a sideline:

   Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 14:18:24 -0400 (EDT)
   Reply-To: digest@info.fcc.gov
   Originator: digest@info.fcc.gov
   Sender: digest@info.fcc.gov
   Precedence: bulk
   From: Stacey Mesa <SMESA@fcc.gov>
   To: Multiple recipients of list <digest@info.fcc.gov>
   Subject: Earlier Email
   X-Comment:  FCC Daily Digest Mailing List
   Status:

> Please excuse the interruption.

> An email inadvertently went out under my name earlier this afternoon to the
> digest list server.  I want to apologize for this email.

> Stacey Mesa

  Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 16:25:39 -0400 (EDT)
  Reply-To: digest@info.fcc.gov
  Originator: digest@info.fcc.gov
  Sender: digest@info.fcc.gov
  Precedence: bulk
  From: Joy Howell <JHOWELL@fcc.gov>
  To: Multiple recipients of list <digest@info.fcc.gov>
  Subject: Inappropriate e-mail
  X-Comment:  FCC Daily Digest Mailing List
  Status:

> It has come to our attention that a highly offensive joke was inadvertently
> transmitted earlier today to the Daily Digest subscribers.  While
> accidental, the transmission was completely inappropriate and inexcusable.
> Appropriate disciplinary action is being taken.  In the meantime, we offer
> our profuse apologies to our Daily Digest subscribers.

Joy Howell
Director
Office of Public Affairs

       -----------------------------------------------

So can I levy a fine on them???

Paul MacArthur


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can levy yourself down to your bank
and send your annual donation to TELECOM Digest at this time is what
you can do. Yes, it is that time of the month again when I humbly
ask that friends of the Digest turn their stocks and bonds, their
endowment accounts and their credit card information over to me, along
with making me a co-signer on their checking accounts, in order that
I might continue to live in the style to which I am accustomed. If
that, you feel is too much, then twenty dollars per year per reader
is fine, and I will be grateful. TELECOM Digest, POB-765, JCKS 66441-0765.

Anyone remember the night back in the early 1960's when a rock and
roll disk jockey for station WLS in Chicago made a very slightly off-
color remark over the air and the FCC cut the station off the air
five or ten minutes later for the rest of the night? And the next
day, and for about two weeks, WLS was required by the FCC to play a
pre-recorded announcement apologizing for their indiscretion and
inviting listeners to write to the FCC about any further punishment
recommended for the station?  Maybe Joy Howell should be required to
do penance by publishing her apology daily for the next month.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #78
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue May 11 20:38:22 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA00286;
	Tue, 11 May 1999 20:38:22 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:38:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905120038.UAA00286@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #79

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 11 May 99 20:38:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 79

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com?? (Joey Lindstrom)
    Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com?? (Adrian McElligott)
    Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com?? (Joey Lindstrom)
    Mystery Test Number (Paul Kenyon)
    Apparent Impact of GPS Y2K _Testing_ on Some Telco Receivers (R.J. Herber)
    Re: Internet Pioneers (James Wyatt)
    Email and Newsgroup Similarities (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: Last Laugh! FCC Goes Ooops (Paul MacArthur)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Joey Lindstrom <Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU>
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 22:37:32 -0600
Reply-To: "Joey Lindstrom" <Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU>
Subject: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com??


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This message and the two following
it are an email exchange between Joey Lindstrom and a person he
alleges is a spammer. He presents the text he received, the person
he says is a spammer replies, then Joey rebuts the reply. I must
say this is new to me also. I'll let Joey explain it.   PAT]

                   ==========================

I dunno if this is a new one on any of you, but it was certainly for
me.  Luckily, thanks to TELECOM Digest, I've become so paranoid about
spam and whatnot that I instantly recognized this for the email-
address-gathering scam that it is, instead of actually replying to the
message.  :-)

       ==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
>Return-Path: <adrian@ezymail.com>
>Resent-Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 22:30:05 -0600 (Mountain Daylight Time)
>Resent-From: adrian@ezymail.com
>From: adrian@ezymail.com
>Resent-Message-Id: <199905110430.WAA00245@sinclair.garynumanfan.nu>
>Received: from www.adsonline.com.au ([203.61.203.1])
>	by mb3.mailbank.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA05201
>	for <joey@lindstrom.com>; Mon, 10 May 1999 21:30:18 -0700
>Received: from WWW.EZYMAIL.COM ([203.61.203.40]) by www.adsonline.com.au
>          (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO205-101c) ID# 1-666L)
>          with SMTP id AAA250 for <joey@lindstrom.com>;
>          Tue, 11 May 1999 14:27:56 +1000
>Received: from dev ([203.30.195.9]) by ezymail.ezymail.com (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO205-101c) ID# 1-666L) with SMTP id AAA119 for <devbot@ezymail.com>; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 17:58:31 +1000
>Reply-To: "adrian@ezymail.com" <adrian@ezymail.com>
>To: joey@lindstrom.com
>Subject: Where in the world is joey@lindstrom.com??
>Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:29:00 +1000
>Message-ID: <005701be8fba$a09e4ad0$09c31ecb@dev.ezymail.com>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
>Importance: Normal
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
>Status:   
>

Hi joey@lindstrom.com,

I am writing to you in relation to a project that I am working on -
to build a geographical map of the Internet, and I was wondering if you
might help me by entering the name of your nearest city on my web page
at: http://www.ezymail.com/~s9813984/geolocate/default.htm. My web page
then maps your virtual location to your geographical location, there by
generating the data that I need for my project. It would help my
project along greatly if you could spare a moment to enter the name of
your nearest city, but if not, then thanks anyway for considering my
request.

I don't want to waste your time any further, but if you would like to
know how I came to get your e-mail address, and why I am asking 'you',
then here is a brief explanation. 

I got your mail address from http://www.interocitor.net/worldwidewebb/,
or if not on that page, it was on a page who's link appeared on that
page. I was trying to find e-mail addresses that had been around for a
while, and so I got hold of a list of URLs that were a few years old,
and then I set a robot up to find any e-mail addresses that might be
associated with those pages. 

Yours - joey@lindstrom.com was picked up by the robot, but I am not 
sure if it was on http://www.interocitor.net/worldwidewebb/, or whether
it was just on a page that appeared as a link on that page. (The idea
was to find people like yourself, that had been around the net for a
while, and would not be terrified by the thought of someone knowing
what their nearest city was.)

I hope that you don't mind me asking, but as you can imagine, to build
a reasonably good map of the net, I need an awful lot of people to tell
me 'where' their part of the net is.

Oh, and if you would like to know what I plan to do with the data, well
I can see all kinds of uses for it, from analysing web traffic to
geographically targeted web advertising. I would also be very
interested in hearing from anyone who may be interested in assisting,
investing, or otherwise in the development of any of these possible
uses. Even if you would just like to use the data yourself, then I
would like to hear from you.

Anyway, I have taken up enough of your time, but once again, if you
would like to help me build a map of the Internet, then all that you
have to do is just enter the name of your nearest city in the single
text box at http://www.ezymail.com/~s9813984/geolocate/default.htm 
Thanks heaps for your help in advance, and even if you don't help, then
thanks anyway for considering my request.


Kind Regards
Adrian McElligott
aem@ezymail.com

        ===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE===================

Too bad Adrian didn't leave me a 1-800 number to dial....

------------------------------

Reply-To: <aem@ezymail.com>
From: Adrian McElligott <aem@ezymail.com>
Subject: Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com??
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 16:11:36 +1000


Hi Joey,

Actually I am not collecting e-mail addresses. I am as I said in my
original message building a geographical map of the Internet.  Why
don't you check out my web page and see for yourself.  It you want to
know anything more about my project, then I am more than willing to
provide you with the information.  Here is the url that takes you
directly to my FAQ http://www.ezymail.com/~s9813984/geolocate/faq.htm

I hope that you don't mind me providing you with this additional
information, I just feel that you have taken me the wrong way.


Kind regards

Adrian

   -----Original Message-----
  From: Joey Lindstrom [mailto:Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU]
  Sent: Tuesday, 11 May 1999 14:38 PM
  To: editor@telecom-digest.org
  Cc: webmaster@tradingpostonthe.net
  Subject: Where in the world is joey@lindstrom.com??

> Too bad Adrian didn't leave me a 1-800 number to dial....

------------------------------

From: Joey Lindstrom <Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU>
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 07:43:52 -0600
Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom <Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU>
Subject: Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com??


On Tue, 11 May 1999 16:11:36 +1000, Adrian McElligott wrote:

> Actually I am not collecting e-mail address. I am as I said in my original
> message building a geographical map of the Internet.  Why don't you check
> out my web page and see for your self.  It you want to know anything more
> about my project, then I am more than willing to provide you with the
> information. Here is the url that takes you directly to my FAQ
> http://www.ezymail.com/~s9813984/geolocate/faq.htm

> I hope that you don't mind me providing you with this additional
> information, I just feel that you have taken me the wrong way.

Further investigation of InterNIC's records shows that the domains
"tradingpostonthe.net" and "ezymail.com" are registered and owned by
the same person.  Your name personally appears as the registered user
of both domain names.

You used a form letter to contact me, which substituted personal
information such as the URL of my website, my own email address, etc.,
but didn't include my real name.  The following quoted paragraph from
your original message is quite telling:

> "I got your mail address from http://www.interocitor.net/worldwidewebb/,
> or if not on that page, it was on a page who's link appeared on that
> page. I was trying to find e-mail addresses that had been around for a
> while, and so I got hold of a list of URLs that were a few years old,
> and then I set a robot up to find any e-mail addresses that might be
> associated with those pages. Yours - joey@lindstrom.com was picked up
> by the robot, but I am not sure if it was on
> http://www.interocitor.net/worldwidewebb/, or whether it was just on a
> page that appeared as a link on that page. (The idea was to find people
> like yourself, that had been around the net for a while, and would not
> be terrified by the thought of someone knowing what their nearest city
> was.)"

Let's have a look at this phrase: "... people like yourself, that had
been around the net for a while ..."

What a load of bafflegab.  How on earth does your robot know how long
I've been on the internet?  Tell us more about this list of URL's "that
were a few years old", and tell me why my friend Eldon, whose site has
been online THREE MONTHS, also got one of your mailings?

Your own URL (under the ezymail.com domain) looks and feels like a
sub-page on an ISP's web server.  Simply surfing to www.ezymail.com by
itself shows the lie of that - it's a standard Microsoft IIS4
installation that nobody has bothered to configure.

You are both the owner and operator of "ezymail.com" and
"tradingpostonthe.net", and probably "adsonline.com.au" too (which
processed your original email message), since it shares the same IP
address as "tradingpostonthe.net".  

You try to pass yourself off as a lowly user of somebody else's
system.  Admit it.  The real purpose of your mailing was to get people
to respond to confirm that the email address was valid and working,
thus making it more valuable when you sell it to spammers or use it
yourself for spam.

Since your connection is directly to Telstra, I think I'll have a word
with them as well ...


/ From the messy desktop of Joey Lindstrom
/ Email: Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU or joey@lindstrom.com
/ Phone: +1 403 313-JOEY
/ FAX:   +1 413 643-0354 (yes, 413 not 403)
/ Visit The NuServer!  http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU
/ Visit The Webb!      http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU
/
/ Rush Limbaugh's Updated 35 UNDENIABLE TRUTHS
/
/ NUMBER 32
/
/ The Los Angeles riots were not caused by the Rodney King verdict. The
/ Los Angeles riots were caused by rioters.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Bravo, touche! and all that ... thanks
very much for turning over yet another rock where they hide, Joey. As
I said three messages ago, this was a new technique I had not yet
seen. I hope other readers will now be aware of it also.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:23:05 -0500
From: Paul Kenyon <pkenyon@loctech.com>
Organization: Location Technologies
Subject: Mystery Test Number


Hello all,

I'll keep this short.  There's a test number in my area (Kansas City,
MO - 816) whose purpose is unknown to me.  I have known this number
(999) since I was in grade school, and it still works today.  When you
dial 999, there will be (usually) one ringback, followed by (usually)
3 'chirps.'  The Chirps are 1 cycle per second, with about a 25%
on/75% silent duty cycle.  I don't know what frequency(s) and rates
make up the chirp; I don't know how to analyze that.  Feel free to
listen to a small recording on my homepage:

http://www.swbt.net/~rixon/telecom/telco.html

Or just the chirp call itself:

http://www.swbt.net/~rixon/telecom/frog.wav (we call it the "electronic
frog")

Your answers/ideas are welcomed!


Paul Kenyon         <C/C++> <VB/Windows :-(>           pkenyon@loctech.com
Programming, Systems Engineering      <WAN/LAN> <ISDN :-)> <Other Telecom>
Location Technologies       http://www.loctech.com           (816)741-3169

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 09:24:03 CDT
From: Randolph J. Herber <herber@dcdrjh.fnal.gov>
Subject: Apparent Impact of GPS Y2K _Testing_ on Some Telco Owned Receivers
Reply-To: "Randolph J. Herber" <herber@fnal.gov>


I quoted the entire article as it was short.

 From: Bob Gross <75013.1420@CompuServe.COM>
 Subject: U.S. Space Command conducting Y2K compliance testing till mid May
 Organization: 75013.1420@compuserve.com
 Date: Mon May 10 22:25:51 CDT 1999
 News-group: sci.geo.satellite-nav

Sam, your news is very interesting, but it appeared on May 10. It is
my information that they did do the test to SVN27. There is one
particular model of GPS receiver that saw a date conflict between
SVN27 and all the others, so that special-purpose receiver (which
shall go unnamed) WENT TO HELL. Apparently, they dropped out of GPS
lock and had to be manually reset to bring them back up. The reason
that I say "they" is because there was a large number of these
installed and providing Stratum 1 timing to large portions of Ma
Bell. They all went into the toilet. If anybody knows anymore about
this, let me know. [It was not my receiver.]

                                        ---Bob Gross---

Randolph J. Herber, herber@dcdrjh.fnal.gov, +1 630 840 2966, CD/CDFTF PK-149F,
Mail Stop 318, Fermilab, Kirk & Pine Rds., PO Box 500, Batavia, IL 60510-0500,
USA.  (Speaking for myself and not for US, US DOE, FNAL nor URA.)  (Product,
trade, or service marks herein belong to their respective owners.)

------------------------------

From: James Wyatt <jwyatt@RWSystems.net>
Subject: Re: Internet Pioneers
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 19:45:03 -0500
Organization: Fastlane Communications (using Airnews.net!)


On Sun, 2 May 1999, Robert Eden wrote:

> To further discussions ...
> How many networks made up the "Internet" in the 80's?

The term 'internet' was (or I thought) only applied to machines that were
directly IP connected to 'The Net'. Machines on UUCP/FidoNet/AX.25 had to
send mail to an internet SMTP gateway (which also usually MX'd for them)
to get to the internet - anyone else remember grinding all night on
pathalias files? In short, you weren't really on The Internet unless you
could directly telnet to other machines on 'The Net'.

I had a ham radio packet gateway which allowed folks to use SMTP and POP
on TCP/IP encapsulated within AX.25 to UUCP gateway which could send
internet mail via a UUCP MX server. It used a coordinated IP address of
44.28.1.8 but could *not* pass packets to 'The Net', only to other hams.
It was 1200b half-duplex slow, but it used 145MHz radio and it actually
worked some of the time. 8{) It used the KA9Q package (and later JNOS) on
an 8MHz NEC V20 DOS 3v3 machine shared with my weather station. A 386/33
SCO Xenix box (running BNews with an 80MB news spool!) would do UUCP to a
MX relay Sun was nice enough to let us use. Two other hams in the area had
similar setups, but one was an early OS/2 zealot. He got it all working on
one machine. 8{)

Usenet news was also forwarded via gateways using UUCP to notes and other
group messaging platforms like FidoNet. Usenet existed a *long* time
before NNTP came around... Now it's impossible to carry much of a Usenet
newsfeed over dialup UUCP, but we used to have a $300/mo phone bill
trucking mail and news to Lawton, Olkahoma from Fort Worth, Texas! That
was with 18.7Kbps Telebit modems, now I'm adding ADSL to augment my ISDN
links. What will we see next?

Thanks for letting me ramble. They were fun times, but I'm having even
more fun now ... Technology is my toy store.


Jy@


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A lot of people do not realize there
were two things with identical names: Internet (with an upper-case 'I')
was one thing, while 'the internet' (with a lower-case 'i') was
something else. The 'internet' was made up of several networks
connected together, one of which was 'Internet'. 'Internet' was
itself a collection of networks, typically at .EDUcational insti-
tutions, or .MILitary organizations. It gets a little tricky
sometimes remembering exactly who officially belonged where. 

The term 'Usenet' was often times incorrectly interchanged with
'Internet'. The latter is/was a collection of networks which were
connected together while the former is a transport mechanism for
passing newsgroups around. Likewise the 'World Wide Web' is not
the Internet or 'the internet'; it is a transport mechanism for
sending files from one site to another, using the internet to
connect the sites. All these 'in the old days' discussions should
really now be sent to pioneers@internet-history.org where they can
be treated in more detail. If you have not yet visited Internet
Pioneers at http://internet-pioneers.org you really should do so
soon. John Levine put a lot of work into getting it running.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Email and Newsgroup Similarities
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 19:30:00 EDT


Some people are amazed to find out that what we call newsgroups are
really just big, giant, open to all mailboxes. You get your mail in
your private box which no one can see but yourself. If you chose to
set the read/write permissions on your mailbox so that everyone could
read it and write to it, then what you did was create a newsgroup.
Conversely, if I never again sent out another Digest in my life, not
only would some people be quite happy (beam!) but comp.dcom.telecom
would become my private mailbox. It is a bit more involved than that,
but that's the basic idea. Just as you can post an item in comp.dcom.
telecom using news posting software, you can do the same thing by
sending email to comp-dcom-telecom@your.site (note the dashes in the
name versus the dots in the newsgroup official version of the name)
 ... all Usenet newsgroups are the same.

Just as an individual user can use a 'dot forward' (as in .forward)
file to tell the system mail software 'do not leave the mail here
but instead put it elsewhere') the pseudo-mailboxes which relate
to newsgroups will have -- if the group is moderated -- the essence
of a 'dot forward' attached to them saying to not leave the file
here, forward it to ptownson@telecom-digest.org. This is the same
as you sending your own mail elsewhere when out of the office, etc.
In newsgroup 'mailboxes' it is not called a .forward file, it is
referred to as the moderator flag being set, forcing the newly
arrived thing to be sent on to whoever is designated as moderator
for the group. If there is no moderator flag set, then the newly
arrived file (we would call the file 'news' instead of 'mail')
sits right there where it was sent. All can view it or add
to it who wish to do so.

Now please note carefully: if you do NOT want your mail to be
piped through someone's .forward file, i.e. handled by his filter-
rules, etc ... then you put a backslash in front of his name. For
example mail to joeblow@site is subject to whatever .forward Joe
has in place. Maybe he sends the mail elsewhere, or maybe he uses
it as a way to pipe the stream into filtering, etc. But \joeblow@site
means the mail is to be delivered absolutely! to Mr. Blow's mailbox,
bypassing or ignoring any .forward, should one be present in his
directory.  A backslash in front of something always means deal with
it just as written, ignoring any user-created aliases locally or
elsewhere which might have been put up for handling that instruction.

If you do this in a script, as a spammer might do who wanted to find
his way safely to millions of email addresses through the minefield of
filter-rules users placed in his path, you need to remember that a
backslash '\' has a special meaning to the shell, and that you have to
'escape the backslash' itself using the shell's escape character --
itself a backslash! -- as well, i.e.  \\joeblow@site. In this example,
the first backslash tells the shell to take literally the second
backslash and use it as an 'escape' from any aliases strewn in the
way, 'troublesome' filter rules waiting at the end of a .forward,
etc. If you are only using a front end client such as a piece of
software to hand your mail over to the 'back office' such as sendmail,
then one slash is all you would use, since the front-end client would
know what to do at that point.

I have never tested to see if a backslash in front of a 'newsgroup
mailbox name' i.e. \some-nice-newsgroup@sitename would also serve to
overthrow the moderator flag, or ignore it and seat itself in the
box anyway. I would never want to screw up someone's moderated news-
group in that way. Even if it did, I doubt it would go any further
than the local site since when other sites came there to get the
latest news to carry away with them elsewhere the absence of the
'Approved-by' line would get them nervous. 

So just remember, when your mail is important, and needs to reach
the recipient post-haste and get right to his attention, be sure
to backslash him to go right to his default mailbox on the system
and ignore any booby-traps he has set for you along the way, things
that would cause your valuable mail to be ignored or destroyed. 


PAT

------------------------------

From: Rtf_PJM@shsu.edu (Paul MacArthur)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 03:38:09 -0500
Subject: Re:  Last Laugh! FCC Goes Ooops


> Ah, where would we be if we had no shame regarding our sexual and
> bathroom activities ... I told you it was pretty gross ... anyway,
> some joker slipped it into the queue going out to a mailing list
> maintained by the FCC ... (really!) ...

Ummm, I think it was actually sent by the FCC person because you can
clearly see in one header her name is on the To: list and then she
sends it to the Daily Digest List (which she usually sends).  So,
either she (Stacy Mesa - of the FCC) sent it accidentally or someone
was going to great lengths to make it look like she did.

> this reply from someone at FCC who apparently moderates the list 
> as a sideline:

No, Stacy Mesa usually sends out the list.

> Anyone remember the night back in the early 1960's when a rock and
> roll disk jockey for station WLS in Chicago made a very slightly off-
> color remark over the air and the FCC cut the station off the air
> five or ten minutes later for the rest of the night? And the next
> day, and for about two weeks, WLS was required by the FCC to play a
> pre-recorded announcement apologizing for their indiscretion and
> inviting listeners to write to the FCC about any further punishment
> recommended for the station?  Maybe Joy Howell should be required to
> do penance by publishing her apology daily for the next month.

Or maybe this should be brought up every time the FCC's attempts to
dictate what content is indecent.  Amazing, Howard Stern gets fined
because a man plays the piano with his penis - on the radio!!! - and
we can't fine the FCC for spamming us with an indecent joke.

I love dictatorships!!!


Paul

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Most governments and civil servants
consider themselves far above and superior to the people they
serve. The laws and regulations of various federal agencies never
apply to the agencies themselves. Does that answer your question?

I've been trying to think of a way Holy Water could be used as part
of Joy Howell's penance. Perhaps a bucket of it poured out on top
of her computer, and that of Stacy Mesa's to cleanse them of their
sins, although I am sure the computer had no idea it was saying 
something shameful and profane. PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #79
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue May 11 23:40:03 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA07393;
	Tue, 11 May 1999 23:40:03 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 23:40:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905120340.XAA07393@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #80

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 11 May 99 23:40:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 80

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Local Competition: Is it Really? (was Area Code For Wireless)(John Galt)
    ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types? (Brett Gallant)
    IVR and Q&A Database (Jeff Marrow)
    UCLA Summer Short Course on Turbo Codes (Bill Goodin)
    Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible? (mtr001deja@my-dejanews.com)
    Re: Siemens 2420 (support@sellcom.com)
    Re: Public Utility or Free Market? (Bill Newkirk)
    Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged (Linc Madison)
    Seeking Historical Date (Valda Fernald)
    New Archive CD ROM? (Matthew S. Russell)
    Re: Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol (Thor Lancelot Simon)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: John David Galt <jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com>
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society
Subject: Local Competition:  Is it Really? (was Area Code For Wireless Urged)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 02:31:46 GMT


L. Winson wrote:

> The question is who will pay to modify all the existing switchgear,
> tamden routers, and billing centers to accomodate more flexibility
> in number assignments?  The newcomers obviously want the baby Bells
> to do it, and the baby Bells obviously don't.  I don't think they should.

> Some people argue the Bells, having enjoyed monopoly protection, are
> morally obligated to do so.  I don't see it that way at all.  While
> the Bells had a monopoly, they also were tightly regulated and they
> didn't get any benefits.

> My feeling is, that if the newcomers think the local business is so
> profitable, let them build their own exchanges and lay their own
> cable.  Indeed, the newcomers argue Bell is costly, inefficient, and
> technologically obsolete (using copper instead of fibre).  Well, given
> that, they should be glad for the opportunity to build their own
> modern and efficient systems.  If they want free enterprise, they have
> to take the drawbacks, too.

Back in the first two decades of this century, a number of other companies
did exactly that.  I recall a good article in this Digest (but I don't
think it reached the archives somehow) about how Theodore Vail was able,
through targeted regional price-cutting, to take over and shut down these
operations for a few cents on the dollar, just as Standard Oil was alleged
to have done (and which quite rightly led to its breakup).

That, and not the legal monopoly protection the Bell companies got later,
is what in my view obligates the ILECs to help their competitors get
started.  It's not restitution, but it's the best approximation to it that
can be done now.


John David Galt


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are referring to the article in the
history section of the archives called:

  if using the web:

     http://telecom-digest.org/history/standard.oil.and.bell.sys

  if using anonymous FTP:

massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/history/standard.oil.and.bell.sys

  if using Telecom Archives Email Information Service 
        (tel-archives@telecom-digest.org):

     REPLY yourname@site
     GET standard.oil.and.bell.sys
     END
It is a great article, written about three years ago by Mark Cuccia. 
Everyone should read it.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Brett Gallant <bgallant@nbnet.nb.ca>
Subject: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types?
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:24:55 -0300
Organization: NBTel Internet


My office is rebuilding after a recent fire.  We are using a digital
hybrid system for our phones (Panasonic).  We'll have 30-40 telephone
lines and upwards to 40 data cat five data lines.  I'd like to have
the building prepared for DSL service before it arrives.

I plan on using the DSL connection with a proxy server such as wingate
to feed internet access to a few people in the building.  The host
computer will be in our server room which will be approx 150-200 feet
from the wiring closet.

Since we are using a hybrid system I was wondering if we have to go
with the expense of adding another line to bring us up to a total of
11 lines instead of 10 to service our building.  Would it be possible
for the telco company to use one of the 10 lines to feed my ADSL
connection to the ADSL host computer?

The reason I'm asking is so far I've noticed that with our existing
system I only manage speeds of 28Bps with my usr 56k modem.  If I take
the same system out of the building or switch to a line that is not
hooked up to the hybrid system I get decent connect speeds of
45-49bps.  Could the Cat 3 voice cable affect this or is it an issue
with the electrical current that powers the phones hooked up to this
system?


Thanks again for your help,

Brett

------------------------------

From: Jeff Marrow <jmarrow@alve.com>
Subject: IVR and Q&A Database
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 20:01:59 GMT


Does anyone know if the Q&A database is either ODBC compatible or has
an IVR plugin?


Thanks,

Jeff

------------------------------

From: Bill Goodin <bgoodin@unex.ucla.edu>
Subject: UCLA Summer Short Course on Turbo Codes
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 16:52:58 -0700


This summer, UCLA Extension will present the following short course 
on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles.

July 26-30, 1999, "Turbo Codes: Analysis, Design, Performance, and 
Implementation".  The instructors are Sergio Benedetto, PhD, Professor, 
Polytecnico di Torino; Dariush Divsalar, PhD, Senior Member of the 
Technical Staff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Guido Montorsi, PhD, 
Postdoctoral Fellow, Polytecnico di Torino; and Fabrizio Pollara, PhD, 
Technical Group Supervisor, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, $1695.

For additional information and a complete course description, please
visit our web page, http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/,

or contact Marcus Hennessy at:
(310) 825-1047
(310) 206-2815  fax
mhenness@unex.ucla.edu

This course may also be presented on-site at company locations.

------------------------------

From: mtr001deja@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible?
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 13:33:38 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.


We have a SX-200 Superswitch which was probably installed around 1982.
Is this switch T1 compatible?


Mike

------------------------------

From: support@sellcom.com
Subject: Re: Siemens 2420
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 17:37:22 GMT
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com


the_spectre@my-dejanews.com spake thusly and wrote:

> Siemens will begin shipment of the Gigaset 2402 sometime in the near
> future (probably by June).  It lacks some of the features of the
> Gigaset 2420 (for example, the wired handset, answering machine,
> auxiliary port, speakerphone), but still supports 8 cordless handsets.
> It also enables users to "bridge" calls (pick up an extension).  The
> Gigaset 2420 continues to be a better solution for small office or home
> office users, but the 2402 is ideal for residential users.  It also
> will cost less.

We plan to offer that unit at www.sellcom.com when it becomes
available and we will try to "beat any advertised price" yada yada ...

But, the price difference (in my opinion) is not that much when one
considers what one is giving up.  For someone thinking of buying
several handsets the few dollars saved is a small percentage of the
overall cost.

The 2402 is very nice, but a giant step backwards from the 2420.  For
those who already have a sophisticated voice mail system it could be
real handy and I suppose it could be located in a more ideal position
for extra range since it would not need to be so accessible.  I dunno,
time will tell.  Everything I have seen Siemens make has been excellent.

Siemens is offering a rebate on the 2420 with one extra handset combo
of a free headset.  If you get a 2420 and two combos (handset and
charger) then you get the headset and a $50 rebate.

See http://www.sellcom.com


Steve

http://www.sellcom.com  
(Opinions expressed, though generally wise and 
accurate are not officially positions of SELLCOM) 
Telecom and internet networking hardware / Security products
Cyclades / Siemens (May REBATE) / Y2K ODIU support / Zoom / Palmer Safes
(Tech assistance provided without warranty express or implied)

------------------------------

From: Bill Newkirk <wnewkirk@iu.net>
Subject: Re: Public Utility or Free Market?
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 23:05:14 -0400
Organization: Posted via RemarQ Communities, Inc.


Well, if you don't want the infrastructre in the town to support your
wireless stuff, then you won't have the wireless stuff.

On the other hand, to insure you don't have to make these decisions,
everyone should give up the radio-based telephones and no one will
want to build an antenna support at the cost-effective point to cover
the town.

We live in a technological age. artifacts of same are inevitable.

Trying to be a reactionary utopian where you have all the benefit (radio
telephones) without any of the costs (infrastructure to provide repeater and
phone line tie-ins for all the flea powered radio telephones) is not
rational.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 16:58:10 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Area Code For Wireless Urged
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.77.7@telecom-digest.org>, lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L.
Winson) wrote:

> The question is who will pay to modify all the existing switchgear,
> tamden routers, and billing centers to accomodate more flexibility
> in number assignments?  The newcomers obviously want the baby Bells
> to do it, and the baby Bells obviously don't.  I don't think they should.

> Some people argue the Bells, having enjoyed monopoly protection, are
> morally obligated to do so.  I don't see it that way at all.  While
> the Bells had a monopoly, they also were tightly regulated and they
> didn't get any benefits.

First of all, to say that the Bells got no benefits under the old
monopoly regime is ludicrous.  Secondly, don't forget that the Bells
have been at the vanguard of pushing for local service competition,
since that's the only way they can get into the long-distance market.
More particularly, the Bells have been pushing for the cosmetic
appearance of local competition, while dragging their feet on the
reality of it.

I agree that the new entrants in the field are pushing to get more
of a free ride than they deserve.  However, the Bells have to accept
a large share of the costs in moving to a non-monopoly business, and
that certainly includes a large share of the costs in revamping the
system of allocating numbers.

The Bells stand to benefit dramatically from true local competition.
They also stand to benefit from slowing the pace of area code splits
and overlays, since it is the ILECs that take the brunt of consumer
anger over those changes.

> Another problem I have with so-called "local competition" is that a
> lot of companies aren't really "companies" but resellers.  They want
> to come in and act as a middleman and resell Bell's services.  I can't
> see how the customer would benefit from that -- to me it's like sleight
> of hand card tricks.

I agree.  I think that we need to tilt the playing field much more
sharply towards facilities-based competition instead of resellers.
However, that doesn't change the fact that the Bells have to be a
part of changing the system of allocating numbers.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ...
> When cable companies began getting the go-ahead to wire towns all
> over the USA several years ago, look how fast they did it, and
> in a usually very inconspicuous way. Within a year or two they
> had even large cities like Chicago virtually wired, with cable
> service available to everyone once the city council approved the
> franchise.  PAT]

Not always true.  I lived for about two years in San Jose, California,
which has the distinction of being the first city in a metropolitan
area to have cable television.  The franchise was awarded in the
late 1960's, IIRC.  However, the neighborhood in which I lived, which
had been around since the 1920's, was still not wired when I moved out
in 1987.  The cable company in Dallas, Texas, took many years to get
out to the northern part of town, even though that area was much more
affluent than the area of San Jose where I lived.


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 17:34:25 -0700
From: Valda Fernald <fernald@jps.net>
Subject: Historical Date Needed


I am artifacs chairman of the Sarah A Mooney Museum in Lemoore, Ca.
We have an old, maybe turn of century wall telephone.  I am looking
for the date telephones arrived in this community. 


Val Fernald


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps someone with knowlege of early
telephone history in that part of California can assist Val.   PAT] 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 21:37:36 -0400
From: Matthew S. Russell <msr@clark.net>
Subject: New Archive CD Rom?


Hi Pat,

Around three years ago I purchased a CD of archived postings of the
Digest, and I can't remember whether I got it through the distributor
Walnut Creek or if I sent the money directly to you. I checked the web
page but I couldn't find any info there.

I'd like to get an updated CD, can you point me to the right place?


Thanks,

 --MSR

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think I took that information out of
the archives once the distributor (Walnut Creek) said that sales per
pretty well over with. There were several thousand copies sold of that
CD ROM. You would have ordered it directly fron Walnut Creek. I believe
our good friend Mike Sandman may still have some copies of it since
it was listed in his last catalog. Contact mailto:mike@sandman.com
for details, or better still, look at his catalog on line in our
archives: http://telecom-digest.org/sponsorlinks.html  I would hate
to undercut him and say 'do not buy the Telecom Archives CD' however
the fact remains it is now about three plus years out of date, :(
Visit him anyway and get his catalog; it is rather incredible, and
if anyone wants the CD from 1995-96 feel free to get it from him.

I would *love* to issue a new, updated version of the CD, probably
sometime next year under the name 'Twenty Years of TELECOM Digest'
The problem is, Walnut Creek will not do it. They say they did not
make any profit on the first one, and furthermore, 'everyone now 
expects everything on the net to be free'. While I agree that things
on the net should generally be free -- I have benefitted greatly from
freeware and free information -- I believe it is okay to charge for
the cost of reproduction, the media, etc. Walnut Creek understandably
is not a charity operation; they told me they have virtually quit
making 'archived collections' of things on the net available because
so many people will sit for hours downloading it for free rather than
spend a few dollars for a professionally prepared archive. 

I on the other hand would probably be inclined to make it available
free to persons who otherwise donated some minimum amount to the
Digest. Furthermore, I do not have a recording device to make CDs.
I would have to buy one (unless someone wants to loan one for an
indefinite period of time) and if it gets to that point, I will
hand-produce them on a demand basis. I would obviously prefer that
some person or company professionally equipped to do this be the
ones to handle it. So right now the answer to your question is
there is no updated version. What few copies of the 1995-96 edition
remain are probably available through Mike Sandman.  Anyone with
a better idea is welcome to speak up.   PAT]
 
------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol
Date: 11 May 1999 00:00:26 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.78.5@telecom-digest.org>, <wsemenov@my-dejanews.
com> wrote:

> Can anybody help me? Where in I-net I can find specification of wink
> robbed-bit T1 signalling protocol?

Go to the bookstore.  Buy _Telecommunication System Engineering_ by Freeman.

What you need is in there.  And so is damned near everything else ...


Thor Lancelot Simon	                          tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #80
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Wed May 12 21:10:05 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA23182;
	Wed, 12 May 1999 21:10:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 21:10:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905130110.VAA23182@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #81

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 12 May 99 21:10:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 81

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com?? (James Wyatt)
    Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com?? (Adrian McElligott)
    Unsolicited FAX Spamming (John R. Covert)
    Book Review: "ATM", Uyless Black (Rob Slade)
    Re: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types? (Ron Walter)
    Re: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types? (Steve Gaarder)
    Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition (Ed Ellers)
    WorldXchange Terrible Experience (Chris Eastland)
    Pulse EPABX (Keelan Lightfoot)
    Re: Local Competition: Is it Really? (was Area Code For Wireless) (J Galt)
    Re: Email and Newsgroup Similarities (Marc Schaefer)
    One Small Correction (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: James Wyatt <jwyatt@RWSystems.net>
Subject: Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com??
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 09:31:48 -0500
Organization: Fastlane Communications (using Airnews.net!)


Collecting a database like this could be useful for analysis, but I
think, with the increased use of proxies, that it will be diluted over
time. As we changed providers (and reassigned subnets) over the last
few years, this information will have 'aged' as well.

Our former subnets have been reassigned to folks far away from us. One
of our customers has users in CA, NY, TX, and UT coming from the same
addess.  Another has 40,000+ users spread over 28 states coming from
the same class 'C' subnet. (btw: after using both them, I'll take
Squid over the uSoft proxies until hardware is free) Several
high-speed (Cable and DSL) outfits are using proxies to cover wide
areas while managing their backbone links.

While I'm not saying "it won't work that easily, is that what you are
*really* doing?", I really suspect motives when someone collects data
from the rest of us while not sharing it. I have participated in
surveys in the past when they have shared results. (Anyone remember
the postscript maps showing the backbone UUCP providers and links?)

It just doesn't sound like we have the whole story - Jy@


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So James, you don't think we have the
whole story? How about if I turn the podium over at this point to
Adrian McElligott who will give us a truthful presentation about the
work going on ... then, after Adrian's testimony, we will empanel a
jury to decide the facts in this matter, unless Adrian would prefer
a bench trial instead.

Adrian, you have been charged with attempted spamming. I will enter a
plea of not guilty plea in your behalf. You of course had the right to
remain silent, but have chosen to testify. Do you swear to tell the 
whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Good!  PAT]

------------------------------

Reply-To: <aem@ezymail.com>
From: Adrian McElligott <aem@ezymail.com>
Subject: Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com??
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 01:08:55 +1000


Hi again Joey, (and ah hi to PAT too):

You certainly have got yourself worked up about this, and I am sorry
about that. I really didn't want to piss you off. Let me just address
a few of your points because you have taken a few fact, and tried to
put a picture together, and where there are pieces missing you have
just made up your own.

First up I am the registered owner, administrative contact etc on
heaps of domains. Just search the InterNic for my name, there are
heaps of them.  There are also other regional nic's which have domains
in my name.  So there are a few pieces of the picture that you had,
but what you don't know is that I build web sites for a living and
although I have worked on these sites, I have built, registered,
moved, or whatever, I don't own them.  (except for ezymail.com, I do
currently still own that one).  So objectively - My name is recorded
against a few domains - what does that prove.

Second, I never said that I wasn't using a form letter. In fact to the
contraire, I told you exactly how I got your e-mail address and
everything.  You even quoted it back to me. So what does that prove?

> Let's have a look at this phrase: "...people like yourself, that had
> been around the net for a while..."
> What a load of bafflegab.  How on earth does your robot know how long
> I've been on the Internet?

Once again you have made an incorrect assumption here.

How does my robot know that?  Well I really don't like giving out my
intellectual property, so I am reluctant to say so, because I take
from the spirit of your last message that you would blab it around
everywhere, I will tell you this much though. The data is 12 months
old because that is how long I have had it sitting on my drive, and it
is easy to build a robot to tell how old sites are if you give it some
thought.  If you really can't think of a way then you let me know, but
tell me what is one of the first things that a person does when they
put a new site up? Oh what the heck, I will tell you - some search
engines remember the date that the site was first logged with them.
My robot asks the 'search engine' for sites in the order of their age,
and that way I get old sites.

So no, it was _not_ a load of bafflegab at all. You just assumed that,
because you didn't think that there was anyone out there smarter than
you, and you figured that if you couldn't figure out how to determine
an approximate age for a site, then no one could.

> Your own URL (under the ezymail.com domain) looks and feels like a
> sub-page on an ISP's web server.  Simply surfing to www.ezymail.com by
> itself shows the lie of that - it's a standard Microsoft IIS4
> installation that nobody has bothered to configure.

Once again, your facts are right, but your assumptions are wrong, and
the problem is that you can't tell the difference between the two.

> looks and feels like a sub-page on an ISP's web server.

Subjective conclusion, but yes I will accept it as a fair enough 
observation.

> Simply surfing to www.ezymail.com by itself shows the lie

That is an assumption I am afraid, and once again it is wrong. Just
because you own the server, and you don't use the root web, doesn't
mean that your are trying to deceive anyone. I have good reason for
not using the root web, you assumed that it is because I wanted to
deceive people, but the fact is that I have many web sites on my
server, and only one can be root.  As I said earlier I develop web
sites for people, well I also host sites for people. The reason why
the root web is empty, not that it is any of your business, is that I
was running a e-mail notification site there, which I have since
closed. I still have the source to it, if you want proof.

> You are both the owner and operator of "ezymail.com" and
> "tradingpostonthe.net", and probably "adsonline.com.au" too (which
> processed your original e-mail message), since it shares the same IP
> address as "tradingpostonthe.net".

All assumptions, and almost all wrong.

I built www.tradingpostonthe.net, register the domain etc. It is one
of my best sites, check it out hey?  However, I don't own it. I do
support it and maintain it though.  adsonline.com.au is the same site,
they changed the name of their company a few years back and they have
kept the original url - adsonline.com.au so as not to break any links,
bookmarks etc.  I am really getting tied of explaining everything to
you, but I know if I stop now you will think that I am trying to hide
something, so I will press on.

I route my mail, incoming and outgoing though their site, they know
it, you can tell them if you like. Please, please!! I don't do this to
be deceptive, I know that you would be thinking that.  I do that
because I am multi-homed, and my ISP don't support multi-homed
routing, so to split my traffic across my two links, I send everything
that I can't individually direct across one link, and everything that
I can't across the other.

> You try to pass yourself off as a lowly user of somebody else's system.
> Admit it.  The real purpose of your mailing was to get people to
> respond to confirm that the e-mail address was valid and working, thus
> making it more valuable when you sell it to spammers or use it yourself
> for spam.

All assumptions, ALL WRONG.

So you think that anyone who uses someone else's system is a 'lowly
user' ...  mmh that is sad, but you are entitled to your opinion.  Your
final conclusion, for which there are now no facts to base it on is
simply wrong. I am not validating e-mail addresses.  I am building a
map of the Internet! Fair dink'em I am. Why is that so hard to
believe?  That is exactly what I am doing.  Why don't you checkout my
page? Do you really think that someone would go to that much trouble
to validate e-mail addresses?

Hang-on, I just thought of how to _prove_ it to you.  In my e-mail I
don't ask you to return my mail do I?  Would that not be a lot easier?
I would just ask people to respond to my e-mail and tell me their
nearest city. Of course I don't do that, because it would not help me
build my map, because I need to map an IP address to a location, and I
can't get an IP address from an e-mail.

Anyway look, tell you what. You add yourself to my interested people
list at http://www.ezymail.com/~s9813984/geolocate/faq.htm

There is a form at the bottom of the page. Don't worry adding yourself
to the list doesn't make you a target for anything, and I am not
selling the addresses or doing anything deceptive with them.  Hell, do
you think that I would want you on the list if I was going to sell it
to anyone. (They would send a hit man after me.)  If you don't trust
me, use a false name and someone else's e-mail account, then you will
see in a few months time, that I was not talking a load of bafflegab,
but was actually telling the truth.

When that time comes, I expect an apology.

> Since your connection is directly to Telstra, I think I'll have a word
> with them as well....

And I will expect an apology for that too....

PS PAT, I do expect that you will respect my right of reply and will
also publish this reply in it's entirety to comp.dcom.telecom. I trust
that you do respect the laws of natural justice, and sorry, but I
don't have a 1800 number to give you.

I also think that this may be a case of a storm in a tea cup, I think
that Joey may have been right when he said "thanks to TELECOM Digest,
I've become so paranoid about spam and whatnot". Mind you I don't
think that it is fair of him to blame your list for his paranoia, but
I guess that he is entitled to his opinion. It is amazing how you can
quote someone and change the entire meaning of what they say. I am not
sure why this still surprises me though, as the media have been doing
this for years.

                         --------------------

Judge Judy's Note: Thank you for your testimony, Adrian. Alright, the
jury will now retire to consider the testimony given and the evidence
previously presented by joey@lindstrom.com ... normally, if a defendant 
poses a danger to the community, I have to place them in the custody
of the Attorney General or his authorized representative during the
time they are on trial. In this case, Adrian is released with a stern
warning to read this e-zine -- err, appear in court -- later this week
when the jury's findings are published, probably Thursday or Friday,
USA time. The question for the jury to decide: is Adrian guilty of
attempted spamming or not guilty of attempted spamming? The jury will
please document its decision with appropriate net research, but do
not make it so detailed that it takes me all day to read it. I want
to publish as many jury votes as possible. Please read earlier issues
of the Digest from this week if you need to review the prior testimony
given by Joey. Get your jury decisions in promptly. Court is adjourned!
PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 13:38:32 -0400
From: John R. Covert <no.spam.covert.maps.on@covert.org>
Subject: Unsolicited FAX Spamming


You thought Title 47 of the U.S. code would stop unsolicited FAX spamming,
didn't you?

Well, unfortunately, you were wrong.

For the past several weeks, all the phones I have have been ringing with
the telltale beep-beep-beep of an incoming FAX.  Finally, they actually
hit the FAX line, and left their advertisement.

It asks me to call one of two 900 numbers to get more Faxed information
about their product.

I called up the phone company to try to find out who owned the 900
numbers, or at least who the LD carrier for that particular number was.
The phone company (Bell Atlantic) told me that they didn't have that
information, and even if they did, it was proprietary and they couldn't
give it to me.

Well, at www.nanpa.com there is a list of the LD carriers for each
900 NXX.  This got me to MCI.  After three more phone calls, I had
the name and address of the company behind the 900 numbers.

I had hoped they were in Massachusetts, because then I would have just
gone down to small claims court and requested the $500 ($1500 if the
court decides that the violation was knowing or willfull) that Title 47
of the US Code allows.

See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.text.html and note that in
the section for faxes, the award is due even for a single call, with no
need to say "stop" and wait for another call.

But they were in Florida, which made things more difficult.  I called
them up, and they told me that the calls were originating from England
in order to be exempt from U.S. law.

I am not sure that I believe that they are power-dialling every number
in the United States from England.  On the other hand, they can probably
figure out whether there is a fax machine at the number they call within
about two UK message units, so maybe they are.

What do other readers of the Digest think?


/john

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 08:15:33 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "ATM", Uyless Black
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKATM.RVW   990402

"ATM", Uyless Black, 1999, 0-13-083218-9 0-13-571837-6 0-13-784182-5
%A   Uyless Black 102732.3535@compuserve.com uyless@infoinst.com
%C   One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ   07458
%D   1999
%G   0-13-083218-9 0-13-571837-6 0-13-784182-5
%I   Prentice Hall
%O   800-576-3800 416-293-3621 201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131
%P   3 volumes, 873 p.
%T   "ATM, Second Edition"

The preface states that the book is intended for professionals who do
not have time to keep up with standards documents, and for engineers
in the field.  Certainly ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) is a topic
that lots of people want to talk about, but few understand.

The topic is divided into three volumes, the first covering ATM as a
foundation for broadband networks, the second looking at signalling,
and the third discussing internetworking.

Chapter one of the first volume is supposed to be an introduction, but
it doesn't lay much of a groundwork for the audience.  In a storm of
vegetable soup, we basically get the idea that people want more
bandwidth.  Even to come up with the notion that ATM can be carried
over SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) requires some reading between
the lines.  Generally this section would also provide some rationale
for the use of ATM, but table 1-3, for example, lists the "top ten"
problems to be solved and starts with the request for LAN performance
above 100 Mbps at a time when Gigabit Ethernet is starting to become
available.

Chapter two discusses the conversion of analogue signals to digital
data suitable for carriage on digital networks.  The explanation is,
however, just as confused as that for chapter one.  At one point we
are given an explanation of pulse amplitude modulation (PAM) that only
requires two or three re-readings to understand.  Immediately,
however, Black starts using PCM (pulse code modulation) without noting
the similarity or distinction in the change.

So goes most of the material.  The remaining topics in book one
include the layered network model, existing technologies, Broadband
Integrated Services Digital Network (B-ISDN), ATM basics, the ATM
Adaptation Layer (AAL), ATM switching, traffic management, call and
connection control, internetworking, SONET, OAM (operations,
administration, and maintenance), the physical layer, and the ATM
market.  Volume two adds ISDN and B-ISDN architecture, ATM
architecture, signalling system 7 (SS7) architecture, addressing, SAAL
(signalling ATM adaptation layer), user-network interface (UNI)
signalling, B-ISDN user part (B-ISUP) signalling, operations between
UNI and NNI (network-node interface), performance requirements, and
private network-network interface (PNNI).  Volume three looks into
internetworking, with a rationale, encapsulation and address mapping,
ATM and frame relay, DXI (data exchange interface) and FUNI (frame
user networking interface), the ATM Forum's standards FRF .5 and .8,
LAN emulation, protocol data units (PDUs), configuration, Next Hop
Resolution Protocol (NHRP), and multiprotocol over ATM.

One cannot fault a technical book aimed at a technical audience for
taking a highly technical tone.  On the other hand, if this book is
truly aimed at those who have no time to study, it is making
extraordinary demands on their time.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKATM.RVW   990402

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
If we knew what we were doing we wouldn't call it research now
would we?                                    - Albert Einstein.
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:30:34 -0500
From: ronw@capcittel.com (Ron Walter)
Subject: Re: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types?


Brett Gallant wrote:

> Since we are using a hybrid system I was wondering if we have to go
> with the expense of adding another line to bring us up to a total of
> 11 lines instead of 10 to service our building.  Would it be possible
> for the telco company to use one of the 10 lines to feed my ADSL
> connection to the ADSL host computer?

> The reason I'm asking is so far I've noticed that with our existing
> system I only manage speeds of 28Bps with my usr 56k modem.  If I take
> the same system out of the building or switch to a line that is not
> hooked up to the hybrid system I get decent connect speeds of
> 45-49bps.  Could the Cat 3 voice cable affect this or is it an issue
> with the electrical current that powers the phones hooked up to this
> system?

Cat 3 voice cable is not your problem, as it's generally better than
the cable used by the phone company.  Without viewing your current
location I would suggest the problem is more likely that the modems
are hooked up as extensions of the system.  You will have that problem
on about any PBX or Hybrid system -- something about the switching
that has to go through to make the connection with the phone company
line.  Actually, 28.8 is a pretty good speed if you are running
through a hybrid system, especially if you are running through one of
those that hooks up through a port on the phone (XDP or Extra Device
Port).  I would bet that if you connect the modem directly to the
phone line ahead of the phone system that your speeds would improve,
even if it is a phone line used by the phone system.

That was a big selling point on the one line of Panasonic phones --
that you could plug your modem into the jack on the back of the phone.
We'd always warn people that their speeds were limited, but that never
seemed to matter when you are saving $500 over other alternatives.
Anyway, the phone system being hooked up to the line won't affect
speeds and shouldn't affect the DSL, either.  You should be able to
use one of your existing lines just fine.


Ron Walter
Capitol City Telephone
Lincoln NE

 TELECRASTINATION (tel e kras tin ay' shun) n. The act of always letting
the phone ring at least twice before you pick it up, even when you're only
six inches away.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 11:09:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steve Gaarder <gaarder@actech.com>
Subject: Re: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types?


Brett Gallant writes:

> The reason I'm asking is so far I've noticed that with our existing
> system I only manage speeds of 28Bps with my usr 56k modem.  If I take
> the same system out of the building or switch to a line that is not
> hooked up to the hybrid system I get decent connect speeds of
> 45-49bps.  Could the Cat 3 voice cable affect this or is it an issue
> with the electrical current that powers the phones hooked up to this
> system?

No, it has to do with the fact that the Panasonic Digital Hybrid
switch digitizes the audio at a lower rate than the standard 64k bits
per second.  The result works fine for voice, but high-speed modem
connections suffer.  You're doing well to get 28k out of it.


Steve Gaarder                      Network and Systems Administrator
gaarder@cmold.com                  C-MOLD, Ithaca, N.Y., USA

------------------------------

From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com>
Subject: Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 06:14:34 -0400


Pat, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted:

> I have used the same analogy as yourself in the past when arguing
> that competitors should be required to actually compete. Picture a
> store in which your competitor gets to purchase your products at a
> greatly reduced price then stand the same store as yourself and sell
> them at a slightly reduced cost to people who had been your customers
> until he got a judge somewhere to agree that it was 'unfair' to make
> him build his own store. He also uses your shopping carts and often
> times has your cashiers ring up his customer's sales and then remit to
> him. If something goes wrong with the product he resells, or it is
> unsuitable for the customer's needs, he blames you for it and is
> continually sending his customers to see you, out of frustration since
> he makes it difficult for the customers to get through to him with
> complaints, etc. The above scenario is what 'local competition' in
> telephone service amounts to."

That's all very true; the only quibble I have is that there is no way
that a competing LEC can offer a usable service unless it can
interconnect with the incumbent LEC so everybody with a phone can
still call everybody else with a phone.  That was the big problem with
the dual phone systems early in the century -- the Bell companies
refused to interconnect with the independents in a given area, so
residential customers usually chose the same telco their friends had
and businesses often had to keep two phones.  

In some areas one of the two companies would be willing to give
businesses the same number they got from the other telco, so you'd see
ads saying "Both Phones 297" or whatever.  (In Louisville we used to
have ads listing "Cumberland" and "Home" numbers.  The latter wasn't
the proprietor's home phone -- it was a business line provided by the
Home Telephone Company.)  I suspect the telecom landscape would be
*very* different if, instead of the states following the progressivist
notion that a regulated monopoly would be more efficient than
competing telcos, the Federal government had simply stepped in and
forced LECs to interconnect!

Frankly, I'd *very much* like to see real, facilities-based local
competition, since a reseller can't improve the situation if the
incumbent telco is incapable of providing good service.  I've been
fighting with BellSouth for the past two years over some severe
problems I've been having with modem connections (including fax) since
they cut over a new switch; as best I can tell their carrier system is
distorting the signal and going back to a copper pair would fix it,
but they refuse to do that.  This past Monday, in fact, one of their
reps tried to convince me that, as long as I can get a dial tone,
everything is okay and they have no obligation to fix the situation.
(The BellSouth rep had the gall to try to sell me ISDN!  That's like a
Lincoln-Mercury dealer refusing to fix a new Sable under warranty and
instead trying to sell the customer a Town Car.)

Right now if someone came to me and offered service off a second-hand
1A ESS switch I'd take it, as long as they gave me a real pair instead
of the imitation telephone service BellSouth provides in my
neighborhood.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Court did require AT&T to inter-
connect much earlier this century. Then maybe fifty years ago the
Court ruled further that AT&T was forbidden to aquire any more
telephone operating companies with one exception: if the telco was
about to go bankrupt or was otherwise in imminent danger of ceasing
operation, then AT&T *had* to buy it and take over. 

My point all along with both local and long distance competition has
been that the competitors should have been required to make the same
capital outlay on outside plant which AT&T had to make. They should
have been required to devote the same amount of resources to research
as AT&T put into Bell Laboratories. If I had been the judge, I would
have instructed the competitors to build their network, solicit
subscribers, etc and that the only thing I would do is order the Bell
System to treat the newcomers at 'arms length'; to provide a supply
of telephone numbers in a fair way. And when the new competitor was
ready to interconnect, I would order Bell to open its front door and
hand a bunch of wires out saying, 'here are your pairs ...'. If the
competitors were so afraid of Bell being unfair, as the judge I
would have ordered that Bell only had the right to make one demand,
that being that competitor met technical standards, numbering plan
requirements, things like that. 

I would never have required that Bell take the competitors in as
'roomates' in their central office, or share their billing records,
etc. I would probably have required that Bell share their conduits,
and henceforth shared in the maintainence cost. No one wants the
streets dug up all the time. I would have overridden any local
franchise deals which put the competitors at a disadvantage. We know
that local telco executives are frequently very chummy at the local
country club with the mayor and city council members as well as state
commissioners. I would have warned all concerned that there had best
not be any game playing. I would have required Bell to include the
newcomers in its billing practices, calling cards, etc more for the
convenience of the public than as an advantage to the competitor.
Full and total interchange, but nothing more. 

Do you realize that in the fifteen plus years since divestiture that
have passed, had any of the competitors seriously begun construction
of their own network, outside plant, etc they could have had it done
by now?  *Then* we would see honest competition, and if, after all
that effort the competitors could sell it for less, let it happen.  PAT] 

------------------------------

From: Chris Eastland <chrise@shoreview.com>
Organization: Shoreview Consulting Inc.
Subject: WorldXchange Terrible Experience
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 09:22:27 -0400


I thought I'd share this to help any other unfortunates. I use US-UK
dialling a lot (I live in Boston area) and read some email that
mentioned 7c a minute, to also apply to calling card calls.  Very
impressive. A month ago I was paying 10c a minute with MCI (pretty
good) but calling card int'l calls were high (maybe 30c a minute or
so) except when dialing home number from UK. I am adding a UK branch
office soon and thought I could use the Int'l callback too so I
determined to try out WorldXchange on one line before switching the
rest.

So I switched -- called my local carrier as asked and told them (BA) to
switch LD carrier to Worldxchange, which they promptly did. Result: No
Long Distance Service! Worldxchange customer service (henceforth WX in
this post) told me it took four days to hook up and that I should not
have called BA even though their agent told me to, until WX were ready
(They didn't tell me how I would know they were ready). OK, fine. I
have other phones ... so I can use MCI on these still.

Four or five days latter after a few calls to Cust Serv it WORKS!! I
am in 7c city (I hope). 00 no longer returns the dreaded 'fast
busy'. I can dial LD in the US and Int'l to the UK! At least it worked
for a few days. Last Firday it stopped working again. I can only dial
800 and 888 numbers from the phone -- the rest and 00 -- fast busy.

So I called WX, waited ten minutes in a queue, and recorded a
problem. Then I sent email from www.worldxchange.com. Someone called
Steph said she'd look into it. The next few days with no sign of the
problem going and no calls from WX to say it had been fixed, I called
WX again with the same five to ten minute wait. I was told to get a
Local Phone company test. I did. BA said no probems and LD calls were
going through to WX as requested. I told WX this (five to ten minute
wait).  They said OK, they would call tech cust serv again. More mail
to and from Steph, mostly saying she could not escalate my problem as
it hadn't been 48 hrs. 4th day of no LD service. I called BA, they
rechecked line -- no problem. WX say no calls getting through to
them. Steph ignoring email. WX custserv say they are doing all they
can etc. NOW they can escalate.

Still nothing, no LD since Friday. No one cares. Cheap rates mean
nothing if you can't connect.  Good luck. If you hear of any good
rates with actual service please let me know.


Chris Eastland

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 22:58:52 -0700
Subject: Pulse EPABX
From: Keelan Lightfoot"<keelan@mail.bzzzzzz.com>


Greetings,

I'm looking for any information on Northern Telecom's Pulse 120/80
EPABX (SG-1A/SG-1). Anything from where I can locate spare parts to
where I could find out information about the creators of this
system. I have been scouring the internet, and have searched every
TELECOM digest from 1981-1989, and found nothing that looks
relevant. (I picked such early digests because Northern Telecom
produced this system in the 70's and early 80s.)

Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Keelan Lightfoot

PS: You can find out more about my PBX 'project' at:
http://www.bzzzzzz.com/beehive/keelanl/pbx/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:08:16 -0700
From: John David Galt <jdg@rahul.net>
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society
Subject: Re: Local Competition: Is it Really? (was Area Code For Wireless)


>      http://telecom-digest.org/history/standard.oil.and.bell.sys

produces a "Not Found" screen on my browser (Mozilla).


John David Galt


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder if I should hire a proof-reader
to go over my notes sometimes ... this is going to make two corrections
in one day (the other one comes a bit later in this issue):
Try http://telecom-digest.org/archives/history/standard.oil.and.bell.sys
                              ^^^^^^^^
PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 07:42:14 +0200
From: Marc SCHAEFER <schaefer@alphanet.ch>
Subject: Re: Email and Newsgroup Similarities
Organization: ALPHANET NF -- Not for profit telecom research


In article <telecom19.79.7@telecom-digest.org> you wrote:

> So just remember, when your mail is important, and needs to reach
> the recipient post-haste and get right to his attention, be sure
> to backslash him to go right to his default mailbox on the system
> and ignore any booby-traps he has set for you along the way, things
> that would cause your valuable mail to be ignored or destroyed. 

And what if he left that university and the .forward file has a reason?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 00:24:58 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: One Small Correction


Well, make that two corrections, since I had to re-enter the URL
for the 'Standard Oil and Bell System' report ...

Yesterday I mentioned in my item on the use of backslashes to bypass
a recipient's .forward file that 'one slash would probably be
enough.'   That is not correct, and I should have looked over my
own scripts here to refresh my memory first.

You always need TWO backslashes, because sendmail will strip off
the first one it sees. The first backslash \ serves as a shell
escape and the second one then travels with the email address to
its destination. 

You can also try quoting the email address with a slash as the
first character and see where that gets you, as in this
example, "\joeblow"@sitename  or perhaps "\joeblow@sitename".
That seems to get YOUR sendmail to leave the backslash alone,
but results vary on the recieving end. I think a double backslash
is better. 

Also, it was pointed out that while sendmail definitly allows a
backslash as a way to bypass any .forward file, the software
known as qmail does not do that. Attempts to backslash a user
who is served by qmail will fail, with the mail returned saying
that ' \joeblow is unknown user'  even if joeblow is okay.

But, take heart spammers! An awful lot of sendmails are still
in service, with no sign of being retired from service anytime
soon. Just remember that old sneaky sendmail will rip off that
backslash while you are not watching unless you use two of 
them to convince him otherwise.

And to the guy who wrote me saying he just accepts delivery of
everything in his default mailbox and *then* starts processing
it once the spammer has dumped his load and left ... well sir,
you are a very wise man. 

To answer Mr. Schaefer's point 'what if the person left there 
and went somewhere else', then I guess he will not be getting a
box full of spam every day as a result of his old address. And
sendmail like so much of the software which binds our virtual
community was written in a long-ago time when things were much,
much different around here. Who was it I quoted here in a story
in the papers a couple months ago? The newsgroup moderator who
pointed out that things are getting a bit ragged and frayed
around the edges, or words to that effect ... it is a glowing
testimony I think, to the original developers of what we now
call 'the net' that it has held together as well as it has under
the strain of America getting wired up.  Join me again next time
for more corrections and things stated as absolute facts. Who
knows, maybe the jury will have announced its verdict in the
Joey vrs. Adrian case by this weekend!   


PAT

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #81
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Thu May 13 20:23:14 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA11334;
	Thu, 13 May 1999 20:23:14 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:23:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905140023.UAA11334@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #82

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 13 May 99 20:23:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 82

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Country Code For Tajikistan (Toby Nixon)
    Book Review: "Newton's Telecom Dictionary", Harry Newton (Rob Slade)
    The World's Free Web-Based Fax Service @ Fax4Free.com (Mike Pollock)
    Vietnam City Codes (Matthew Andrion)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (Richard Shockey)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (Jim Youll)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (John David Galt)
    Re: Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible? (Bruce Kille)
    Re: Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible? (Steve Rowland)
    Re: Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol (Dan Strich)
    Re: WirelessNPA/Local Competition (Eric Florack)
    Re: Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition (Eric Bohlman)
    Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability (jbyrn)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Toby Nixon <tnixon@Microsoft.com>
Subject: Country Code for Tajikistan
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 14:17:56 -0700


According to ITU Operational Bulletin No. 689 (1 April 1999),
Tajikistan initiated use of country code +992 on 25 March 1999 (they
will no longer be sharing +7 with Russia and Kazakhstan). Both +992
and +7 are supposed to work through the end of the year. As of today
(13 May), AT&T still does not route calls using +992; you have to use
+7. I tried talking to the AT&T operator and repair, and neither know
anything about +992 or have it in their knowledge base. Does anyone
know who I would call or write to ask when AT&T will allow dialing
Tajikistan using +992?


Thanks.

Toby L. Nixon                     <mailto:tnixon@microsoft.com>
Program Manager, Windows Networking and Embedded Products Group
Microsoft Corporation, One Microsoft Way, Redmond WA 98052  USA
+1 425 936-2792   Fax: +1 425 936-7329    Cell: +1 206 790-6377
Text pager: 2067906377@mobile.att.net (150-char maximum)

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 08:10:12 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Newton's Telecom Dictionary", Harry Newton
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKNTTLDC.RVW   990401

"Newton's Telecom Dictionary", Harry Newton, 1999, 1-57820-031-8,
U$32.95
%A   Harry Newton harry_newton@harrynewton.com www.harrynewton.com
%C   12 West 21 Street, New York, NY 10010
%D   1999
%G   1-57820-031-8
%I   Flatiron Publishing, Inc.
%O   U$32.95 212-691-8215 800-LIBRARY fax 212-691-1191
%P   901 p.
%T   "Newton's Telecom Dictionary, 15th Edition"


You have to warm to a book that tells you, presumably in regard to the
ever increasing number of terms to cover in this field, "Will it ever
stop?  No.  And it's getting worse.  But you should buy this soon-to-
be-obsolete book, anyway.  We need your money for the 16th."

Whatever the faults in Newton's research and writing (and they do
exist), you have to say this for him: he's a goer.  Now reissued
annually (with semi-annual "half editions") the dictionary keeps a
currency and range that no other such reference can match.

Newton asks for, and can use, help, because this is a massive work. 
There are lots and lots of telecommunications terms, with a fair
preponderance of telephony and internet listings.  Computer jargon
gets a fair amount of space, with MS-DOS related material getting the
lion's share.  BOB refers to the late, unlamented, and Microsoft-
wishes-it-could-be-forgotten product, although there is now also a
reference to "BreakOut Box."  "Virus" is in there, and it isn't bad. 
(On the other hand, it hasn't gotten any better over the last three
editions.)  Management is remembered with the "Osborne Effect" and
"Seagull Manager", and the description of "Digital Cash" is written by
someone with a firm grasp of reality.  The numeric entries for 1791
through 1999 constitute a quick history of telecommunications.  The
entry for "Call Waiting" refers to the trouble it may give to modems
and mentions both the *70 command and the setting of the S10 register.

Then there is telecommunications trivia, such as the part played by
radio in the saving of the Eiffel Tower, the contribution of the
telephone to the English language, and reflections on the Titanic
disaster and telecom-related biographies.  (You can even learn some
erstwhile English terms.)  There are useful tables, even within the
text such as the listing of North American Area Codes in both numeric
and place order.

Newton's serious attempt to include more material related to the
Internet is evident, but so is a lack of familiarity with some topics. 
The usage of the double backslash (\\) and double forward slash (//)
in the Universal Naming Convention (UNC) is reversed for NT and UNIX. 
The storage information for cookies is still applicable only to the
Netscape browser.

The listings are quite current, including items such as "SATAN" (not
quite fairly), "Rimm Job", "cookie" (with the associated controversy)
and even "push" (without the controversy).  However, a number of
recent concerns, such as the "ping of death" and  "teardrop attack"
are not mentioned.  The reader will find some esoteric technical
entries, like "Hydrogen Loss" and "Zener Diode".

While reviewing the book, I left it at a reception desk for fifteen
minutes.  That was long enough for the staffer at the desk to inform
me, on my return, that the author was a pretty funny guy.  Quite true. 
A number of the definitions are fairly lighthearted, and Newton isn't
afraid to throw in subjective comments.  A number of listings are
*completely* off the wall.  What does "Apocalypse, Four Horsemen of"
have to do with communications?  Or "Apologize", or "FORD" for that
matter?  Apparently if you are a friend or relative of Newton, there
is grave danger that you will end up listed in here.  Some of the
humorous content does have a closer technical connection, like
"Bogon", "Get a Life", and "Psychic ANI".

The book is not without flaws.  I can still cut eight characters out
of the "Fox Message."  I was surprised not to see an entry for
mailstorm.  "Freeware" is listed (and correct), but shareware and
public domain share the same confused definition.  (Indeed, the
definition of "Sysop" confuses freeware and public domain software.) 
The author still doesn't understand that there is a valid technical
use of the term "granularity".  (I *am* willing to forgive a lot to a
dictionary that gets "Hacker" right, but Newton loses points by
misusing the term under the entry for "SATAN.")  Send a correction in
to Newton and he will make it, but it may take an edition or two.  Or
three.  Or four.

While extensive, the work is neither complete nor exhaustive.  But
then, given the expansion of the field madly off in all directions it
could hardly be so.  The book could use some discipline, not in
excluding the humour, but in including more extensive, or more
accurate, definitions in places.  Weik's dictionary (cf. BKCMSTDC.RVW)
pays more attention to standards bodies, communications engineering,
and the influential contributions of the military.  Petersen (cf.
BKDTTLDC.RVW) has done more careful historical research.  Shnier (cf.
BKCMPDCT.RVW) is generally better in the computer listings.  Still,
regardless of shortcomings, this is easily one of the best
telecommunications dictionaries available today, and, for breadth of
scope, probably *the* best.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1997, 1998, 1999   BKNTTLDC.RVW   990401


======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
       It may be my sole purpose in life is simply to serve as
               a warning to others.
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

From: Mike Pollock <pheel@sprynet.com>
Subject: The World's Free Web-Based Fax Service @ Fax4Free.com (tm)
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 12:05:50 -0400


If you don't mind banner ads running down the side of your document, you can
fax (but not spam)  for free!

 http://www.fax4free.com


Mike

------------------------------

From: Matthew Andrion <MatthewA@amrcom.com>
Subject: Vietnam City Codes
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 09:40:01 -0700


Mr. Townson,

I really appreciate all the information that on your site. It's by far,
the most complete listings of country and city dialing codes I've ever
seen. I'm looking for more information on Vietnam city dialing
information. Do you know of any other resources I might try? If nothing
else, thanks for your time and great web site.


Matthew Andrion
Matthewa@amrcom.com <mailto:Matthewa@amrcom.com> 	
Data Analyst
AmeriCom Communications
916-349-7500 Ext. 370


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your complimentary remarks
on the Telecom Archives city and country code files. While still a
good reference, far better ones can be found on the net. I have been
'meaning to' get some updated information there for a long time, and
never quite get around to it. Two regular participants here, Linc
Madison and someone else whose name escapes me for the moment both
have excellent dialing code references at their web sites. I am
asking them now if they won't please send you a link so you can
review their files as well.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: rshockey@ix.netcom.NsSPaM.com (Richard Shockey)
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 05:04:52 GMT
Organization: Shockey Consulting LLC


John R. Covert <no.spam.covert.maps.on@covert.org> wrote:

> You thought Title 47 of the U.S. code would stop unsolicited FAX spamming,
> didn't you?

> Well, unfortunately, you were wrong.

> I am not sure that I believe that they are power-dialling every number
> in the United States from England.  On the other hand, they can probably
> figure out whether there is a fax machine at the number they call within
> about two UK message units, so maybe they are.

> What do other readers of the Digest think?

See the article below ... complain to OFTEL ...
	  				
LONDON, ENGLAND, 1999 MAY 5 

Oftel, the UK telecommunications regulator, has appointed the Direct 
Marketing Association (DMA) to set up and run new opt-out schemes to 
block telesales voice and fax calls. 

Previously, only voice calls have had a preference service for  
telesales calls. However, over the last few years, telesale faxes 
have become a major problem in the UK, since most are sent at off-peak
times, meaning that recipients are unable to stop the ads rolling
through the fax machine. 

According to David Edmonds, the head of Oftel, for the first time  
ever, the public now has the right to protection in their homes from 
the intrusion of unsolicited faxes and increasing protection from 
direct marketing phone calls, 

"Oftel has worked closely with the Department of Trade and Industry
and  the DMA to ensure that the scheme is now in place," he said. 

According to Edmonds, companies that breach the regulations could face
action from the Data Protection Registrar. "Failure to comply could 
lead to fines of up to 5,000 pounds," he said. 

Michael Wills, the DTI's telecommunications minister, said that he was
delighted that consumers now have the ability to avoid unwanted direct
marketing calls and faxes. 

"For many, these calls and faxes constitute an irritating invasion of
privacy and, for small firms in particular, unwanted faxes can be both
costly and delay important business correspondence," he said. 

UK phone users wanting to register for the phone preference service  
should call 0845-070-0707. Fax users should call 0845-070-0702. 

Oftel's Web site is at http://www.oftel.gov.uk .  


Richard Shockey
Shockey Consulting LLC           
8045 Big Bend Blvd. Suite 110
St. Louis, MO 63119            	
Voice 314.918.9020       
FAX   314.918.9015

Internet E-Mail/IFAX 
rshockey@ix.netcom.com
eFAX 815.333.1237  

------------------------------

From: Terry Kennedy <terry@spcunb.spc.edu>
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 02:22:14 GMT


John R. Covert <no.spam.covert.maps.on@covert.org> writes:

> I had hoped they were in Massachusetts, because then I would have just
> gone down to small claims court and requested the $500 ($1500 if the
> court decides that the violation was knowing or willfull) that Title 47
> of the US Code allows.

> See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/227.text.html and note that in
> the section for faxes, the award is due even for a single call, with no
> need to say "stop" and wait for another call.

  There's a similar scam operating in New Jersey -- it's a "survey" on
gun control, rigged like the "when did you stop beating your wife?"
question, with two 900 numbers to call. The "call this number to be
removed from our list" number is a UK number, but the "survey" states
that it is being run by a New Jersey company. I wonder if that's
enough of an in-state presence for a small claims suit.

  Also, isn't there a requirement that the sender of the FAX (and
their number) be clearly identified on the page? That is not the case
with these FAXes.


	Terry Kennedy		  Operations Manager, Academic Computing
	terry@spcvxa.spc.edu	  St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
        +1 201 915 9381 (voice)   +1 201 435-3662 (FAX)

------------------------------

From: jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim Youll)
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming
Date: 13 May 1999 02:30:55 GMT


John R. Covert <no.spam.covert.maps.on@covert.org> wrote:

> You thought Title 47 of the U.S. code would stop unsolicited FAX spamming,
> didn't you?

> Well, unfortunately, you were wrong.

> What do other readers of the Digest think?

What I think is that I'm preparing to file in local court against both
boomerang.com and a company called Sento that does training/certifica-
tion for Windows NT.  Both are out of state. That's okay. There are
processes in place for dealing with situations like that.

Both made brilliant statements to me about how "their attorneys had
reviewed the law" and "as long as they removed my number when I asked
them, they hadn't violated Federal Law." 

Maybe hearing a judge's interpretation will make it more clear for them.

------------------------------

From: John David Galt <jdg@but-i-dont-like-spam.boxmail.com>
Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 01:26:14 GMT


Quoth John R. Covert:

> But they were in Florida, which made things more difficult.  I called
> them up, and they told me that the calls were originating from England
> in order to be exempt from U.S. law.

> I am not sure that I believe that they are power-dialling every number
> in the United States from England.  On the other hand, they can probably
> figure out whether there is a fax machine at the number they call within
> about two UK message units, so maybe they are.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that if we can
require a mail-order outfit to collect sales tax from customers in any
state where it has an office, then we can hold a company liable for
making these calls into a country where it has an office.


John David Galt

------------------------------

From: Bruce Kille <brkille@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible?
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 08:19:04 -0400
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises


mtr001deja@my-dejanews.com wrote in message ...

> We have a SX-200 Superswitch which was probably installed around 1982.
> Is this switch T1 compatible?

Only if you use a channel bank!!!


Bruce

------------------------------

Date: 12 May 1999 22:56:10 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
From: rodeocomm@aol.com (Steve Rowland)
Subject: Re: Mitel SX-200 T1 Compatible?


If the Mitel is a 200A, the only way is via channel banks.  If it is a
200D, it needs to be a G1002/3 or higher.  If you call any Mitel
dealer from in front of the machine, it will take about 15 seconds to
decide.

Other clues:

 -if you have a dark brown console=200A
 -if you have a single disk drive=200D too low a software level
 -two disk drives=200D probably OK
 -if two card shelves in single cabinet=200A


Good luck.

Steve Rowland
RODEO Communications
rodeocomm@aol.com

------------------------------

From: Dan Strich <dstrich@rcnets.com>
Subject: Re: Question About T1 Robbed-Bit Protocol
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 17:20:11 -0700
Organization: CTS Network Services


Check out:

ftp://ftp.t1.org/pub/t1e1/e1.2/dir99/9e120069.pdf

wsemenov@my-dejanews.com wrote in message ...

> Can anybody help me? Where in I-net I can find specification of wink
> robbed-bit T1 signalling protocol?

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 23:22:33 -0400
From: Eric Florack <eflorack@servtech.com>
Reply-To: eflorack@servtech.com
Organization: FREE FILE FARM BBS
Subject: Re: WirelessNPA/Local Competition


 Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Wrote to the group;

>> The question is who will pay to modify all the existing switchgear,
>> tamden routers, and billing centers to accomodate more flexibility
>> in number assignments?  The newcomers obviously want the baby Bells
>> to do it, and the baby Bells obviously don't.  I don't think they should.

>> Some people argue the Bells, having enjoyed monopoly protection, are
>> morally obligated to do so.  I don't see it that way at all.  While
>> the Bells had a monopoly, they also were tightly regulated and they
>> didn't get any benefits.

> First of all, to say that the Bells got no benefits under the old
> monopoly regime is ludicrous.  Secondly, don't forget that the Bells
> have been at the vanguard of pushing for local service competition,
> since that's the only way they can get into the long-distance market.
> More particularly, the Bells have been pushing for the cosmetic
> appearance of local competition, while dragging their feet on the
> reality of it.

Linc, I've never spared the rod in our past discussions when I thought
you were wrong. In this case, I'd be remiss if I was not equally loud
on my praise; you're right on the beam, I think. We know darn well
what the Bells are after, here ... and they'll likely get it, too.
However, I think you're off just a touch in your longer terms view 
here:
 
> I agree that the new entrants in the field are pushing to get more
> of a free ride than they deserve ...

The fact is the new kids are playing their hand so hot because they
know they CAN play it that way, for several reasons. It's politically
expedient right now for the fed to play up this competition
thing... even if it really isn't competition, in reality. The image is
all the government is after, I fear. So, the government's prone to
giving into such nonsense as is being generated by the newbies.  And,
the Bells are willing to cut a deal that is better for the new locals
to get what they want; Namely, LD.  Of course once they get their
power back in the LD market, they'll be able to petition the fed to
change the ground rules...  They've done it before, after all ... 
Consider that with all the LD income, they'll certainly have the
income to support the legal beagles pursuing their cause.

> However, the Bells have to accept
> a large share of the costs in moving to a non-monopoly business, and
> that certainly includes a large share of the costs in revamping the
> system of allocating numbers.

As I say, I suspect they will, in the end. They'll consider it an
investment in their own future from two standpoints;: Future LD
customers, and (buyouts and mergers being what they are today in this
biz...) future buyouts of the now new LEC's, once they have the money
to do so.

> I agree.  I think that we need to tilt the playing field much more
> sharply towards facilities-based competition instead of resellers.

How do you propose accomplishing this without leaning toward the
established companies?  The only people that would find advantage
under such a lean is, well, AT&T's cable systems, Time Warner, and
established locals, like the Bells, and Frontier-Globular. (Chuckle!)

> However, that doesn't change the fact that the Bells have to be a
> part of changing the system of allocating numbers.

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ...
>> When cable companies began getting the go-ahead to wire towns all
>> over the USA several years ago, look how fast they did it, and
>> in a usually very inconspicuous way. Within a year or two they
>> had even large cities like Chicago virtually wired, with cable
>> service available to everyone once the city council approved the
>> franchise.  PAT]

> Not always true.  I lived for about two years in San Jose, California,
> which has the distinction of being the first city in a metropolitan
> area to have cable television.  The franchise was awarded in the
> late 1960's, IIRC.  However, the neighborhood in which I lived, which
> had been around since the 1920's, was still not wired when I moved out
> in 1987.  The cable company in Dallas, Texas, took many years to get
> out to the northern part of town, even though that area was much more
> affluent than the area of San Jose where I lived.

We had similar problems around Rochester  though at least in our case it
was government holding up the works, in the granting process.

     ____________________________     ___________________________________
    /Eric Florack, SysOp of the /\   /   eflorack@servtech.com  Or:     /\
   /   FREE FILE FARM BBS      / /\ /    bignasty@billsfan.net        / /\
  /716-352-6544 or 352-1629  / \/  / http://www.servtech.com/~eflorack/ \/
 /GT Net 041/003 and 041/007 /\   / DEMOCRATS LIE.  Any Questions?  /\
/___________________________/ /  /_________________________________/ /
\___________________________\/   \_________________________________\/
  \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \     \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

------------------------------

From: Eric Bohlman <ebohlman@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition
Organization: Netcom
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 05:27:40 GMT


> Pat, the TELECOM Digest Editor, noted:

> My point all along with both local and long distance competition has
> been that the competitors should have been required to make the same
> capital outlay on outside plant which AT&T had to make. They should
> have been required to devote the same amount of resources to research
> as AT&T put into Bell Laboratories. If I had been the judge, I would
> have instructed the competitors to build their network, solicit
> subscribers, etc and that the only thing I would do is order the Bell
> System to treat the newcomers at 'arms length'; to provide a supply

Little problem here.  As of the time of the divestiture decree (as
opposed to the early days of the Bell system), AT&T's capital outlays
on plant, research, etc. had been at least partially funded out of
subscriber revenues, not just by raising funds on the capital markets.
AT&T got much of those revenues by virtue of being the only game in
town as a result of its legal monopoly.  Your scenario, in which
competitors would have to raise all their funds on the capital markets
(since they wouldn't have any subscriber revenues until *after* they
made their capital outlays) would essentially have the competitors
playing by a different set of rules than the incumbents.

This seems to be one of those cases where treating different players
*the same* isn't the same thing as treating them *equally*, because it
doesn't take into account the difference in advantages that occurred
in the past.  The issues are actually similar to those in a lot of
arguments over affirmative action.  "First across the finish line
wins" is fair *only* if all the runners started at the same time and
from the same place.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Okay, fine. So suppose we change my
scenario a little and tell the competitors they can have a decade
or so of squatting for free on the incumbant's outside plant and
other things, but that after a decade or so of this, they had best
be in a position to truly 'compete', and not just resell. Maybe
instead of Free Fridays and five-cent Sundays and numerous service
charges designed to confuse the telephone consumer we tell the
competitors, okay fine: sit in Mother Bell's nest and hide behind
her skirts and whatnot for a decade or so, while you develop the
financial wherewithal and business maturity to do your own thing.

Competitors will be subject to entirely the same rules; their
tariffs will be identical to Mother's; all the regulations and
grief she gets you will get, and instead of convincing some
ignorant telecom manager or member of the telephone-consuming
public that yours costs twenty percent less so why pay Mother
one hundred percent using billing practices which are highly
technical and confusing, the **only thing** you will be able to
compete with is to the extent and degree your customer service
and response times, etc are better than hers. Both of you will
charge ten cents for a telephone conversation, but you will prevail
in the end because your customer service reps answer the phone
immediatly, your operators do not sass-back or lie to the customers
quite as much, and your repair technicians do not insist that
the trouble is at the subscriber's premises and make a date for
a week from next Tuesday which they then fail to keep.

You define the role of the customer as the purpose of your busi-
ness rather than as an interupption to it; you build up your
cash reserves from the price your customers pay less the wholesale
rate you pay Mother and the fees you pay into a common pool with
other telcos for back-office functions. Anything Mother can do,
you can do. Anything she *has* to do, you *have to do also*. And
a decade to the day after you have incorporated or chartered your
telephone company, Mother gets to push you out of the nest. At
that point, you either survive, or you die. Best have your outside
plant, your research laboratories, your lobbyists in Congress, and
your drinking buddies at the country club ready to go.  And after
she does force you to fly on your own or lay on the ground and get
eaten by the neighbor's cat, regulators will continue to regulate
you both for a short time while watching to see if some sort of
incestuous relationship was or still is going on. If the two of
you are in bed together at that point, playing magic tricks on your
customers, and condescending to them, the regulation will continue
unabated, but if the regulators observe at least two of you or 
preferably three or more in a community truly competing, then
regulatory activities in general will cease, and we will let the
telephone consumer decide what to do. And in the meantime, do not
worry about having a wicked and cruel step-mother. *We* can keep
her in line. 

Do you think THAT would be a fair arrangement?    PAT]

------------------------------

From: jbyrn <jbyrn@mciworld.com>
Subject: Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 05:54:05 GMT


Paul Robinson wrote in message ...

> oldbear@arctos.com (Will Roberts) writes black@csulb.NOSMAP.edu
> (Matthew Black) writes:

>>> GTE California has started billing this residential customer $0.38 for
>>> local number portability.  I never requested any such service and am
>>> curious if this is some new universal fee.

>> Local Number Portability (LNP) is the FCC-mandated ability to keep
>> your same telephone number even if you switch Local Exchange
>> Carriers.  The idea is that no one would leave the incumbent RBOC if
>> they had to change to a new phone number. I'd guess that this charge
>> is a result of GTE attempting to recover the cost of providing LNP.  I'd
>> be curious if this is an across-the-board charge on all customers or
>> something related to your having taken your phone number to a
>> different local telco.

It appears to be an across-the-board charge on all customers, as the
incumbent LECs try to recover the costs of developing systems to
handle LNP as required by the Telecom Act of 1996.  Systems, I might
add, which are barely adequate for providing customers with the
ability to easily change LECs, but which they hope are good enough to
gain them entry into the lucrative long distance business.

I am also paying an LNP fee on my Southwestern Bell bill.  Just the
usual procedure of passing on costs to the consumer.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #82
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Fri May 14 02:16:03 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA23291;
	Fri, 14 May 1999 02:16:03 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 02:16:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905140616.CAA23291@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #83

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 14 May 99 02:16:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 83

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Some Information Required (Stavan Kadepurkar)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (support@sellcom.com)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (John McHarry)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (Bill Levant)
    Re: Email and Newsgroup Similarities (Peter Corlett)
    Re: One Small Correction (Marc Schaefer)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers" (Marc Schaefer)
    Feds Make Bust in $45M Net Scam (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Last Laugh! FCC Goes Ooops (Andy Yee)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Stavan Kadepurkar <stawan@metro1.com>
Reply-To: "stawan@metro1.com" <stawan@metro1.com>
Subject: Some Information Required
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:34:04 -0700
Organization: Metro One Telecommunication


Hi Patrick,

I desperately need some info on Feature Group D(FGD) also called equal 
access dialing plan. The info that I have is that the inbound string 
consists of 2 strings one the ANI and the other the DNIS plus other things 
like KP and II digits. Now what do the II digits stand for? What 
information do they contain . what can the carriers send through these 
digits?

Please let me know if you have any pointers to where I can get information 
about this stuff.


Stawan

------------------------------

From: support@sellcom.com
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 04:50:32 GMT
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com


jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim Youll) spake thusly and wrote:

> Both made brilliant statements to me about how "their attorneys had
> reviewed the law" and "as long as they removed my number when I asked
> them, they hadn't violated Federal Law." 

When we get unsolicited FAXes we just FAX them right on over to a nice
lady at the FCC.  (They prefer that you call them first and then they
will give you their FAX number).

We don't seem to get as many as we used to ...


Steve

http://www.sellcom.com  
(Opinions expressed, though generally wise and 
accurate are not officially positions of SELLCOM) 
Cyclades / Siemens (May REBATE) / Y2K ODIU support / Zoom / Palmer Safes
(Tech assistance provided without warranty express or implied)
Check us out at http://www.thepubliceye.com

------------------------------

From: John McHarry <mcharry@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:06:44 -0400


John R. Covert wrote:

> But they were in Florida, which made things more difficult.  I called
> them up, and they told me that the calls were originating from England
> in order to be exempt from U.S. law.

> I am not sure that I believe that they are power-dialling every number
> in the United States from England.  On the other hand, they can probably
> figure out whether there is a fax machine at the number they call within
> about two UK message units, so maybe they are.

I find it believable that they were calling from England.  Since the
collapse of the international settlement regime it might as well be
the 52nd state.  At least if you have a calling plan such as they
could get.  On the other hand, I doubt this gives them any immunity
from US law since they are running it out of Florida.  If I sent you a
bomb via a foreign remailing service, I suspect my neck would break
just fine.

------------------------------

From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:31:13 EDT
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming


> But they were in Florida, which made things more difficult.  I called
> them up, and they told me that the calls were originating from England
> in order to be exempt from U.S. law.

  Well, sure, that's what they'd SAY.

> What do other readers of the Digest think?
> I had hoped they were in Massachusetts, because then I would have just
> gone down to small claims court and requested the $500 ($1500 if the
> court decides that the violation was knowing or willfull) that Title 47
> of the US Code allows.

  This reader thinks you ought to go down and file suit.  Assuming
that the Defendant has "minimum contacts" with Massachusetts (and
spamming calls into the state might be enough) then the Court should
have the power to make service of process anywhere in the country.

  I'd sue in Federal Court, though.  The state court judges are less
likely to be familiar with the new (Federal) law and less willing to
enforce it.  Besides, it's easier to transfer judgments from state to
state in Federal Court.  Yes, the filing fee is apt to be steeper
($150.00, IIRC), but you get to add it to your claim if you win.


Bill

(Yes, I'm a lawyer, but not in Massachusetts or Florida).

------------------------------

From: abuse@verrine.demon.co.uk (Peter Corlett)
Subject: Re: Email and Newsgroup Similarities
Date: 13 May 1999 19:48:51 GMT
Organization: B13 C*b*l


TELECOM Digest Editor  <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote:
[...]

> Now please note carefully: if you do NOT want your mail to be piped
> through someone's .forward file, i.e. handled by his filter- rules, etc
> ... then you put a backslash in front of his name. [...] A backslash in
> front of something always means deal with it just as written, ignoring any
> user-created aliases locally or elsewhere which might have been put up for
> handling that instruction.

Not at this site it doesn't!

Mail to backslashed addresses gets treated as-is by the delivery
software here. I have a procmail script which filters and pipes and
diddles mail around to organise them better. For example I pipe
mailing lists into local moderated newsgroups so I can follow threads
easier. Non directly-addressed mail gets dropped into a low-priority
mailbox ... as does anything to a backslashed address.

[...]

> I have never tested to see if a backslash in front of a 'newsgroup mailbox
> name' i.e. \some-nice-newsgroup@sitename would also serve to overthrow the
> moderator flag, or ignore it and seat itself in the box anyway. I would
> never want to screw up someone's moderated news- group in that way. Even
> if it did, I doubt it would go any further than the local site since when
> other sites came there to get the latest news to carry away with them
> elsewhere the absence of the 'Approved-by' line would get them nervous.

The backslashing would merely affect the delivery of the article to
the moderator or moderation bot. Many of these use procmail to filter
and forward articles - in this case dropping through to the "default"
mailbox has the least desired result - the message lingers in
/var/spool/mail never to be read. This also assumes that their
mailserver doesn't bounce the message with "no such user" because
there's a backslash in front of the address.

There are easier ways to post to a moderated group without it being mailed
to the moderation address.

> So just remember, when your mail is important, and needs to reach the
> recipient post-haste and get right to his attention, be sure to backslash
> him to go right to his default mailbox on the system and ignore any
> booby-traps he has set for you along the way, things that would cause your
> valuable mail to be ignored or destroyed.

The default mailbox isn't always the one that is read. Some procmail
recipes filter out the interesting messages and then leave all the
junk to fall through and be ignored. Anybody who has enough about them
to set up .forward or procmail to customise mail delivery is probably
trying to track mail than let it all pile up and languish in one
place.

Besides, if somebody wants to contact me *that* urgently, they have my
mobile telephone number, or a handy little web form I knocked up that
allows them to page me. Email is checked whenever I can be bothered to
dial in, which can anything up to 60 hours between polls.

------------------------------

From: Marc Schaefer <schaefer@alphanet.ch>
Subject: Re: One Small Correction
Date: 13 May 1999 11:10:49 +0200
Organization: ALPHANET NF -- Not for profit telecom research


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote:

> sendmail like so much of the software which binds our virtual
> community was written in a long-ago time when things were much,

Yes. However nowadays's UNIX/sendmail has many anti-spamming rules
(based on headers, ability to DNS resolve, ability to reject relaying,
and also dynamic databases of known spammers or 'open servers' (MAPS,
http://maps.vix.com/ or the more aggressive ORBS)).

It works pretty well. This ensures a quite low spam volume (at this
time around one per day, and I didn't enable the secondary MAPS yet, the
ISP dialup blacklist), even when I post, regularly, on newsgroups and
mailing-lists with my right mail address.  And most of the spams
aren't even sent to the mail server since the TCP connection is simply
rejected.

I just checked, DejaNews (http://www.dejanews.com) reports around a
gazillon news articles with schaefer@alphanet.ch inside.  I use this
address since 1991.

Now, on a related note, if you prefix a newsgroup moderation alias
with \, in general this will return an error. The \ trick *only* works
for UNIX accounts which may have a .forward file.

One of the griefs against sendmail is the many tricks and address-
flagging which have caused (sometimes security) bugs in the past. In
fact, at the beginning, an internal address(*) (which could be a file
to append to) could also be an external address. So you could append
to any files on a remote system (but that's old) with a properly
constructed recipient address.

But it looks the \ leak hasn't been fixed yet. The only risk is that
the mail piles up on the server (instead of, e.g. going to the new
place), or that procmail filtering rules are bypassed. In both cases,
presumably the mail will not be read or read much later, thus it's
more an annoyance for the guy using the \ than the guy reading the
mail :)

There are alternatives to sendmail: there is qmail, a very fast and
security-conscious software, Postfix (from IBM I think), and of
courses the old GNU Smail package.  They all support the concept of
.forward files (well, at least quite closely), but at least presumably
qmail doesn't have this ``feature''.

All of the above, including sendmail, are open source. To my
knowledge, both sendmail and Postfix have commercial support
available.

(*) the primary goal for the \ is the ability to forward the
    mail somewhere and keep a copy
       schaefer@somewhere.org, \schaefer
    One could object to this that sendmail could have, from
    the beginning on, detected loops like this:
       schaefer@somewhere.org, schaefer   (in schaefer's .forward)
    and resolved them as a local copy. Infact, the version of
    sendmail I have (8.9.x) also works if you forget the \, thus
    making \ completely obsolete. Thus, the only remaining
    use of \ is backward compatibility.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But I, for example, receive a great
deal of mail -- all editorial mail -- in my default mailbox. Everything
inbound to anything@telecom-digest.org or various aliases@lcs.mit.edu
directed to ptownson hit my .forward file which says pipe it along to
the Elm filter. (You can use Elm filter without using the rest of Elm
if you wish). It then goes through a rather strong filtering, with
various rules which examine 'if to' 'if from' 'subject' and a host
of other things. I have about thirty rules, some of which divert that
particular item into a box for its purpose such as additions/deletions
and change of addresses to the mailing list. Other rules look for mail
coming from postmasters, mailer-daemons, roots, and put those things
a certain place. A script I wrote a few years ago is an 'intelligent
autoreply', meaning the filter rules look at the incoming thing, try
to decide what the person is writing about, and then divert it to one
autoreply message or another, so that each person receives an approp-
riate reply ... usually! (grin) ... Rob Slade sent me a book review
one day which had the word 'subscribe' or 'subscription' or at least
the string 'subscri' and got back an autoreply from me saying I would
add him to the Digest mailing list ... (smile) ... but usually it
works okay. 

Once the rules have weeded out all the postmasters, daemons, and such
by replying or dropping them on the floor or whatever, then the rest
is considered 'editorial' and mailed to my default mailbox. The only
way I can get it via mail and not start an endless loop with the filter
is by backslashing myself when I tell the rules 'now send it to me.'
Here at LCS that works okay at present. At some places where I have
accounts -- and at LCS until a couple versions of sendmail ago, the
result doing that was it would remail to absolutely me, but put an
extra bunch of header stuff at the top with a blank line between it
and the first bunch of header info ... and that was a terrible mess
to deal with when the stuff all gets put in the Digest-making script.

Alternatively, I could just cat the stream >> usr/mail/ptownson taking
care to add a blank line between items, have the required 'From ' and
whatnot ... in other words put it in my default mailbox myself and
the later pull it out through 'other side' when I was reading mail. This
is sort of like at the 'real' post office where the clerk sticks mail
in your box from one side, and later you show up with a key, open the
box from the other side and take the mail out. In essence, you work
both sides of the counter or mailbox. 

There are some definite problems with this however; it just is not, 
IMO, good practice to be postmaster and patron at the same time (smile).
In my account, there are times the mail arrives so rapidly -- this was
especially true in UUCP days when sendmail would sit quietly for
quite awhile, then someone's UUCP load would show up and sendmail
would hand me ten items within a two or three second period -- that
at times, trying to put something in the box is going to 'crash' with
another piece, resulting in two emails merged together, a few lines 
of one and a few lines of another, none of it making any sense. Even
my filter rules and autoreplies would cause crashes like that if I
did not identify the incoming stream as thing.$$, meaning process, 
so that two or more instances of my autoreply could be running at the 
same time harmoniously, without each trying to tamper with what the 
other instance was doing, etc. Where 'delivering my own mail' was
concerned, the only way to avoid crashes of two files at one time
was by saying to each instance as it came along, 'while lock then
sleep 1', 'touch lock, drop mail, rm lock', move along let the
next one in ... and each instance waits in line until it cannot see
a lock any longer, then creates a lock to protect itself, drops its
mail and takes it lock away. 

That works, mostly, but it still is not good practice. A user is never
able to synch that process quite as well as sendmail can, and there
would be times -- rarely -- when two instances would both try to
establish lock at the same time, each drop their mail on the other
one, then the first one to remove the lock would leave the second
one there hanging, looking for a lock to remove that no longer was
around. Maybe its answer was to establish lock and then walk away
leaving it there; now the mail was stalled 'while lock then sleep'
for ten hours or until the next day when I logged in and found
one piece of mail in my box. I'd look at my directory, see that lock
there from ten hours earlier, and 'rm' it .. .then sit there watching
for the next couple minutes as fifty or a hundred pieces of mail would
show up in my default box, one or two seconds apart. 

Now had sendmail been in charge, by ten hours later it would have
been telling everyone -- sender, recipient, site postmaster -- that
it had gotten itself stalled somehow and was unable to continue.

It is best not to 'play postmaster' and deliver your own mail out of
your filter rules, etc, but rather, give it to the mail software and
tell him to deliver it --OR-- do not use your default box at all and
manage to dispose of all the mail yourself in other user-created boxes
somehow. My problem is I have always used my default mailbox as the
drop point after sorting and filtering. To change it now I would have
to rewrite a couple of scripts and change a dozen filter rules. Then
it would get broken, I would get cranky, and you would get no issues
of the Digest for a week while I sat here nervously trying to repair
whatever had gone wrong.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Marc Schaeffer <schaefer@alphanet.ch>
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Date: 13 May 1999 11:27:49 +0200
Organization: ALPHANET NF -- Not for profit telecom research


Robert Eden <rmeden@yahoo.com> wrote:

> UUCP    - (anyone update the maps lately?)

Well, no, I don't think I updated them since 1991. However, UUCP
is still alive, mainly as a leaf-node cheap transfer protocol (especially
in countries where Internet access is not that cheap and where
people still have some UNIX knowledge).

However, some of my UUCP connections (most of the active remaining
ones) go through the Internet over TCP. Also, I still transfer
my news with UUCP: I still haven't found a way to compress news
with bzip2 with NNTP :(

   <vulcan> schaefer:/usr/users/schaefer> uuname | wc -l
        28

So, I still have 28 UUCP nodes. From them, there are 15 which are still
active, it seems. Note that on UNIX software, we always use FQDN
(Internet) addressing, never bang path (!). Some older software (e.g.
UUPC on MS-* or OS/2) insists to use bang path, however. We do not
use maps, we just have default routing to my server, which does
Internet routing. We don't do any non local calls UUCP anymore.

> FIDONET - BBS network...

I still have 6 active FTN downlinks (2 nodes, 4 points in FTN
terminology). It's going to die very soon, however, since the non UNIX
software is not open source, and has Y2K compliancy problems.
Moreover, BBS'es have been badly hit by the popularity of the
Internet.  FTN also has the notion of ``UUCP maps'' (they call it a
FidoNet nodelist).  I started doing FTN in 1993, and since then, I
have not really used a nodelist. I just route the mail to my ``boss''
(higher in the FidoNet's hierarchy), applying the same logic as in
UUCP. Again, some FTN connections go through the Internet.

> AX.25   - Ham Radio.. (a better name escapes me)

This is still active, too.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 00:04:35 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Feds Make Bust in $45M Net Scam


http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/CWFlash/990510A51A 

http://www.labmed.umn.edu/%7Ejohn/ccfraud.html

------------------------------

From: address lost in transit (Andy Yee)
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! FCC Goes Ooops
Organization: Jasc Software, Inc.
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 16:01:31 GMT


In article <telecom19.79.8@telecom-digest.org>, Rtf_PJM@shsu.edu (Paul
MacArthur) wrote:

> Or maybe this should be brought up every time the FCC's attempts to
> dictate what content is indecent.  Amazing, Howard Stern gets fined
> because a man plays the piano with his penis - on the radio!!! - and
> we can't fine the FCC for spamming us with an indecent joke.

> I love dictatorships!!!

> Paul

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Most governments and civil servants
> consider themselves far above and superior to the people they
> serve. The laws and regulations of various federal agencies never
> apply to the agencies themselves. Does that answer your question?

> I've been trying to think of a way Holy Water could be used as part
> of Joy Howell's penance. Perhaps a bucket of it poured out on top
> of her computer, and that of Stacy Mesa's to cleanse them of their
> sins, although I am sure the computer had no idea it was saying 
> something shameful and profane. PAT]

Why punish a computer for the mistakes of a human? :)


Andy Yee                   Corporate E-Mail:    See Above
Software Engineer          Coporate Web Page:   http://www.jasc.com
Jasc Software, Inc.        Personal E-Mail:     nde@yuck.net
                           Personal Web Page:   http://www.visi.com/~nde

Question authority...and the authorities will question YOU!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why not punish the computer? We blame
the internet for the ills in our society now, computers are part of
the internet aren't they? Sometimes I come close to screwing up,
myself ... (oh really?) ... 

Like the other day: I was reviewing the logs for http://telecom-digest.org
and noticed that every single day, about 2:00 AM, I was getting
hit repeatedly by one site, typically a couple hundred hits in one
minute, then it would go away. Thinking it might be just some spammer
out looking for names, I thought of a game I would play with it. You
can redirect callers to different web pages based on their browser,
and you can certainly lock out sites, domains, etc at will. So I
decided I would prepare a 'special page' just for that guy when he
came around every night.

I would at the top of the regular page put in something to redirect
him when I saw him coming to a page with just a single line of HTML
in large -- maybe 'H5' bold print which said:

  WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT? WHY ARE YOU STARING AT ME THAT WAY?

and then send him away. Or maybe I would prepare a special directory
just for him: a directory entitled 'top secret' with several bogus
files therein including 'hackers', 'crackers', 'child porn pictures',
'list of root passwords at major universities', 'warez', 'fraud
calling card numbers that work' ... you know  the sort of thing I
mean.

Then I got to looking a bit further, and saw that this very frequent
visitor every day was coming from 18.something ... and that all the
18's or most of them are at some place in Massachusetts where they
have an Institute of Technology and that all of the computers with
18 in their address accounted to a Mr. Jeffrey (someone) at that
Institute of Technology and I thought to myself, what if that dude
does not have a sense of humor?   Hmmm ... then I found that the
machine in question was called 'search.mit.edu' -- not part of LCS
at all -- and was used to auto-update the website www.mit.edu on a
daily basis where one feature is a search engine linked to a data-
base called 'Other Web Sites We Operate' (at MIT). Clicking there
not only reached my neighbor here on massis called 'hyperarchive'
but it also displayed TELECOM Digest files as well, with a nice
index of recent articles, etc.  I was quite pleased to see such a
nice display of this Digest at the MIT main website, but then I 
realized ...

Oh dear ... and automated at that ... so had I gone through with
my plan to install a 'top secret' directory just for it to look at,
the next day MIT's web site would have had such interesting things
as 'click here to see some top secret child porn', 'click over there
to review our latest top secret warez', 'click below to get a top 
secret list of our root passwords and those of other universities'
 ... oh dear, indeed. 

And then the top executives and the trustees of MIT would begin
receiving phone calls from the {Boston Globe} and other newspapers
asking about the latest features at their web site. As I explained
later to someone at LCS who reads this Digest frequently, under
the circumstances, -- under the circumstances -- my only option 
would be to go into seclusion (in other words, try to hide) while
the Sitting Ducks at LCS braced themselves for the worst.

Stop laughing, it is *not* funny. I am glad I re-thought my plan
to abuse the search engine which I had originally thought was a 
spam engine. And I bet you are glad also! :) So, search.mit.edu
and the rest of you out there, I'll see you again tomorrow!   PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #83
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat May 15 02:21:07 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA11100;
	Sat, 15 May 1999 02:21:07 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 02:21:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905150621.CAA11100@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #84

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 15 May 99 02:21:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 84

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Australian Pay Telephones (JF Mezei)
    Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503 (Eric B. Morson)
    Subcriber Loop Test? (Quang D. Nguyen)
    Book Review: "Telecom Made Easy", June Langhoff (Rob Slade)
    Privacy Report Has Both Sides Scrambling for Spin (Monty Solomon)
    DNA Dragnet (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Vietnam City Codes (Linc Madison)
    Re: Pulse EPABX (Bruce Larrabee)
    Re: WorldXchange Terrible Experience - Update/Correction (Chris Eastland)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (Ted Ede)
    Re: Cell Phones in Airplanes: Costa Rica (Nate Duehr)
    "Jury" Decision on Alleged Spammer (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 14 May 1999 17:54:42 -0400
From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>
Subject: Australian Pay Telephones
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 18:13:47 -0400


Last year, I noticed how Australia has rapidly begun to replace all
its payphones with newer smart-card technology ones. (supposedly from
Spain).

This year, the changeover seems to have slowed down.

Not only that, but instead of pushing the sale of smart cards, Telstra
now seems to be pushing the slae of "PhoneAway" cards. These are
pre-paid "calling" cards which give you reduced rates for long
distance calls, allow you to make local calls and also allow you to
call Australia from other countries. (And is much cheaper than
Australia Direct).

(Note Canadian and Australian dollars are roughly at par.

For instance, calling Quebec, Canada from Australia: for a 2 minute call:

Canada Direct's inflated prices:
	$6.66+taxes =  $7.66 $5.19 first minute, $1.47 subsequent, no offpeak)
Canada Direct with 40% reduction package:	$4.60	(billed by minute)

Telstra payphone smart card: $1.60 per minute	(billed by $0.40 increments)
					  $0.80 per minute weekends.
		2 minute call: $3.20  (weekdays)
		2 minute call: $1.60  (weekends)


Telstra PhoneAway Card:	$0.77 per minute, $0.44 on weekends.
		2 minute call: $1.54  (weekdays)
		2 minute call: $0.88  (weekends)


Interestingly, the Phoneaway card, when used to dial from Canada to Australia,
has the same rates.

QUESTION:

Considering the amount of money that Telstra has invested in the smart
card phones and considering that both smart card and phoneaway are
"pre-paid" concepts, why could Telstra not offer the smame low rates
on the smart card as it offers on the PhoneAway card ?

Seems to me that Telstra has invested a lot in the smart card, only to
see it overshadowed by a simpler card.

------------------------------

From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric B. Morson)
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 18:15:04 -0400
Subject: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503


The Portland and Salem aareas in northwest Oregon will receive a 971
overlay area code beginning January 30, 2000.

Permissive 10-digit local dialing will begin on July 11, 1999 and become
mandatory on January 30, 2000.

See the full text of the press release at:
http://AreaCode-Info.com/headline/1999/or990514.htm


Eric B. Morson
Co-Webmaster
AreaCode-Info.com

EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com

------------------------------

From: s9609776@cse.rmit.EDU.AU (Quang D. Nguyen)
Subject: Subcriber Loop Test?
Date: 15 May 1999 01:40:39 GMT
Organization: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.


Hi,

I am currently doing a project to measure capacitance, loop resistance
and induction resistance of telephone subcriber loop, to detect and
locate faults on the telephone line. Does anyone have a idea to have
it done? Any input is appreciated .

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 08:30:44 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Telecom Made Easy", June Langhoff
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKTLCMME.RVW   990331

"Telecom Made Easy", June Langhoff, 1997, 0-9632790-7-6, U$19.95
%A   June Langhoff 71022.2131@compuserve.com
%C   796 Aquidneck Avenue, Newport, RI   02842-7246
%D   1997
%G   0-9632790-7-6
%I   Aegis Publishing Group Ltd.
%O   U$19.95 800-828-6961 fax: 401-849-4231 aegis@aegisbooks.com
%P   400 p.
%T   "Telecom Made Easy, Third Edition"

According to the book jacket, this is for very small companies with
less than five phones installed.  The text seems to hit the target
quite well.

Chapter one is a standard promotional piece for modern telecommuni-
cations services.  Basic (very basic) user premises equipment is
reviewed in chapter two, concentrating on wiring and connections.  For
those with no background in telephony, these explanations are clear
and detailed, although for anyone with some experience the material
gets a bit tedious.  A variety of phone services, such as Caller-ID
and 900 numbers, are briefly described in chapter three.  Chapter four
looks at phone "lines," or the basic service that you get.  

The section on ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) has a number
of points in it, but still may not give the reader enough information
about how, actually, to connect to and use the service.  A wide range
of features for "basic" phone sets are listed in chapter five.
Private branch exchanges (PBXs) and other types of phone systems are
discussed in chapter six.  Chapter seven not only describes the
various types of mobile phone service, but also offers tips on
security and saving money.

Voice mail is covered in chapter eight, and answering machines in
nine.  Chapter ten deals with pagers.  Online services get a look in
chapter eleven.  The chapter obviously has its origins in commercial
services and BBSes, with the Internet as an afterthought, but for all
of that the information, though brief, is well thought out.  Even the
section on viruses isn't bad, until it gets into MS Word macro viruses
("a group of viruses commonly named the Microsoft Concept virus") and
protection.  The material on modems, in chapter twelve, has lots of
tips, but lots of gaps as well, unfortunately.  Installing a modem is
still a tricky business.  Fax is fairly straightforward, and so is
chapter thirteen.  Chapter fourteen deals not only with telecommuting,
but with communicating, and computing, on the road.

Chapter fifteen "shows us the money" on phone bills.  From my
perspective, the advice is pedestrian, but then, I'm a Scot.  A
miscellany of LANs, disaster recovery, and other topics finishes off
in chapter sixteen.

Sprinkled throughout the text are boxes with tips or "A Day in the
Life of ..." descriptions of use by diverse small businesses or
operators.  At the end of each chapter there are suggested books for
further readings in the topic.  I'd never heard of most of them, and
of those I had, a number were in the mediocre range.

For those just starting out in business, or starting to get to the
point of needing more telecommunications services, this work should be
a good introduction.  In addition, consultants may wish to keep copies
around for small business customers in order to get them over the
initial hurdles, and keep common questions to a minimum.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKTLCMME.RVW   990331

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick
themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened.   - W. Churchill
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 02:24:07 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Privacy Report Has Both Sides Scrambling for Spin


http://www.thestandard.com/articles/mediagrok_display/0,1185,4555,00.html 

It was a classic case of the glass being half empty or half full - or
more precisely, two-thirds full or one-third empty. A Georgetown
University study on commercial Web sites' privacy policies found that
two-thirds of the top 300-plus sites had a privacy policy posted. That
compares to the paltry 14 percent that had policies posted last year
when the FTC did a similar study, sparking debate between an online
industry that wants to regulate itself and privacy groups that are
pushing for legislation.

The Washington Post's Robert O'Harrow Jr. set the scene perfectly,
saying "the scramble to gain the high ground of interpretation began
within hours of the report's release, as people on all sides of the
debate issued statements, held press conferences and dissected what it
all means." (The study's genesis at nearby Georgetown may have helped
O'Harrow's story land on the Post's front business page.) Industry
mouthpieces quickly seized on the positive upswing, saying laws
weren't needed; indeed, the Wall Street Journal story led with the
conclusion that the study's release means "the Clinton administration
is likely to back away from threats to press for new privacy laws.''

But critics pointed out that the survey also showed that only 10
percent of major sites had comprehensive privacy policies that allowed
surfers to access their own data, which became the focus on tech sites
like News.com and ZDNet. In the half-empty camp, Beth Givins of the
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse complained to CyberTimes that "one-third
posted no privacy practices at all." Electronic Privacy Information
Center director Marc Rotenberg was even more critical, telling the
Post that "I think the time for self-regulation is running out."

Still, there were some voices of compromise in the debate. FTC chair
Robert Pitofsky told the Post that online firms deserve credit for
making progress over the last year, though he added that the FTC would
analyze the survey's results before reporting to Congress. And Jerry
Berman, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology,
told CyberTimes, "I think that the self-regulatory efforts that are
being made deserve credit for moving a lot of those numbers up, but I
don't think ... we can get privacy to be the rule simply based on
the self-regulatory efforts of industry."

Reporters' heads weren't only spinning from the dueling experts, but
also from the concept of Web reach touted by Media Metrix. CyberTimes'
Jeri Clausing said the study showed that two-thirds of "all commercial
Web sites" display warnings on collecting personal information, while
the Post's O'Harrow said the sample accounted for "99 percent of the
activity on the Web." Hogwash. Wired News' Declan McCullagh got it
right, saying the survey included 364 "dot-com" Web sites that
together reach 98.8 percent of home Internet users, according to Media
Metrix's confusing metrics. That doesn't mean all Web sites or all Web
activity - just the most visited sites according to one ratings house.

More Web Sites Appear to Post Privacy Policies
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-05/13/067r-051399-idx.html

New Privacy Study Says Majority of Sites Provide Warnings
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/05/cyber/articles/13privacy.html

Survey: Web Privacy Improving
http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/19643.html

Study: Data Privacy Policies Fall Short
http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,36470,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh.ni

Web Has Work to Do on Privacy
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2258012,00.html?chkpt=hpqs014


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I feel like such an idiot sometimes. 
When I recently tried to renovate and improve the telecom-archives
web site at http://telecom-digest.org, one of the first things I did
was add a short blurb about 'your privacy at this site'. It is avail-
able to readers with java-enabled browsers since those readers get
a small cookie offering from me if they wish to accept it, and I ask
for the same cookie back on subsequent visits. It just seemed to
me it was extremely important to let people know my intentions and
the specifics about the cookie information. I do not give the file
to Lynx browsers because I do not have the ability right now to ask
a Lynx user anything anyway. Any non-java browser which does not
see that file in the greeting at the top of the page can still read
it if they wish at http://telecom-digest.org/cookienotes.html

Then I read a report like the one Monty sent in today, and it frankly
annoys me no end that so many *huge* 'dot com' sites do not bother to
explain anything at all, nor sometimes even the fact that they are
busy raping your hard drive while you read whatever they have to
offer. Others insist you either take their cookies or you cannot
participate at all. Maybe *they* have so many callers each day they
can afford to offend and send away users with privacy concerns, but I
sure cannot afford it. The other day I saw a web site (if I can recall
its URL I will get it again and post it here) where the webmaster
talked openly about the techniques he uses in cooperation with
several other sites to share 'cookie data' and user information. He
claims if you visit even a few 'cooperating sites' with what he
termed 'double-click and/or 'click-trade' schemes over a period of a
few days, you can then go to his site and he can tell (and does look
to see) all the other places you have been.

As he explained it, site A trades cookies with B, but not with
C. However B trades with D and E, and E trades with C. So soon enough,
all sites which collect cookie information have all the information
on users who went to any of the others. He contends that many sites
not only use cookies, but have no compunction at all against just
looking through your cache, i.e. Windows Temporary Files, grabbing
up all the URLs they can find in there as well, which become part of
your 'UserID' information which is stored in the cookie. I guess the
first one of these sites to discover you do not have a cookie with
a userID embedded in it assigns you one, and plants a cookie with
it on your computer. Subsequent sites use whatever userID was
assigned by whichever site assigned it. And from that day on, as
your 'dossier' grows, each site references that same userID when
it trades with other sites. So he concluded, "go ahead, surf the
net for a couple days, I will wait for you. You'll be bound to hit
at least one double-clicker or cookie collector in that time, and
when you get around to my site eventually, I'll be able to tell you
exactly when and where you went when you downloaded the porn pictures
of those naked boys ... but at least I am honestly telling you what
is going on; most sites won't. And did it ever occur to you that
certain government and law enforcement sites which encourage the
public to visit might also be double-clicking behind your back and
looking to see what you are about? You bet they do ..."

Well, like I said two or three paragraphs ago, it makes me feel like
an idiot at times, sitting here with my dinky little thing and
puny little website, putting up a notice about user privacy. If so
few in dot.com seem to care about it, why the hell should I?  I get
mail every day from sites who want me to join in 'click-trade' with
them. I think the privacy problem on the net may be even worse than
some privacy experts believe.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 02:34:49 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: DNA Dragnet


Tom Schoenberg
Legal Times
May 10, 1999

DNA is in the criminal justice headlines nearly every day: A prisoner on
death row for a crime he didn't commit is released; a defendant awaiting
trial for rape is exonerated.

But if DNA's capacity to exculpate makes for a compelling story, its
ability to help cops solve crimes is reshaping law enforcement. After a
push by Congress begun in 1994, every state is now collecting DNA from
violent offenders, while the courts are batting away constitutional
challenges to the practice. And last October, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation unveiled a national database that links DNA information from
the states, allowing authorities throughout the country to match traces of
crime scene evidence to possible suspects.

http://www.lawnewsnet.com/stories/A1301-1999May7.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Police have long had the right to take
fingerprints from persons who are arrested, and we do not hear too
many complaints from civil liberties advocates about that. I would
assume by extension that police have the right to gather whatever
identifying information they can from arrested people, but the catch
is that fingerprints -- once years ago the latest technology in
people identification -- are rather feeble when compared with DNA 
type-casting. DNA records are just a bit too-perfect for comfort
it would seem compared to fingerprints, handwriting analysis and
all those older techniques, although the most banks have started
using thumbprints on checks they cash now; had you noticed that?
Ah, DNA and cookies; what a combination as we enter Century 21.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 01:30:26 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Vietnam City Codes
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.82.4@telecom-digest.org>, Matthew Andrion
<MatthewA@amrcom.com> wrote:

> I really appreciate all the information that on your site. It's by far,
> the most complete listings of country and city dialing codes I've ever
> seen. I'm looking for more information on Vietnam city dialing
> information. Do you know of any other resources I might try? If nothing
> else, thanks for your time and great web site.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for your complimentary remarks
> on the Telecom Archives city and country code files. While still a
> good reference, far better ones can be found on the net. I have been
> 'meaning to' get some updated information there for a long time, and
> never quite get around to it. Two regular participants here, Linc
> Madison and someone else whose name escapes me for the moment both
> have excellent dialing code references at their web sites. I am
> asking them now if they won't please send you a link so you can
> review their files as well.   PAT]

My site, <http://www.LincMad.com>, has area codes for North America
and country codes for other locations, and the most accurate map of
area codes available anywhere.

The best resource I can recommend for city codes outside North America
would be the World Telephone Numbering Guide by Dave Leibold,
<http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/8818/wtng.html>


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

Date: 14 May 1999 15:12:00 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
From: larb0@aol.com (Bruce Larrabee)
Subject: Re: Pulse EPABX


You might try earlier references than 1981 - I sold systems in the 1977-1980
timeframe and the Pulse systems were largely obsolete then. Take a look in
documents in the mid-70s.


Bruce Larrabee

------------------------------

From: Chris Eastland <chrise@shoreview.com>
Organization: Shoreview Consulting Inc.
Subject: Re: WorldXchange Terrible Experience
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 11:28:41 -0400


It seems I spoke too soon. 

A follow on to this. It turned out to be BELL ATLANTIC's fault!!
WorldXchange took the time and trouble to make BA see the error of
their ways. Although World Exchange's customer service could do with
some improvement, once they realized there was a problem (someone
senior got involved thanks to the agent who signed me up in the first
place), they worked to fix it.

I apologize to WorldExchange for implying it was their problem BEFORE
all the evidence was in. I guess I believed Bell Atlantic's strenuous
denials that the fault lay with them.

I am now a WorldXChange devotee -- and their rates are fantastic (7c
US- to UK).


Chris Eastland 
Email: chrise@shoreview.com, Web: www.shoreview.com
Shoreview Consulting Inc.
1770 Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 597
CAMBRIDGE, MA 02140, USA
Tel: (617) 876-6673  Fax: (978) 525-4908

------------------------------

From: ted@roxie.ede.com (Ted Ede)
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming
Date: 14 May 1999 15:33:26 -0400
Organization: Road Runner


My guess is they simply gather the fax number from the domain
registrations on the Internic.  I too received an international fax.
They have quite a nerve asking you to call a 900 number.  Do they
honestly think anyone is dumb enough to reply to this?

------------------------------

From: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in Airplanes: Costa Rica
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 13:57:38 -0600
Organization: NateTech


As a pilot, long time comp.dcom.telecom reader, telcom professional, and
concerned bystander to this discussion ...

Flying non-U.S. flag carriers in countries outside the U.S. raises the
risks associated with flying.  A few exceptions would be SwissAir,
British Airways, and Lufthansa.  (I'm sure there are others worth
mentioning ... it's not where my point is going.)

First, they're not going to be flying under the FAA's rules that you're
used to in the U.S., and even if there are rules to be followed, there's
very little enforcement of those rules in many areas of the world. 

Your message mentioned that it was an 18-pax single-engine aircraft. 
That's not allowed under U.S. regulations.  Not only would it not be
possible under current law, you'd have to have at least one flight
attendant for that many people. 

Sounds like flying around on an airline like that, I'd be glad to see
there were at least two cell phones aboard to call for help after the
crash!  (-:

BUT: A couple of items in the pilot's defense.  It appears it was not
instrument conditions, the pilots are the only two people aboard
qualified to see if their cell phones are interfering with the aircraft
systems, and they probably fly the route so much they could do it in
their sleep.  

So, I'm certainly not condoning their actions, but there's a few more
things to think about.  Were they acting like professionals?  Hell no. 
Were you safe?  Probably.

If it was a U.S. flag carrier operating under FAA Part 121 rules, I'd
have called the chief pilot and hung 'em out to dry, but you probably
don't have that option in this case.


Nathan N. Duehr, nate@natetech.com

------------------------------

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <editor@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: "Jury" Results on Alleged Spammer
Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 01:00:00 EDT


To conclude this issue of the Digest, a few remarks by readers who
participated on the 'jury' in the 'case of Joey vrs. Adrian' ...

Adrian has been charged with attempted spamming, a very serious
offense in our community.

Readers will recall that Joey got a piece of email from Adrian asking
him certain things, and referencing a web site. He considered it to be
spam, and mentioned others who had received the same mail.

Adrian responded to Joey, he rebutted, then Adrian asked for a
bit more space for a further rebuttal. All this occured here in
the Digest on Monday through Wednesday of this past week. Then I
asked the readers, 'what do you think?'  and those responses will
be presented now.

First --  From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)
 Subject: Is he is, or is he ain't a spammer ? (Was : Where in the World...)

> The question for the jury to decide: is Adrian guilty of
> attempted spamming or not guilty of attempted spamming?

  Well, are we in criminal court (beyond a reasonable doubt) or in civil 
court (preponderance of the evidence/more likely than not) ?

  In criminal court, I say "not guilty".  In civil, well, I dunno.  He
gets points, though, for responding in person.  On balance, probably
not guilty, even in civil court.


Bill

Next we hear From: Ralph Seberry <rseberry@yahoo.com>
 Subject: Is it SPAM?

Is it SPAM?

My first impression was: "It depends what the meaning of it is".
Adrian McElligott <aem@ezymail.com> acknowledges a mail-out
of unsolicited commercial email. To me, this is spam. But perhaps
not the worst kind [bulk e-mail].

But a bit more digging makes me feel that Mr McElligott is sort of
sleazy. 

There is a widespread newspaper in Australia called "The Trading Post" 
which has a site www.tradingpost.com.au. A check of the trade mark
database (search at pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au) shows they have
"Trading Post On-Line" registered.

The site www.tradingpostonthe.net is remarkably similar to the real one.
Mr McElligott's email and a check of the company names (search at
www.asic.gov.au) show that the company (his client) changed their name
 from "Ads On-line" to "Trading Post On The Net" in 1998, after the real
Trading Post had established its web presence.

Second, his domain name is "ezymail". Telstra has a product called
"EasyMail" that they're promoting heavily, and his domain name irks
me. I should note that Internic records show that he had ezymail
before Telstra's product, and their TradeMark is only "pending".

Ralph


A third response comes From: mattack@area.com (Matt Ackeret)
 Subject: Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com??
 Organization: Area Systems in Mountain View, CA - http://www.area.com

In article <telecom19.81.2@telecom-digest.org>...
Judge Judy Noted in part:

> The question for the jury to decide: is Adrian guilty of
> attempted spamming or not guilty of attempted spamming? 

Of course he is guilty.  It is unsolicited mail _advertising_ a web site
and asking you to go to it.

Even if it is not specifically selling something, it is spam.

I am perfectly happy to get responses to any Usenet postings I make,
or email out of the blue, as long as it is not an ad or charity spam
or something like that.  I also do not use a munged email address,
because that is attacking the problem from the wrong end and makes it
difficult for someone who is truly trying to respond to a Usenet
posting to help you or discuss the topic with you.

So for all spam, I either (1) send it to an antispam address if it
comes into my work mail, or (2) send to abuse,root,postmaster,admin at
the originating site in the Received header and/or all entries (plus
the 4 previous) in the whois database entry for the site if it's a web
site spam.  This doesn't take very long nowadays, because all of the
items in my pine address book are shorthand for common spam sites
(uunet, mindspring, etc.).

mattack@area.com

The next juror we hear From: James Wyatt <jwyatt@RWSystems.net>
 Subject: Re: Where in the World is joey@lindstrom.com??
 Organization: Fastlane Communications (using Airnews.net!)

I gotta admit that Adrian's being a fairly good sport about this...

>> Simply surfing to www.ezymail.com by itself shows the lie

> That is an assumption I am afraid, and once again it is wrong. Just
> because you own the server, and you don't use the root web, doesn't
> mean that your are trying to deceive anyone. I have good reason for
> not using the root web, you assumed that it is because I wanted to
> deceive people, but the fact is that I have many web sites on my
> server, and only one can be root.  As I said earlier I develop web
> sites for people, well I also host sites for people. The reason why
> the root web is empty, not that it is any of your business, is that I
> was running a e-mail notification site there, which I have since
> closed. I still have the source to it, if you want proof.

Uh, the 'root' URL of any www server (and most others) *should* at
least include contact information. It can be useful for folks to
contact you and prevents you from *looking like* you don't know how to
correctly configure your server -- not good for business. If you have
customers that don't want to blow the money for a domain, you might
link to them from the root as a courtesy ... If you have multiple
domains, you can have many 'roots' if you have a decent (or industrial
strength) server.

[ ... ]
> I route my mail, incoming and outgoing though their site, they know
> it, you can tell them if you like. Please, please!! I don't do this to
> be deceptive, I know that you would be thinking that.  I do that
> because I am multi-homed, and my ISP don't support multi-homed
> routing, so to split my traffic across my two links, I send everything
> that I can't individually direct across one link, and everything that
> I can't across the other.

BTW: How can you be multi-homed when your 'ISP don't support' it? If you
really have a technically inept ISP, you might consider running your web
business via a different provider.

[ ... ]

> So you think that anyone who uses someone else's system is a 'lowly
> user' ...  mmh that is sad, but you are entitled to your opinion.  Your
> final conclusion, for which there are now no facts to base it on is

Most admins are 'lowly users' on other admin's systems too. (^_^) I
thought PAT was a 'lowly user', though he admins the list. Please, let's
stop demeaning 'lowly users'; they are who use our servers and services.

Adrian, are you going to make your results available to the rest of if we
help you? It would be nice if you would put a query page up so we could
play with it. If you are going to get a meaningful amount of data, you
must have some drive space set-aside for it! How much response are you
expecting and how is it going so far? - Jy@

                      ----------------------

So on our four-person jury, we come up with four different answers:
one, that there is no absolute proof, nor a preponderance of evidence
and therefore Adrian is not guilty. One juror says it all sounds
sleazy, third says Adrian is guilty, and the last juror neither says
guilty or not-guilty, but discusses how the root page should be set
up, and notes that Adrian is being a very good sport about all this.

Yes Adrian, you have been a good sport; thanks for playing! Now to
conclude this thread, if Adrian wishes to make a final comment or
if Joey has anything to add, please send it in over the weekend.

PAT

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #84
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon May 17 17:11:34 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA28072;
	Mon, 17 May 1999 17:11:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 17:11:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905172111.RAA28072@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #85

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 17 May 99 17:11:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 85

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Privacy Report Has Both Sides Scrambling For Spin (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Email and Newsgroup Similarities (Randal L. Schwartz)
    Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503 (Randal L. Schwartz)
    Click-Click-Click: What Causes it? (eraimy@my-dejanews.com)
    Re: Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition (John R. Levine)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (EclectiJim)
    Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming (John R. Covert)
    Re: 24-Hour 4.8c Long Distance (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US/European Connectivity? (John Covert)
    Prepaid Phone Cards (William Wheeler)
    Delivery of Tariff Services (John Starta)
    Re: Subcriber Loop Test? (John Fricks)
    Re: The World's Free Web-Based Fax Service @ Fax4Free.com (Tom Heathcote)
    Re: Australian Pay Telephones (Darryl Smith)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock)
Subject: Re: Privacy Report Has Both Sides Scrambling for Spin
Date: 16 May 1999 21:25:21 GMT
Organization: Net Access BBS


Regarding the "privacy notice", I think that whole concept is pretty
foolish.  It's just another piece of micro-fine print that will only
_confuse_ people, not enlighten them.  And it will serve to eliminate
liability of host sites that perhaps should be retained.

I get "privacy statements" from my bank, the phone company, and even
the cable company.  They're long, hard to understand, and in the end,
meaningless.  For example, my cable company says it won't release
anything to outsiders, but may use it internally.  Well, the company
is owned by Time Warner, a huge conglomerate, and there's lots of
opportunities to use personal data.

Regarding DNA records, I think the real concern ought to be not the
"government" (which everyone seems to be excessively afraid of), but
rather the private sector.

Obviously, the government (any level) can be heavy handed and ruin a
person.  But normally there are constitutional checks in place that do
protect people.  It's important to remember that the private sector
has NONE of those constitutional protections.

Your employer has every legal right to listen to your phone calls,
search your desk, search your body and papers, monitor your computer,
and check your credit records.  Proctor & Gamble forced the phone
company to give up _home_ telephone records of employers it suspected
of leaking secrets.  When it comes to your employer, or anyone you
choose to do business with, you have no "right" of privacy at all.
Your only right is not to do business with such people.

Some would argue "fine, don't do business with companies who won't
respect your privacy".  In theory, true.  But today, with all the 
mergers, it's not so simple.

In many industries, there's only one large player left, only "one game
in town".  Consumers, or more importantly, employees, no longer have a
choice.  Even when there's a couple of players, they tend to have
eliminated any meaningful competition so well that they do as they
please.

Say you're a banking employee and aren't happy at your job.  In the
old days there were plenty of other large banks you could change to.
Now there are very few, all have been bought out or merged.  The same
applies in almost any industry.  Seven once independent hospitals in
Phila are now under a single ownership, and that of a national
company.  Phila has only three major banks, all owned elsewhere.

Say you work for one of these large companies and have a falling out
with your supervisor.  You get fired and your personnel record is
blackballed.  Your situation is no different than when the robber
barons of the late 19th century would blackball a suspected union
organizer or trouble maker.

Unlike a credit card company, a prospective employer has no obligation
to inform me if they decline to hire you on account of adverse
information they uncover.  There have been incidents where people
suffered greatly, unable to find a job, because unbeknowst to them,
there was adverse data floating around about them (and inaccurate
data, but hard to locate and fix).  Today, with computer databases so
easy to set up, search, and distribute, the potential for abuse is
greater.

Sooner or later most of us will be seeking a new job and a new
dwelling unit.  (It's very rare nowadays to stay in one job and live
in one place forever).  Will we find ourselves blackballed and
destined to work only as a fast food cook at minimum wage or live in a
slum because of some nasty stuff buried in some database?

People today seem to be more worried about encryption chips and the
government spying on us.  I think the real potential of abuse will be
from the private sector.  I think there's a great possibility some
over-eager "property protection" manager will go too far.  (Remember
Henry Ford's internal security dept?)

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Email and Newsgroup Similarities
From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA
Date: 17 May 1999 11:02:38 -0700


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> writes:

> Now please note carefully: if you do NOT want your mail to be
> piped through someone's .forward file, i.e. handled by his filter-
> rules, etc ... then you put a backslash in front of his name. For
> example mail to joeblow@site is subject to whatever .forward Joe
> has in place. Maybe he sends the mail elsewhere, or maybe he uses
> it as a way to pipe the stream into filtering, etc. But \joeblow@site
> means the mail is to be delivered absolutely! to Mr. Blow's mailbox,
> bypassing or ignoring any .forward, should one be present in his
> directory.  A backslash in front of something always means deal with
> it just as written, ignoring any user-created aliases locally or
> elsewhere which might have been put up for handling that instruction.

Nope.  This works locally, not remotely.  I can put it in my local
 ..forward to say to deliver to \merlyn,someguy@remote.com, but I can't
say \someguy@remote.com.  It won't work.  If you've seen it work,
that's perhaps an artifact of an overly permissive sendmail.cf, but
not the norm.


Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
Keywords: Perl training, UNIX[tm] consulting, video production, skiing, flying
Email: <merlyn@stonehenge.com> Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger merlyn@teleport.com)
Web: <A HREF="http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/">My Home Page!</A>
Quote: "I'm telling you, if I could have five lines in my .sig, I would!" -- me


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A single backslash "\" will not work
when leaving this site and traveling across the net either. But a
double backslash to start with on outgoing mail "\\" allows sendmail
to take one off thinking it is supposed to deal literally with whatever
follows, and when it does take one off, it sees the second one and
makes that literal transaction, sending the second one as part of the
recipient's email address.  Try \\someguy@somewhere and see how that
responds. Also, try only one backslash, but quoting it either in 
part or in whole, as in "\someguy@somewhere" and also "\someguy"@somewhere.
The trouble with quotes is that sometimes the shell at the remote
end thinks you are talking about 'backslash user' (as a name) rather
than 'user' with a backslash in front of his name. And of course,
'backslash user' does not exist, and never did.  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503
From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA
Date: 17 May 1999 11:08:11 -0700


Eric B Morson <Eric@AreaCode-Info.com> writes:

> The Portland and Salem aareas in northwest Oregon will receive a 971
> overlay area code beginning January 30, 2000.

> Permissive 10-digit local dialing will begin on July 11, 1999 and become
> mandatory on January 30, 2000.

> See the full text of the press release at:
> http://AreaCode-Info.com/headline/1999/or990514.htm

If I read this right, it means the end of being able to dial a
seven-digit number from my house.  From my 503- phone number, I'll
need to dial "5 0 3 - xxx xxxx" to get across the street!

Why in the creator's name are they eliminating that?  I can dial local
calls in San Jose with seven digits!

Or is the article wrong?

Is the rest of the country also eliminating seven-digit numbers too,
and I just haven't caught on?


Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
Keywords: Perl training, UNIX[tm] consulting, video production, skiing, flying
Email: <merlyn@stonehenge.com> Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger merlyn@teleport.com)
Web: <A HREF="http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/">My Home Page!</A>
Quote: "I'm telling you, if I could have five lines in my .sig, I would!" -- me

------------------------------

From: eraimy@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Click-Click-Click: What Causes	It?
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:24:07 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.


I just added a Radio Shack headset telephone, a handheld computer
(Jornada) with a modem, a Radio Shack "telephone recording control,"
and a tape recorder to my telephone line. Now I hear a loud, steady
click-click-click on some, but not all, incoming calls. Any
suggestions? Thanks.

------------------------------

Date: 17 May 1999 13:07:39 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I suspect the telecom landscape would be
> *very* different if, instead of the states following the progressivist
> notion that a regulated monopoly would be more efficient than
> competing telcos, the Federal government had simply stepped in and
> forced LECs to interconnect!

Well, actually, in the Kingsbury Commitment in about 1919 Bell agreed
to interconnect and to stop buying up other non-overlapping telcos, to
get the trust-busters to back off.  Regulation came later.

Had that not happened, Bell might well have absorbed all of the
independents, but I don't know that it would have made much practical
difference.  The idea of forced interconnection among telcos in the
same city seems not to have been very popular until the 1980s.  I
suspect that back when the infrastructure was a gazillion open pair
wires on poles, they didn't want any more wires and poles clogging the
streets than necessary.  

Also, don't forget the universal service issue.  Monopoly LECs agreed
to serve everyone in the territory, averaging rates even though some
customers were served at a loss.  It's not at all clear to me that
non-monopoly telcos would have agreed to do that.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

Date: 17 May 1999 13:12:55 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
From: eclectijim@aol.com (EclectiJim)
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming


> Do they honestly think anyone is dumb enough to reply to this?

They do - and (unfortunately) they're right.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 07:57:13 -0400
From: John R. Covert <no.spam.covert.maps.on@covert.org>
Subject: Re: Unsolicited FAX Spamming


Ted Ede wrote:

> My guess is they simply gather the fax number from the domain
> registrations on the Internic.  I too received an international fax.

Not in my case.  My fax number is absolutely unlisted, not in the NIC
database, not in any database.  I do not give it out to businesses, but
only to friends.  The 900-number folks could have found it only by power
dialing the exchange.  And as I mentioned, all my phones have been
ringing with a "beep-beep-beep" of an attempted fax.

Terry Kennedy suggested contacting OFTEL, but OFTEL's database only
supports UK numbers.

Lawyers who think that Title 47 Section 227 of the U.S. Code applies
to calls from England (if there is a U.S. company involved) are
encouraged to contact me if they want to take the case on a
contingency basis.


 /john

------------------------------

From: Fred Goldstein <fgoldstein@wn.net>
Subject: Re: 24-Hour 4.8c Long Distance
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 09:24:54 -0400


On Sat, 08 May 1999, Paul Cook wrote:

> I often wondered why someone didn't do something like set up the old
> system of dialing a local number, handing you a dial tone and having
> you punch in a pin code and then the number you wanted to call.

> My thought was that the rate for such calls should be cheaper since
> there would be no "equal access" or 800 fee.  And perhaps there would
> be a calling card that wouldn't rip people off either by charging
> enormous rates for connections or whatever miscellaneous call
> surcharges are imposed.

There is no "equal access" fee any more.  If you're an IXC, you should
be paying very similar rates regardless of the type of access you
choose.  If you're not OFFERED equal access, that's a different
story ... but there are only a handful of rural indies that don't have
it yet.

There are unscrupulous carriers who attempt to take calls on
"business" lines, rather than pay their access fees.  In such cases
the caller pays for a local call, which (as Pat noted in the case of
early MCI) can be more than the "savings", or in a flat-rate area is
simply money the ILEC is technically owed but not collecting.  I don't
know how long somebody can get away with this but I know of some
"VoIP" IXCs who've done it for over a year; LECs seem rather remiss
about enforcement these days.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 12:22:37 -0400
From: John R. Covert <no.spam.covert.maps.on@covert.org>
Subject: Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US/European Connectivity?


Charles Conn wrote:

> I am looking for a cell phone provider that allows me to do the
> following:

> Have a cell phone which works in the US, but when I travel to Europe,
> it will ring there as well (when someone calls my US phone number).

There are three ways to do this:

1. Economically, with a GSM service provider.  Various GSM providers
   can provide this capability.  To look up the GSM providers in the
   United States, in order to find one in your area, you can go to the
   GSM Mou web site at http://www.gsmworld.com/ and select the GSM Info
   link at the top of the page.

   GSM in the United States and Canada operates at 1.9 GHz.  In Europe and 
   the rest of the world, it operates at 900 MHz and 1.8 GHz.  This means 
   that you must either own two phones or have a phone such as the Bosch 
   Worldphone.  I've chosen the two-phone route, since with GSM, your 
   identity is in a smart card (SIM card) which you can move from phone to 
   phone as needed.  One of my phones (the Motorola 6000e) operates on 1.9 
   GHz, my other phone (the Motorola 8900) operates automatically on both 
   900 MHz and 1.9 GHz.  They are identical form factors, and use the same 
   batteries and other accessories.

   I use Omnipoint, where incoming calls from the U.S. are 99 cents per
   minute, including both LD and airtime, pretty much anywhere in Europe.
   See http://www.omnipoint.com/ for info about them.  I signed up with
   them when they first began offering service in NYC even though I live
   in the Boston area, intending to use them only on travel to Europe.
   I didn't even buy a U.S. phone until a year later when they launched
   their Boston service.

2. Somewhat more expensively, with AT&T's service which requires you to
   be a customer of AT&T wireless, pay an additional annual fee, and then
   $2.95 per minute for your calls.  High fees for renting a phone, too.

3. Horribly expensively, with Iridium.  One of the problems with Iridium
   is that it will only fall back to somewhat reasonably priced cellular
   roaming if you're in an area with ground-based systems that are compatible
   with your home area's land-based systems, which rules out Europe.

> I assume that I would have to call the cellular provider and inform
> them of when I would be in Europe, and they would turn on service
> during this window.  Is this how it works?

With GSM, it is completely automatic.  When you are roaming, all of your
features, including the ability to SEND AND RECEIVE text messages (even
email in the case of Omnipoint), work seamlessly no matter where you are
as long as there are roaming agreements.  Omnipoint has agressively sought
out roaming agreements in every part of the world where there is GSM.

If you don't have a European phone, Omnipoint will rent you a phone for
use when in Europe at very attractive prices.  Unlike the typical $95/week
charge to rent a phone with the company recommended by AT&T, Omnipoint,
the last time I checked, would rent phones for about $10/week.

John Starta wrote:

> Finding service is going to be a challenge; everyone I've approached has
> said no thanks. Let me know if you have better luck.

I have no idea what your problem was.  Omnipoint was eager to sign me
up, even before I lived in an area where they provided service.  They
FedEx'd me my SIMcard, and my service worked immediately and
flawlessly on my first trip to Europe after signing up.


 /john

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 10:04:32 -0700
From: William Wheeler <wuffa@inetarena.com>
Organization: so many books too little time
Subject: Prepaid Phone Cards


Hi Pat,

Very long time no talk with (8 to 10 years).

A long time ago you were selling prepaid Phone Cards. I got some from
you. I loved them they worked very well for me.  If you have anything
now or later you are selling Pls to put me on your List.


Thanks,

william wheeler ( was dragon or wwheeler at agora.rain.com back then
runing a AMIGA 3000)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Back around 1991 or '92 when prepaid
phone cards were new and sort of a novelty, I had them available here
as part of a Beta test for the company which was issuing them on
behalf of AT&T. There were $2, $5 and $10 denominations issued. They
were just rather plain-looking scraps of paper, a lot like a bus ticket
or similar. I sold out the supply I had and heard nothing more about
it. 

Then someone in that industry got wise, and started making them on
thin pieces of plastic -- much thinner and more plyable than credit
cards -- just 1/32 of an inch thick perhaps -- with some beautiful
pictures on one side, and the name(s) of affinity groups which were to
resell them to members, etc. The trouble was, some pictures were 'too
beautiful' and instead of using the cards, thus relieving telco of a
bit of its cash reserves acquired when it sold the card in the first
place through three or four levels of brokers which is what caused the
price to be 50-75 cents per minute of talk time as all the brokers got
their piece of the action, the cards became collector items. People
hoarded the cards, much as a stamp collector might do, or someone who
is into baseball trading cards, with pictures of their sports heros.
There were even a couple of monthly magazines started which were
devoted to 'phone card collecting', with classified ads from people
with cards to sell or trade, etc, and always wonderful graphics with
displays of the latest cards available and where to buy them. Soon,
the 'rare' cards -- those of limited issue with some particularly
stunning graphic on the back -- became worth more money if totally
unused than their face value if telco had to pay it off with calls.

I've not heard anything from the phone card collectors in quite a
while and do not know if it is still their hobby or not. There were
lots and lots of them, and I am sure telco was pleased to encourage
their habit. After all, the United States Postal Disservice has
always been encouraging of stamp collector clubs, especially those
clubs which collect pristine, or unused stamps of rare denominations.
The USPS in fact even has its own 'mailing list'; a large number of
people in its 'First Day of Issue' club. Every time USPS has a new
denomination stamp available, members of their club receive in the
mail an envelope (which costs about three cents) with a copy of
the new stamp affixed (which costs the stamp value), manually can-
celled with postal indicia which includes the phrase 'First Day
of Issue' (which costs whatever they pay the clerk who does the
work). The indicia very carefully does NOT cover the stamp itself,
so as not to deface it in any way. Then your credit card gets a
charge of ten dollars or something. At the main post office in
Chicago, one window clerk deals exclusively with stamp collectors,
and has a beautiful catalog of unusual US postage stamps which
one may purchase (whole sheets only please, no individual stamps)
for the face-value of the sheet of stamps. Naturally, they never
expect to have to redeem any of them in actual use. 

Sprint was one of the big promoters of 'phone card collectors';
maybe they still are. On the back side of their glossy, high
quality thin-plastic things, just a tiny reference to Sprint with
its logo up in one corner of the card, sitting transparently on
a brilliant background devoted to the affinity group which made the
card for its members. If one was ever presented at a pay phone to
make a call, probably the operator would go into shock.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: John Starta <starta@primenet.com>
Subject: Delivery of Tariff Services
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 10:56:56 -0700
Organization: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc.


I need some advice. I'm trying to order a tariff service from my telco
(USWest) and they're refusing delivery saying either 1) I'm too far
away from the CO; or 2) the switch/CO is incapable of providing the
service.  (Their reason alternates depending upon the department I
speak with.) I know for a fact that I'm not too far away as I have
ISDN service, and the network disclosure information they have filed
with the local utilities commission indicates that all switches/CO's
servicing my city are capable.

Is there some way of forcing USWest to uphold their commitment? Aren't
telco's required to deliver tariff services?


jas

------------------------------

From: John Fricks <jfricksNOTelvis@bellNOSPAMsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Subcriber Loop Test?
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 01:33:05 GMT


For Teradyne products, go to http://www.teradyne.com

For the 4TEL test systems specifically, go to
http://www.teradyne.com/prods/ttd/products/ttdprod.html

4TEL is a well-known line test system. Look at its specifications and
note the relevant ITU, IEEE, Bellcore, etc. standards. These are the
standards which will define the tests.

------------------------------

From: tom@nospam.demon.co.uk (Tom Heathcote)
Subject: Re: The World's Free Web-Based Fax Service @ Fax4Free.com 
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 04:27:53 +0100


Mike Pollock <pheel@sprynet.com> wrote...

> If you don't mind banner ads running down the side of your document,
> you can fax (but not spam) for free!

>  http://www.fax4free.com

I notice that "The World's Free Web-Based Fax Service" only offers
free faxing to the USA, and promises ("coming soon") merely that faxes
to other countries will use "the least cost pricing available".

It seems to me that this hardly makes it "free" or "the world's".
Although it may be the best option for faxes to the US.

If you want to send free faxes elsewhere I suggest you take a 
look at <http://www.tpc.int>.  Coverage varies from area to area 
and country to country.  Some countries have complete coverage* - 
the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden, Singapore, Hong Kong, Nicaragua, 
Lebanon, San Marino and (surprisingly) Botswana.

* They claim complete coverage, although premium-rate and some 
mobile-phone and other special-rate codes seem to be excluded, at 
least from the UK coverage.  But still, I don't suppose many 
people have their fax machines on such numbers anyway.


Tom Heathcote
TomHeathcote<AT>email<DOT>com

------------------------------

From: Darryl Smith <vk2tds@ozemail.com.au>
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 10:38:48 +1000
Organization: Quite poor
Subject: Re: Australian Pay Telephones


The markets for Phone Cards vs. Smart Cards are different. Here in
Australia EVERY public phone accepts a stored value card (Usually a
smart card, although there are a few magnetic phones around still). The
only exceptions are the occasional public phone in a milk bar and the
like, and the also rare credit card phone.

People in Australia expect to be able to go to any phone anywhere, put
in their card and make a local call. And it does work that way. At
railway stations there are usually people making quick calls to arrange
lifts, and they do not need cash in their pocket.

For Mother's Day, homeless children on the streets were given phone
cards (Smart Cards) to ring their families ... The call cost is about
40c Australian, which is just over 30c USA. However usage of public
phones is not what it once was -- we now have about 33% of the
population owning a mobile, and over 90% of the POPULATION covered. I
don't know what percentage of the land mass has mobile coverage, but I
would guess at below 25%.


Darryl Smith
Sydney, Australia


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah yes, Mother's Day. Reminds me of the
time a number of years ago when Sprint did something similar. They had
representatives give out about fifty cents worth of prepaid plastic to
all the young guys they could find around 42nd Street in Manhattan and
particularly around 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue at the Port Authority 
bus terminal so they 'could call their mothers and let them know they
were doing okay ...' Frightened Mothers who probably drove the poor
kid out of the house to start with, but that's another story ...

Anyway, the public relations people who handed out the cards failed to
let the left side of the brain at Sprint know what the right side was
doing; no one bothered to remember that Sprint does not honor its own
cards -- let alone any other telco cards, where it actually has to pay
off in a settlement -- at any pay phones in a couple of central offices 
serving midtown Manhattan. Too much phone fraud, you know ...  So none
of the cards worked! Oh, they would work okay in parts of Queens, or
out on Long Island somewhere, where Nice People live, but not around
42nd Street where Bad Boys and Bad Girls encounter Nice People who lure
them away to a place where they can crash overnight. 

And you probably thought the time one part of Sprint was promising a
free modem to all new customers while another part of Sprint was busy
denying such a deal existed was a fiasco! Or maybe the time Sprint
reps were excitedly telling new customers about free calling on Friday
while the employee-who-never-took-phone-calls-and-always-was-away-from-
his-desk was busy cancelling out those customers was the one that took
the cake. 

Sprint had just come off of litigation where they settled out of court
with a woman whose son had gotten a calling card hassle with Sprint,
but they don't learn very well. You may recall that time the kid
wanted to see the world, and although mother was concerned, she let
the kid go check things out with a Greyhound 30-day Ameripass and a
Sprint calling card issued in her name so he could call home if he
'got in any trouble'. 

As to be expected, small-town innocent kid lands at Port Authority and
within an hour or so has already made a very poor judgment regards
some new friends. He gets cuffed around a bit and everything --
clothes, Walkman, money -- stolen by Bad Boys who make sure the kid
understands how they do business there. Well, the kid has that Sprint
PIN memorized, and goes right to the pay phone to call his mother. 
Sprint won't honor the card, and after mother wastes a sufficient
amount of time on hold with customer service and others files suit. 

They talk her into settling the matter with a handful of 'Pay to the
Order of the Telephone Company' coupons -- a rather big handful -- the
same technique AT&T uses; let the local telco figure out who to charge
these back to if they ever do; with luck the indicia will be so
illegible and the coupons so tattered and torn after a couple weeks in
the back office telco will charge them back to one of our competitors
instead in error or maybe have to write them off locally when telco
can't figure out who they got them from or who to charge back; anyway
our hands are now washed. (ha!ha!).

Well, Sprint gets rid of that Complainer then has a case of amnesia
and goes around giving essentially worthless plastic to street
children in Manhattan. A good time was had by all, believe me you. PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #85
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon May 17 21:57:06 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA09139;
	Mon, 17 May 1999 21:57:06 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 21:57:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905180157.VAA09139@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #86

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 17 May 99 21:57:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 86

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #183, May 17, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Qwest Sued by Marketing Agent (Wally Reece)
    Book Review: "Removing the Spam", Geoff Mulligan (Rob Slade)
    Non-Subscription Access to ISP? (Jacob Thakadu)
    TTS to Dialogic VOX Format (jgerlich@ziplink.net)
    Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone? (David Willingham)
    TDA - Telecommunications Officials from Czech Republic (Peter Robinson)
    Pursuing a Career in Telecommunications (Kendall Cole)
    NPA-NXX & Cities (Clay Koontz)
    Re: Click-Click-Click: What Causes It? (Jeffrey M. Vinocur)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 17 May 1999 11:49:13 -0400
From: Angus TeleManagement <angus@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #183, May 17, 1999


************************************************************
*                                                          *
*                      TELECOM UPDATE                      *
*    Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin    *
*                  http://www.angustel.ca                  *
*                 Number 183: May 17, 1999                 *
*                                                          *
*    Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by     *
*             generous financial support from:             *
*                                                          *
*  AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/   *
*  Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/         *
*  Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/       *
*  MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/     *
*  Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ *
*  Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/       *
*  TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/    *
*                                                          *
************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE: 

** CRTC Won't Regulate the Internet
** Telus to Build National Fiber Net
** Metromedia to Offer Dark Fiber in Toronto
** Mobility Canada Splits
** Internet Direct, Look to Merge 
** Nortel to Drop 4,000 Manufacturing Jobs
** Bell Mobility Launches Digital Wireless Data
** Bell Strike Ends
** Shaw to Accelerate Internet Rollout
** 24-Hour LD Plan From Bell
** Profit, Revenue Down at Teleglobe
** CRTC Rules on IX Forbearance
** Motorola Establishes Montreal Software Center
** Hummingbird Wins PC Docs Bidding War
** MetroNet Installs 100,000 Lines
** Cantel Offers Text Messaging for the Deaf
** BCnet Seeks Partners for Advanced University Network
** CRTC Publishes 1999-2000 Calendar
** Corporate Reports
      Microcell
      TIW
** Techniques to Quell the Wireless Work Overload


CRTC WON'T REGULATE THE INTERNET: On May 17, the CRTC announced that
new media on the Internet "are achieving the goals of the Broadcasting
Act and are vibrant, highly competitive and successful without
regulation." The full report is available on the CRTC Web site at:
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/bcasting/notice/1999/p9984_0.txt and
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/bcasting/notice/1999/p9984_1.txt


TELUS TO BUILD NATIONAL FIBER NET: Telus will spend about $260 Million
to build a fiber network from Edmonton to Halifax, including 118 km of
fiber rings in the Toronto area.  Completion is planned for late in
2000, but Telus expects to begin offering Internet and data services
in Toronto and southern Ontario this fall.

** Shares in Call-Net Enterprises fell 13% following the 
   announcement. Some analysts had predicted that Telus would 
   buy Call-Net fiber to obtain national coverage.

METROMEDIA TO OFFER DARK FIBER IN TORONTO: Telus will keep only 15% of
the fiber it is installing in Toronto. The rest will be offered to
carriers and business customers as unmetered dark fiber by New
York-based Metromedia Fiber Network Inc.

MOBILITY CANADA SPLITS: Following Stentor's example, the consortium of
telco-owned wireless companies is splitting into two competing groups,
Telus versus the rest. National customers will still be served by
Mobility Canada "for the duration of all existing contracts," but
otherwise the two camps will compete with each other nationally by
reselling each others' services.

INTERNET DIRECT, LOOK TO MERGE: ISP Internet Direct and Look
Communications have agreed to amalgamate. Look's shareholders
(principally, Charles Sirois' Telesystem) will own 60% of the new
entity, which will offer high-speed wireless Internet access in
addition to Look's existing TV services.

** Internet Direct has announced that its subscribers can now dial up
without charge from more than 20 cities across Canada.

NORTEL TO DROP 4,000 MANUFACTURING JOBS: In the next three years
Nortel Networks will divest or eliminate 4,000 manufacturing
positions, including 2,400 in Canada. Two of the centers coordinating
Nortel's worldwide supply chain will be in Canada -- in St. Laurent,
Quebec, and Calgary. (See Telecom Update #166)

BELL MOBILITY LAUNCHES DIGITAL WIRELESS DATA: Bell Mobility now
provides e-mail, Internet access, and e-commerce applications to
subscribers with a data-capable phone.  Price: 15 cents/minute.

** The services include Veev (wireless banking at the Bank of 
   Montreal) and Revolv, which links wireless users to their 
   corporate data base.

BELL STRIKE ENDS: After a five-week strike, Bell Canada operators and
technicians returned to work on May 16. The 9,500 members of the
Communications, Energy and Paperworkers union voted 80% in favor of a
new five-year contract.

SHAW TO ACCELERATE INTERNET ROLLOUT: Shaw Communications says it will
accelerate deployment of two-way cable service, making its high-speed
@Home Internet service available to all of its customers within six
months.

** Shaw@Home Internet service now forwards e-mail to Shaw 
   pagers for $9.95/month. Shaw@Home also provides two extra 
   computer hook-ups from a cable modem for an additional 
   $9.95/month each.

24-HOUR LD PLAN FROM BELL: Beginning May 31, Bell Canada will offer
residential customers the option of paying 10 cents/minute for calls
to Canada and 20 cents/minute for U.S.  calls, 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week. Users of the First Rate 24 Hours plan must also pay a
$4.95/month subscription fee.

PROFIT, REVENUE DOWN AT TELEGLOBE: Teleglobe reports that
first-quarter revenue declined 13% from last year, mostly because of a
21% drop in sales by its Excel subsidiary. Net income (excluding
one-time items) fell 26%.

** Teleglobe's Excel Canada long distance service says it has 
   signed 10,000 representatives and 52,000 customers since 
   its launch in March.

CRTC RULES ON IX FORBEARANCE: In Telecom Order 99-435, the CRTC says
it will forbear from regulating Interexchange Private Line (IXPL)
services offered by non-dominant carriers. The Commission rejected a
Call-Net proposal to re-institute regulation of dominant carrier IXPL
services, and a Stentor proposal to remove the requirement that
forbearance be applied on a route-by-route basis.

** CRTC Telecom Order 99-434 sets out the criteria the 
   Commission will use when deciding whether to forbear from 
   regulating high capacity and digital data services offered 
   by the major telcos.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0434.htm 
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0435.htm 

MOTOROLA ESTABLISHES MONTREAL SOFTWARE CENTER: Motorola Canada is
establishing a $100-Million software development center in Montreal,
with several hundred staff positions.

HUMMINGBIRD WINS PC DOCS BIDDING WAR: Hummingbird has raised its bid
for PC Docs Group International, a Toronto-based software company, to
about $305 Million. In response, the rival bidder, Open Text Corp, has
withdrawn its offer. (See Telecom Update #181)

METRONET INSTALLS 100,000 LINES: MetroNet Communications says it has
now installed 100,000 switched local access lines. A majority of the
access lines are now on MetroNet-owned fiber and switches.

CANTEL OFFERS TEXT MESSAGING FOR THE DEAF: Cantel's Interactive
Messaging Service now forwards text messages to users of TDD
(Telecommunications Device for the Deaf) equipment.

BCNET SEEKS PARTNERS FOR ADVANCED UNIVERSITY NETWORK: BCnet has issued
a Request for Proposals for establishing an advanced optical network
to link universities and other high- technology institutions in the
province. Register by May 18.

http://www.bc.net/RFI.html

CRTC PUBLISHES 1999-2000 CALENDAR: The CRTC has posted its calendar of
activities until March 2000. Go to
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/backgrnd/calendar/cal9905e.htm

CORPORATE REPORTS:

** Microcell: Microcell Telecommunications reports 344,000 
   subscribers, more than three times last year's level. 
   Revenue per user is up 6%; cost of subscriber acquisition 
   has been cut almost in half, to $455. (See Telecom Update 
   #179)

** TIW: Telesystem International Wireless says it now has 
   1.56 million customers, most of them in Brazil and 
   Romania. Revenue rose to US$391 Million in 1998 from 
   US$71 Million the previous year.
 
TECHNIQUES TO QUELL THE WIRELESS WORK OVERLOAD: In the May issue of
Telemanagement, John Riddell reports on the most promising techniques
for reducing reduce the burden of managing corporate cellphones. Also
in Telemanagement #165:

** Gerry Blackwell talks to Research In Motion, the Waterloo, 
   Ontario, company that is bidding for leadership in 
   wireless "wearable computing."

** Rob Slade discusses books on how to secure Internet 
   commerce. 

To subscribe to Telemanagement call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 
or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html.


HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE

E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca

FAX:    905-686-2655

MAIL:   TELECOM UPDATE 
        Angus TeleManagement Group
        8 Old Kingston Road
        Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7


HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE)

TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There 
are two formats available:

1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World 
   Wide Web on the first business day of the week at 
   http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html

2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of 
   charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to 
   majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should contain only the two words: subscribe update

   To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail 
   message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address]


COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus
TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further
information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please
e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225.

The information and data included has been obtained from sources which
we believe to be reliable, but Angus TeleManagement makes no
warranties or representations whatsoever regarding accuracy,
completeness, or adequacy.  Opinions expressed are based on
interpretation of available information, and are subject to change. If
expert advice on the subject matter is required, the services of a
competent professional should be obtained.

------------------------------

From: Wally Reece <wreece@ncn1.com>
Subject: Qwest Sued by Marketing Agent
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 13:51:44 -0400


Contact: Wally Reece
Phone: (423) 899-8010
E-Mail: wreece@ncn1.com

NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK, INC VS QWEST COMMUNICATIONS

     The growing giant long distance carrier, Qwest Communications,
may have used smaller companies as victim stepping-stones to achieve
its success.  National Communications Network, Inc., once Qwest's
largest agent, has filed a $23 million suit in Hamilton County,
Tennessee asserting that not only did Qwest fail to provide acceptable
service to their customers, but actually stole customers through mass
mailouts, telephone solicitations, and through the use of its customer
service line.  "Customers were actually solicited to change directly
over to Qwest long distance when they called in for customer service",
stated Ms. Reece, Director of NCN's customer relations.  "We actually
have recordings of Qwest attempting to steal NCN's customers.  Qwest
even went so far as to directly solicit various NCN employees who had
previously signed up with Qwest for their personal long distance
service."

     In a statement given by Mr. Greg Casey, President of NCN, he
reported that the company was well on its way to obtaining the goal of
$1 million in monthly billings by December of 1997.  "We had seen an
average growth rate of over 45% the first 6 months of the contract.
We also brought over 30,000 new customers to Qwest and were within a
few dollars of billing $300,000 per month at our peak. It's
unfortunate that many of these customers were directly switched to the
Qwest system - keeping NCN from receiving the monthly commission due
to us according to our contract with Qwest." He also stated, "The
chain of events that began late in 1996 progressively slowed and
eventually stopped our phenomenal growth."

     In a marketing effort to interest new customers and to retain
existing customers, NCN reports that Qwest agreed to introduce an
initiative called "The Rewards Program". This program was designed to
allow customers to receive points for every dollar spent on their long
distance calls, similar to frequent flyer programs. The program was
introduced on two separate occasions by Qwest management: once in
February of 1997 at the Annual National Leadership Conference held in
Orlando, Florida and again in August of the same year at the National
Homecoming Conference held in Chattanooga, Tennessee. "The Rewards
Program", although introduced by Qwest management with great enthusiasm, 
had not even been approved by Qwest's upper management, something NCN
found out later.  Mr. Casey states, "You can imagine what happened to
the credibility of our company when this exciting new program was
pulled out from under our feet on not one but two separate occasions!"

     After the appointment of Joe Nacchio as President & CEO of Qwest
in December of '96, NCN hoped that the situation would change for the
better.  According to Mr. Reece, things did change, but unfortunately
it was for the worse.  In a meeting between Mr. Reece, Steve Jacobson
(Senior Vice President of Consumer Sales for Qwest and hand picked by
Mr. Nacchio),the Qwest National Sales Director and the NCN Qwest Agent
Manager, Mr. Reece states,"After I shared with Mr. Jacobson the many
problems we had experienced over the past months, he looked me right
in the eye and told me that Mr. Nacchio had brought him on board
because he got things done and that he would personally see to it that
these problems were taken care of. From that point on it seemed that
the bottom fell out from underneath us." Mr. Casey added, "Not only
did the deceptions continue, but also Qwest set out to misappropriate
NCN's customer base by direct solicitations seeking to circumvent the
NCN contract.  Our customers were contacted through direct mailouts,
telephone solicitations and even customers who called into Qwest
customer service were solicited. When our over 3,000 independent
representatives found out that their customers were being switched to
Qwest and away from our commission program, they stopped signing up
new customers." He added, "I had heard that Mr. Nacchio was known for
those types of practices at AT&T and now I know why."

     It has also been reported that NCN has sworn statements from
former employees of Qwest, solidifying these claims. Despite REPEATED
objections by NCN, Qwest continued these fraudulent and unethical
tactics, which left NCN no recourse other than to file suit. This is
definitely a case of David verses Goliath; however, with the stones
NCN has in its pockets and sling, this Goliath may well take a hard
fall.

                            ----------------

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I reported on this just briefly here
a couple weeks ago, when NCN sent me a complete copy of the formal
filing. After the merger between Qwest and LCI -- reported to be the
fourth largest long distance carrier in the USA most of the time --
things apparently just got even worse. The formal filing which was
copied to me lists 34 counts of absolutely disgraceful activities
which NCN alleges took place, as summarized above. 

You may recall that beginning shortly after telco divestiture, all
sorts of companies were springing up devoted to selling long distance
service via various programs, quite a few of which were either MLM
(multi-level-marketing) schemes or closely resembled it. It all came
down eventually to getting your service from Sprint since in the 
old days, even LCI was a reseller of Sprint, and until Sprint's own
network was up and running they were a reseller of AT&T or MCI. And
I can remember when MCI used to be a reseller of AT&T, circa 1980. !!

So Sprint would sell to LCI and LCI would sell to Qwest and Qwest
would market it via NCN and others who in turn would sign up agents
and the agents would sell to the church ladies and the church ladies
would get everyone else in the church to sign up under them then
those people would go sell it to their friends at the Elks Club or
the neighborhood school's PTA. Soon, there was no one left to actually
*use* the long distance service because they were all so busy selling
it to each other. But, there was a lot of money to be made (oh heck,
Ted Vail could have told you that much back in 1900), so the ones
who got in on it very early did not too bad financially, each with
their own little 'downline' of a dozen or so people contributing two
cents here and five cents there throughout the month. And as long as
at least two or three cents for each minute of traffic made its way
back to the top, the Big Three were happy; after all, they no longer
had all that messy customer service to bother with (that was now part
of what the church ladies, the agents for NCN, and others like it
had to deal with) and if the end user did somehow figure out that 
dialing 10333 at the start of each call meant he was dealing with
Sprint no matter how many slices of the pie were gone before he got
his, the answer to that was just cut him over to being one of their
customers instead. 

NCN's litigation with LCI/Qwest claims that the Denver-based company
took some awfully large slices of the pie, even sneaking them off of
other people's plates when they thought no one was watching or would
catch them in the act. As for customer service, what a quaint notion
that is! Let the church ladies, the Usenet newsgroup moderator who
thought he could make a couple dollars and others of that ilk worry
about the customer service. So as people started going back to the
'traditional' carriers leaving the agents holding the bag, the agents
started abandoning companies like NCN. I used to sell long distance
for an agency which resold AT&T through some intermediate reseller.  I
sold '800 numbers' for another agent who got them third or fourth hand
from Sprint. Old time readers may recall I did so shamelessly right
here a couple of times, around 1989-90. No more. I would not touch
reselling phone service for any reason. We all have to learn things as
we go along in life. I hope the NCN vrs. Qwest/LCI debacle serves as
an example for others. PAT]

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 10:57:05 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Removing the Spam", Geoff Mulligan
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKRMSPAM.RVW   990328

"Removing the Spam", Geoff Mulligan, 1999, 0-201-37957-0,
U$19.95/C$29.95
%A   Geoff Mulligan
%C   P.O. Box 520, 26 Prince Andrew Place, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 2T8
%D   1999
%G   0-201-37957-0
%I   Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
%O   U$19.95/C$29.95 416-447-5101 fax: 416-443-0948 bkexpress@aw.com
%P   190 p.
%T   "Removing the Spam: Email Processing and Filtering"

This book is intended for the system manager, rather than the end
user.  More specifically, it is aimed at the mail administrator for an
ISP (Internet Service Provider) or corporate network.  Slightly
unfortunate is the fact that it becomes more particular still, being
of greatest use to those running UNIX, sendmail, ProcMail, and either
Majordomo or SmartList.  Regardless of system expression, anti-spam
configuration is, as Mulligan points out, important for two reasons. 
The lesser of the two concerns is the most obvious: that of restrict-
ing the amount of spam reaching your own users.  The more vital is
that by failing to restrict the possible abuse of your system by
spammers, and particularly by permitting unrestricted relays, you face
the increasing possibility of becoming blacklisted, and therefore
hampering the legitimate use of the net by your clients.

Chapter one is an excellent overview of electronic mail.  It is
concise, complete, and accurate.  Newcomers to the field will find not
only a conceptual foundation for all the aspects of Internet email,
but also pointers to other references.  Professionals will find fast
access to a number of details that need to be addressed on a fairly
frequent basis.  The main theme, of course, is how spam uses the
functions of email systems, and how it can be impeded, with as little
impact as possible on normal communications.  A good framework is
presented in this chapter, with a number of references to spam-
fighting resources.  If I were to make one suggestion, it would be to
increase the number of examples of forged email headers, and how to
dissect them.

Chapter two describes sendmail, and goes into sufficient detail for
interested people to obtain it and start using it.  At that point, the
text concentrates on barriers to spam, such as restriction of relaying
and the access database.  Administrators using sendmail will find this
a quick guide to basic functions.

ProcMail has a variety of functions, and most of chapter three looks
at the number of uses it can have.  The spam filtering section is
relatively brief, but provides some recipes, and directions to other
ProcMail based filters.  Again, sysadmins can use this as a quick
start for basic mail processing.

Chapter four doesn't have a lot to say about spam, but it does review
the proper setup of mailing lists, which can have a significant impact
in reducing unwanted mail.

This book should be required reading for all mail administrators.  The
usefulness is not restricted to spam, since admins will be able to
find brief discussions of a variety of common mail problems.  As
Mulligan notes, the fewer improperly configured mail servers there are
out there, the more constricted spam sites will become, until at last
they can be eliminated altogether.  While the details of managing
other mail server programs may not match those given in the book, the
functions should be available, and should be turned on.  If the
functions aren't available, perhaps it's time you got some new
software.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKRMSPAM.RVW   990328

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
This is a very good sign, [that someone] is a humanist,
a universal spirit,  too interested in too many things to become
a monomaniac.  Only a monomaniac gets what we commonly refer to
as `results'.         - Albert Einstein
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 20:26:33 +0200
From: Jacob Thakadu <ThakadJ@eskom.co.za>
Subject: Non-Subscription Access to ISP


I have been trying to investigate this, but cannot find information
because the people I have been to told that it is a non-existing
situation here in South Africa.

The problem reads like this:

A new service being planned by a network provider is defined as
follows:

Non-subscription access to ISP: Allows access to an Internet Service
Provider (ISP) using a computer and dial-up modem by a person who has
no subscription to the ISP. The user dials the ISP's "non-subscriber"
single access. The SCP translates the number to an appropriate point
of presence . Call and ISP services charges are debited to the user's
telco account. The telco pay the ISP the service charge to the ISP,
retaining the call charges.

Examine the roles of the various parties involved in such a service.

I need some information please.


Regards, 

JMM Thakadu  Engineer
Eskom Bloemfontein
Tel : +27 51 404 2944
Fax : +27 51 404 2002
Email : THAKADJ@ESKOM.CO.ZA

------------------------------

From: jgerlich@ziplink.net
Subject: TTS to Dialogic VOX Format
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 20:27:47 GMT
Organization: Posted via RemarQ Communities, Inc.


I'm looking for an off-line text-to-speech conversion to Dialogic VOX
format. I want to use it to pre-process e-mail messages and place them
in people's voice mail.

------------------------------

Date: 16 May 1999 18:30:07 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
From: we202c3f@aol.com (David Willingham)
Subject: Re: 90# "Feature" on Your Phone?


> This will not happen on your home telephone, Mr. Wu, since residence
> lines rarely are equipped with the feature allowing one to flash, dial
> something and disconnect, transferring the caller elsewhere. There
> *was* a few years ago a sort of hybrid centrex -- a special 'flavor'
> offered to residential subscribers marketed under various names. I do
> not think any telcos offer it any longer at all, 

Pat--

Bellsouth does offer once again the ability to transfer calls on
residential lines; this is offered only as part of the 2-line or
3-line "complete choice" package; it is called "3-way calling with
transfer."

On Bellsouth Centrex ("Essx") lines, this is a typical feature. (Can't
have government lines that would not allow transferring the call to
someone else or that would not allow employees to hide behind voice
mail!)  


WE202C3F@aol.com (David Willingham)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 17:32:07 -0400
From: Peter Robinson <info@assist-intl.com>
Subject: TDA - Telecommunications Officials From the Czech Republic


The United States Trade and Development Agency (TDA) will be
conducting an Orientation Visit to the United States for senior
executives of private telecom companies and officials from national
telecom carriers in the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic and
Slovenia. This visit is scheduled to take place from June 5, 1999
to June 12, 1999.

The purpose of the orientation visit is to introduce U.S. telecom
operators, technologies, and equipment to the delegates of the Czech
Republic, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia as they prepare to
modernize and expand their telecom operations in the near future.

The delegation comprises twelve (12) delegates from companies or
telecom operations such as SPT Telecom, Telekom Slovenije, Slovak
Telecom, Rann Globenet, Micos, Gity, GTS Czech Net/Dattel, Ceske
Radiokomunikace, FPD Telecom, and Kable Plus/Cable Plus.

The delegation will be in Atlanta, Georgia at SUPERCOMM 99 from Sunday
June 6, 1999 to Wednesday June 9, 1999. In addition, the delegation
will be in Washington D.C. on Thursday June 10, 1999 and Friday June
11, 1999.

For details on sponsoring this important delegation, projects
summaries, and meeting the delegation members, please contact the
following person. U.S. TDA's coordinator for this orientation visit is
Parter International, Inc.  and the primary points of contact for all
activities is:


Mr. Peter Robinson
Tel: 212/587-1340 ext. 32
Fax: 212/571-9563
email: info@assist-intl.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 20:14:15 -0600
From: Kendall Cole <kdc@bwn.net>
Subject: Pursuing a Career in Telecommunications


Mr. Townson:

I am a 19 year old who is very interested in Telecommunications. I
will be attending community college in the fall in Colorado. I would
like to pursue a career in Telecommunications and my dream is to start
my own Telecom company.  Do you have any advice for me such as courses
to take? Where to go to college (4yr)? or any general advice for
someone my age who is interested in telecom?? What can I do right now
to prepare for the future?

I am trying to learn what I can and look forward to getting your e-mail
newsletter.


Thanks For Your Time

Sincerely,

Kendall Cole

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I've added Mr. Cole to the mailing list;
we shall see how he feels about it in six months or so; maybe he will
decide to run for his life and get away before the bad guys have tried
to get him. (smile) ... readers with suggestions for school, training
and/or apprentice programs please write Mr. Cole direct. Personally, I
would opt for providing him some hands-on training, maybe in customer
service at a telco, or possibly back office with all those drones and 
worker-bees in their hive. At one time many years ago, the Bell System
made *all* their top executives spend a few weeks working in the
Traffic Department, i.e. the telephone operators. The guys would watch
astounded as the operators could yank those cords around in and out
of the switchboard faster than they could blink their eyes. Every
operator saying 'number please?' about every three to five seconds 
while plugging in a cord with one hand and yanking another one down
with the other hand. Row after row of them, human telephone switches.
Then maybe a couple months in the back office pushing huge stacks
of paper toll tickets around between the drones all day and six months
or so after that in the Business Office. 

If, said Ma Bell, after six months or a year of that, if they have
survived the Traffic Department, the back office hell-hole and managed
to learn something without either quitting, stealing our money or giv-
ing away all our secrets and getting fired, we will consider giving
them a private office upstairs with a high-backed swivel chair, a
window to look out of, and several hours of time each day to spend in
meditation and contemplation, hopefully to our benefit, but you never
can tell. (grin) And there were many, many executives of the 'old'
AT&T who came up just that way. Learned the business at a local Bell,
became an executive at the local Bell, then eventually transferred
into the hierarchy on the east coast. Many were the men who started
their telecom career in the Repair Department, outside plant at the
customer's premises, etc. It was not that Ma Bell did not care about
formal education -- she did -- but if you got anywhere in a telecom
career, and 'telecom career' meant 'employment by Ma Bell' in those
days, you had best know how to handle a very heavy load 'working the
boards', where the red, green and yellow wires went inside a telephone, 
and the 'right' things to say to subscribers who called about their
accounts, etc. Remember when Ma would not even let you near one of
the 'boards' until you had completed a training class of several 
weeks and service representatives underwent six months of rigorous
training at the company's expense before they were allowed to speak
to customers without being supervised in every motion and word?
Heavy handed perhaps ... but we are beginning to discover that Ma Bell
had one way of doing things, one System ... the Bell System ... and
it worked quite well.

So what do readers suggest for Mr. Cole? Readers can write him 
directly, or if it is a thread worth pursuing here, i.e. 'How to
Start a Career in Telecom in Century 21', then cc: your correspondence
to me if you wish.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Clay Koontz <claycppc@interpath.com>
Subject: NPA-NXX & Cities
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 21:53:56 -0400


Hi,

I am a small business in telecommunications and I need information on
the Area Code and prefixes ... NPA - NXX data with Rate Centers (Cities).
Can you supply this data?  If not were can I get it?  All I need is
N. Carolina's data.


Clay Koontz
CPPC

------------------------------

From: jmv16@cornell.edu (Jeffrey M. Vinocur)
Subject: Re: Click-Click-Click: What Causes It?
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 17:15:23 -0400
Organization: Cornell University


In article <telecom19.85.4@telecom-digest.org>, eraimy@my-dejanews.com
wrote:

> I just added a Radio Shack headset telephone, a handheld computer
> (Jornada) with a modem, a Radio Shack "telephone recording control,"
> and a tape recorder to my telephone line. Now I hear a loud, steady
> click-click-click on some, but not all, incoming calls. Any
> suggestions? Thanks.

I don't know what causes it, but first rule in diagnosing something like
this is to pinpoint the problem.  Can you try different combinations of
devices and try to figure out exactly what causes it?


Jeffrey M. Vinocur   *   jmv16@cornell.edu
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/jmv16/

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #86
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Wed May 19 15:57:04 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA01548;
	Wed, 19 May 1999 15:57:04 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 15:57:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905191957.PAA01548@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #87

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 19 May 99 15:57:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 87

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telcomine: Summary for May 1999 (Seema Dhawan)
    A Busy Weekend for Global Crossing - US West, Sources Say (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503 (Linc Madison)
    Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503 (Bill Newkirk)
    Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503 (Patty Winter)
    Which Countries Use A-law vs. u-law Codecs? (Toby Nixon)
    Re: Australian Pay Telephones (JF Mezei)
    Re: Internet Pioneers (Ron Bean)
    Re: DNA Dragnet (Free Spirit)
    Internet Pioneers Update (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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Seema Dhawan <seema@infozech.com>
Subject: Telcomine: Summary for May 1999
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 16:47:29 +0530


*****TELCOMINE************

Wealth of Information about Telecommunications
Volume 2,No 5, May 1999

IN THIS ISSUE

1. IBM'S CELL PHONE -CUM- COMPUTER WITH 11" VIRTUAL SCREEN ON 1.4" BASE 

In a remarkable multi-media quantum leap IBM says it is "cooking
up" a cell phone plus computer that would navigate the web with the
thumb over an 11 inch virtual screen, enter data by voice and provide
an entire range of telecom facilities such as phone calls, email,
faxes and voicemail.

2. BRITISH TELECOM'S HANDWRITING COMPUTER - NO KEYBOARD 

It was thought that the biggest revolution in handwriting was the
pen. Not anymore. British Telecom has come up with the next big
revolution - a computer which lets the user write by hand without
keyboards.

3. TELECOM SERVICES NET $800 BILLION 

Big differences have been visible in estimates of revenue generated by
telecom services in 1997-98, believed to be $800 billion in 1998.

4.CLINTON-OBUCHI DEAL TO FIGHT Y2K BUG - BUT THE VIRUS IS ALREADY HERE

Believe it or not, the Y2K bug has attained the distinction of
figuring in the just concluded US-Japan Washington summit between
President Clinton and Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi. The two mightiest
economies in the world have agreed to join forces to squash the Y2K
bug.

5. WILL INTERNET BREED MORE LITTLETONS?

The Littleton tragedy once again aroused the conscience of the world
against the numerous dangers of Internet.  Several possibilities have
emerged for checking its misuse against corrupting the minds of the
young and committing violence, deception, fraud, indecency,
pornography and a wide variety of other crimes. Telcomine takes a look
at this phenomenon through the following six stories:

A. PENTIUM III NUMBERS CAN TRACK "ROGUE COMPUTER"

In its new Pentium chip Intel Corp, the giant chip maker has embedded
a serial number in each chip, which can also serve as its unique
identity number. This can be an ideal clue to track down any "Rogue
Computer" which may be the source of putting out criminal or
objectionable material on Internet.

B. FILTERING SOFTWARE BLOCKS ACCESS TO OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL

A number of products are available which, when installed in the
personal computer, block access to web sites containing objectionable
material.  These products work by creating lists of sites that are
deemed inappropriate for access by children.

C. AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT CLASHES WITH ISPs OVER CENSORSHIP

The Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Services) Bill 1999 sets
out a censorship regime for Internet Service Providers that will be
based on a "black list" of sites. The Australian Broadcasting
Authority (ABA), decided that the sites have to be blocked or ISPs
will face fines of up to AUS$27,500 (US$17,600) per day, per site.

D. LIE-DETECTING SOFTWARE TO CATCH DECEIT

Even when a liar wags his finger, his voice betrays him. With this
principle in mind, an avante garde piece of software- the Fortress
Personal Lie detector - is developed. This Software detects a lie by
identifying minute physiological changes that express themselves by
beeping while the subject is knowingly engaged in deception.

E. NET SLEUTH PROGRAM COULD HELP STOP INTERNET SCAMS

"Net Sleuth,'' a computer program being developed at the U.S. Energy
Department's Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico may soon
make it easier for regulators to spot misleading stock tips or fake
news stories on the Internet. The program specializes in sorting
through massive amounts of information to find specific clues that
could spot a bogus stock tout and help pinpoint the author of
anonymous words in cyberspace.

F. BRITISH TELECOM'S WAR ON NUISANCE CALLS

The burgeoning increase of e-mail and fledgling Internet telephone
technology are making communicating around the world cheaper, easier
and faster for anyone with a computer. But one of the unintended
consequences of this has been the problem of junk (unsolicited)
electronic mail and malicious and unwanted telephone calls.

6. FEDERAL AGENCIES PROBE HIDDEN CHARGES IN LONG DISTANCE CALLS

Cheap calls may not be as cheap as advertised. This is the reason
behind a new probe by two Federal Agencies who have been receiving
complaints from callers saying they are being hit with fees not
advertised by some alternative long distance companies, purporting to
provide discounted long distance calls through their "dial-around
service" or the more commonly known "10-10" dialing service.

7. BEAT THE BILLING NIGHTMARE

With new services and new carriers entering the market regularly,
billing has become a carrier nightmare and led to inaccuracies in
customer's bills.  In an article to the Internet Telephony magazine,
Mr Ankur Lal, CEO, Infozech, discusses how it can be brought under
control.

8. MAGICTEL SUCCESSFULLY USES eBILL FOR IP TELEPHONY

Infozech's billing solution eBill meets with a good start in Hong Kong
when Hong Kong giant Magictel successfully uses it to send out bills
to its customers for the Month of May.

9. MAILBOX

Thank You Telcomine
Billing World - an International magazine on the billing and customer care 
industry thanks Telcomine for mentioning its "Billing System Functionality 
Report" in the newsletter.


Regards
Seema Dhawan

Infozech -- Software for Telecom Service Providers
Telcomine: A  'FREE' Telecom & Technology Newsletter 
http://www.infozech.com/telcomine.html
To subscribe: Send a mail to nl@infozech.com
Fax: 91-11- 6287117, Tel: 91-11-6234664, 91-11-6283113
in US Contact: 408-490-2840, 2090 Hillsdale Circle, Boulder, CO-80303

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 23:08:56 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: A Busy Weekend for Global Crossing - US West, Sources Say


http://thestandard.com/articles/mediagrok_display/0,1185,4582,00.html

A Busy Weekend for Global Crossing - US West, Sources Say

Global Crossing and US West skipped the yard work this weekend in
favor of pumping iron, as they hammered out a merger. The deal teams a
hyperactive two-year-old that has plowed its revenues into undersea
fiber-optic network and has converted its enormous stock prices into a
string of acquisitions with a Baby Bell offering local telephone
service in 14 sparsely populated states. After a 50 -50 stock swap,
the two will create a  company with $17 billion in annual revenue and
a stock market cap of $65 billion.

On Friday, CNBC reported that talks between the companies were under
way. That left business writers trying to track down the details over
the weekend, and most of this morning's crop of articles quoted
unnamed sources. London's Financial Times was the only news outlet to
claim confirmation from both companies; the FT also scored with
comments from US West Chairman Solomon Trujillo.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the deal cemented Global
Crossing as one of the new heavyweights in telecommunications. The
merger is typical of the frenzied pairing-off in the telecom industry,
but according to reporters Steven Lipin, Rebecca Blumenstein and
Stephanie Mehta, analysts wonder how the new company will work,
especially since US West has yet to ask the FCC's permission to offer
long-distance service in its area. That means it might be years before
Global Crossing's network can delivers long-distance voice and data
services within the US West region.

Lipin and Blumenstein's Heard on the Street column gets at what the
deal is really about: The magic of multiples. With Internet play
Global Crossing trading at 40 times cash flow, and US West at a puny
six times, "To a certain extent, Global Crossing wants to do this deal
because it can," they wrote. "That reflects a growing divide between
the new and old worlds of telecommunications."

Washington Post staff writer John Schwartz wondered whether the FCC
will help close the gap by blessing the deal. Critics may question
whether the merged company will be able to offer long-distance service
within the US West region, but Schwartz's sources report little
geographic overlap between the long-distance services offered by
Frontier, which Global Crossing is acquiring, and US West's 14-state
footprint.

The Denver Post took a regional view, wondering about the local
ramifications of reports that the new company would maintain
operations in Colorado but set up headquarters in New York. But Post
business writer Roger Fillion was also able to add local context that
reports from national papers missed. He notes that the merger
represents a strategic reversal for Trujillo, who had espoused a
go-it-alone strategy as recently as one month ago. He also detailed
some of the subscriber numbers to which other outlets had glibly
referred: US West's aggressive use of advanced technologies amounts to
35,000 DSL subscribers over the carrier's 14-state area – that's about
half of the total DSL market.

As for announced plans that US West's Trujillo and Global Crossing
chief executive Robert Annunziata will run the company together,
Bloomberg wire copy published in USA Today held out little hope for
the union. Fahnestock & Co. analyst Scott Wright told Bloomberg he
gives the shotgun marriage little more than a year.

Global Crossing Is Poised to Merge With US West
http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB926704513151397395.htm

Upstart's Bid for U S West Is Just a Sign of the Times
http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB926905492344923291.htm

Global Crossing and US West Confirm $37 Billion Merger
http://www.ft.com/hippocampus/qd3cfa.htm

US West, Global Crossing to Merge
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/may99/global17.htm

Global Crossing, US West Near Merger
http://www.usatoday.com/money/mds023.htm

U S West Merger Imminent
http://www.denverpost.com/business/biz0517a.htm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 14:05:34 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.85.3@telecom-digest.org>, merlyn@stonehenge.com
(Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:

> Eric B Morson <Eric@AreaCode-Info.com> writes:

>> The Portland and Salem areas in northwest Oregon will receive a 971
>> overlay area code beginning January 30, 2000.  Permissive 10-digit
>> local dialing will begin on July 11, 1999 and become mandatory on
>> January 30, 2000.  See the full text of the press release at:
>> http://AreaCode-Info.com/headline/1999/or990514.htm

> If I read this right, it means the end of being able to dial a
> seven-digit number from my house.  From my 503- phone number, I'll
> need to dial "5 0 3 - xxx xxxx" to get across the street!

> Why in the creator's name are they eliminating that?  I can dial local
> calls in San Jose with seven digits!

They are eliminating 7-digit dialing because Portland will no longer
have 7-digit local numbers.  There will be some 503 numbers and some
971 numbers.  As for San Jose, yes, you can still dial local calls in
San Jose with 7 digits, but only for another four months.  As of
October 1, 1999, you must dial 1+10D for all local calls in San Jose,
in anticipation of the introduction of the 669 overlay.

> Is the rest of the country also eliminating seven-digit numbers too,
> and I just haven't caught on?

Yes, much of the rest of the country is also eliminating 7-digit local
dialing.  It's already gone in Atlanta, Miami, Maryland, Dallas,
Houston, Denver, and part of Los Angeles.  It's already scheduled to
go away in Anaheim, San Francisco, San Mateo, Oakland, San Jose, San
Bernardino, Orlando, Philadelphia and suburbs, and northern Virginia,
and in danger in Maine, southeast Texas, New York City, Chicago,
Seattle, Charlotte NC, Boston, most of Los Angeles, northern San Diego
County, California's Wine Country, and other areas.  Tampa Bay,
eastern Kentucky, Phoenix, and Pittsburgh are among areas that
narrowly missed going to overlays and therefore 10D or 1+10D local
dialing.  Kansas City is about to join a long list of areas where
local calls to adjacent area codes can no longer be dialed with just
7D.  (Calls that stay on one side of the state line will still be 7D,
but calls between Missouri and Kansas will require 10D.)


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

From: Bill Newkirk <wnewkirk@iu.net>
Subject: Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 23:13:37 -0400
Organization: Posted via RemarQ Communities, Inc.


Orlando (most of the current 407 AC minus Brevard County and Debary
that'll be in 321 when that starts up..) is running 10 digit dialing
right now ...

If there's going to be more phones than addresses, then we either have
six digit ACs or longer "normal" phone numbers.


rdgs, bill n.

------------------------------

From: pwinter@best.com (Patty Winter)
Subject: Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503
Date: 19 May 1999 14:52:47 -0700


In article <telecom19.85.3@telecom-digest.org>, Randal L. Schwartz
<merlyn@stonehenge.com> wrote:

> If I read this right, it means the end of being able to dial a
> seven-digit number from my house.  From my 503- phone number, I'll
> need to dial "5 0 3 - xxx xxxx" to get across the street!

> Why in the creator's name are they eliminating that?  I can dial local
> calls in San Jose with seven digits!

Not for long you can't. :-) We'll be getting an overlay in 408 soon,
too.

Yes, it's a bit of a hassle, but at least it doesn't force all the
businesses in the area to buy new stationery, cards, etc.  as would be
needed if part of 408 were simply chopped off and given a new area
code.

Still, neither solution is ideal, and I hope this AC madness can get
fixed soon ...


Patty

------------------------------

From: Toby Nixon <tnixon@Microsoft.com>
Subject: Which Countries Use a-law vs. u-law Codecs?
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 17:17:40 -0700


Does anyone know where to locate a list of which countries use A-law
and which use mu-law G.711 PCM codecs in their national networks? I
searched the ITU web site and didn't find anything useful.


Thanks.

Toby L. Nixon                     <mailto:tnixon@microsoft.com>
Program Manager, Windows Networking and Embedded Products Group
Microsoft Corporation, One Microsoft Way, Redmond WA 98052  USA
+1 425 936-2792   Fax: +1 425 936-7329    Cell: +1 206 790-6377

------------------------------

From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>
Subject: Re: Australian Pay Telephones
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 21:52:06 -0400


Darryl Smith wrote:

> The markets for Phone Cards vs. Smart Cards are different. Here in
> Australia EVERY public phone accepts a stored value card (Usually a
> smart card, although there are a few magnetic phones around still).

The "markets are different". Yep, that is what a Telstra rep told
me. But why? What is wrong with providing the same long distance
rates on those PhoneAway cards *and* smart-cards? Why should users of
smart cards be penalized?

Are there technical reasons why a smart card could not be charged a
different rate for long distance than coins? (Most smart card phones
in australia accept both card and coins)?  I can understand why coins
should not get a price break. They require a visit from an employee to
collect the money. But a smart card user should be given a break.

And as far as "EVERY public phone" thing. Have you not heard about
those gold phones ? ? ? ? Or are you so ashamed of these touch-tone-
that-dials-pulse el cheapo phones that you do not which to admit to
their existance? (Blue phones come close to being as bad, but at least
they dial with touch tone). (Both Gold and Blue phones are customer
owned phones, located in public places (often in roadhouses, hotels or
resorts, neither take card, except the phoneaway cards which are just
like calling cards, you punch in your number (or speak to an operator
in the case of gold phones since you can't use keypad)).

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Internet Pioneers
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 20:37:24  CDT
From: Ron Bean <rbean@execpc.com>


James Wyatt <jwyatt@RWSystems.net> writes:

> The term 'internet' was (or I thought) only applied to machines that were
> directly IP connected to 'The Net'.

> In short, you weren't really on The Internet unless you could
> directly telnet to other machines on 'The Net'.

At the time someone said:

"If you can type 'ping nic.ddn.mil' and get a response, then you're on
the internet".

Even just getting access to Usenet was a Big Deal before programs like
"UUPC" (UUCP for PC's) and Fidonet gateways came along.  Before then
you had to have an account on a unix box, and unix machines were
expensive. That all changed when the '386 came along and several
companies licensed the unix source from AT&T.

Remember Eric Raymond's FAQ on buying a PC to run unix?  These days,
any garden-variety discount store PC will run linux just fine.

------------------------------

From: Burn@D.man (Free Spirit)
Subject: Re: DNA Dragnet
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 15:47:14 GMT
Organization: Black Rock City


My biggest concern for the new reliance on DNA evidence in criminal
cases is that it is much easier to 'plant' DNA evidence at a crime
scene than it is to fake a fingerprint.

On Fri, 14 May 1999 02:34:49 -0400, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
wrote:

> Tom Schoenberg
> Legal Times
> May 10, 1999

> DNA is in the criminal justice headlines nearly every day: A prisoner on
> death row for a crime he didn't commit is released; a defendant awaiting
> trial for rape is exonerated.

> But if DNA's capacity to exculpate makes for a compelling story, its
> ability to help cops solve crimes is reshaping law enforcement. After a
> push by Congress begun in 1994, every state is now collecting DNA from
> violent offenders, while the courts are batting away constitutional
> challenges to the practice.
> http://www.lawnewsnet.com/stories/A1301-1999May7.html

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Police have long had the right to take
> fingerprints from persons who are arrested, and we do not hear too
> many complaints from civil liberties advocates about that. I would
> assume by extension that police have the right to gather whatever
> identifying information they can from arrested people, but the catch
> is that fingerprints -- once years ago the latest technology in
> people identification -- are rather feeble when compared with DNA 
> type-casting. DNA records are just a bit too-perfect for comfort
> it would seem compared to fingerprints, handwriting analysis and
> all those older techniques, although the most banks have started
> using thumbprints on checks they cash now; had you noticed that?
> Ah, DNA and cookies; what a combination as we enter Century 21.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 18:42:07 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Internet Pioneers Update


Over the weekend, a *large* groups of links was edited and verified for
presentation at internet-pioneers.org / internet-history.org ....

About thirty principal, or 'root' links are presented there now which
lead to a very wide variety of sources of history about the net.
The earliest include messages from Vint Cerf in the 1969-70 period
and the latest go through 1995 with comments by and about Tim Berners-Lee
and the WWW project. Most of the principal links given present in-
turn other links, etc. 

Also included there are hundreds of VERY old messages from 1981-82
which were part of the Unix Users Network, what we today call Usenet.
These old messages and mailing lists were part of either the 'fa.'
group or the 'net.' group. If you go there and look at fa.telecom you
will even see the first several issues of this Digest, from August,
1981 onward. The software then was called 'A-News'. On checking out
that link, I was surprised to find them there myself. This was good
news for me, because I had earlier felt certain a few of the very
oldest issues from Volume 1 were long since lost. Now, my own
collection is complete once again! Sometime later today or tomorrow
I am going to be adding one of the 'maps'  from the middle 1980's,
contributed by Garrett Wollman of the MIT/LCS staff. You can even 
see Jon Postel's home page which was carefully preserved by someone
among the links.

Anyway, all the old 'A-News' archives from the beginning, and many
hours or days worth of reading through links are available if you
want to check it out. The idea behind IHS/Pioneers is to have all
the links and the people behind them sort of in one place where any
new user who wants to learn about it can find it handily. Its purpose
is not to put down or denigrate efforts by other repositories, but
to have all the respositories and people involved easily locatable,
if they want to be located. A 1995 'home page' by Tim Berners-Lee
found among the links includes a note by Tim BL discouraging users
who would send him email. I can't imagine why he would be tired of
receiving email from users by now, can you? :)  ... and a further
memo in the stack implies that CERN was just a bit weary of all
the publicity the Web was leaving at its doorstep by the same year.

So if you did not know that Tim Berners-Lee 'invented' the World
Wide Web or that Vint Cerf typed out the letters L-O-G at one end
of a phone line while the other end confirmed it was being recieved
by them back around 1969 or that we have an Internet Public Library
at ipl.org, then check out the links page installed over the weekend.

Sir Isaac Newton once commented that, "if I appear to have seen
further than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders
of giants ..."  and that is sort of how I felt late last night when
I finished editing the links page to the point I felt it was at
least presentable enough to be placed on the web.

What is still missing?  You are! If you were on the net in the 1970's
and early 1980's, please write to pioneers@internet-pioneers.org
and be part of it.

     http://internet-pioneers.org (and/or) http://internet-history.org


PAT

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #87
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Wed May 19 18:01:24 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA07244;
	Wed, 19 May 1999 18:01:24 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 18:01:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905192201.SAA07244@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #88

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 19 May 99 18:01:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 88

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cornelius NC  Man Takes Aim at E-mail Scams (Stan Schwartz)
    FTC Cracks Down on E-mail Telesleaze Scam (Linc Madison)
    Global Crossings/Frontier Strikes With Tender Offer For US West (J. Stahl)
    New York's 646 Area Code (Eric Morson)
    PC Cordless Phone System Beta (Marsha Lybra)
    Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation (Brody)
    Re: 24-Hour 4.8c Long Distance (Linc Madison)
    Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call! (G. Roessler)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: stannc.no1spam@yahoo.com
From: Stan Schwartz <stannc.no1spam@yahoo.com>
Subject: Cornelius NC  Man Takes Aim at E-mail Scams
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 12:04:01 -0400


('The Charlotte Observer' 05/19/99)
By ERIC FRAZIERAND DAVID BORAKS
Staff Writers

Clifton Taylor figured there must be some mistake.  He and his
grandson, Jake Bagwell, a Cornelius seventh-grader, were researching
on the Internet in February when an e-mail popped up, saying they
would be charged $375.98 for an order -- one they never made.

Surprised, the boy's father, Joe Bagwell, called the phone number
given in the e-mail. He found himself listening to a phone-sex service
from the Caribbean island of Dominica. Shortly after, he received a
bill for the phone call. It was less than $2.

Like at least 20,000 other people across the country, they had been
scammed by the same junk e-mail, or 'spam.'

"I was really angry that someone had devised a scheme to charge
parents money to introduce their children to a phone-sex line," said
Taylor, 68, also of Cornelius. "I just want it stopped. And I want
people to be aware of it."

Federal Trade Commission officials said Tuesday that the Bagwell case
prompted the first-ever federal Internet scam lawsuit filed against an
unknown defendant. The suit aims to root out anonymous rip-off artists
who ply their trade in cyberspace.

The agency went to federal court in Charlotte last week and won an
injunction to freeze the assets of the still-unidentified scam
artists. By filing a civil suit, the agency can use subpoena powers to
learn who's sending such e-mail. The agency expects to find out the
identities of the operatives in a few days. The number Bagwell called
has been disconnected.

"It demonstrates for the first time that con artists that try to cloak
themselves in the anonymity of the Internet are not immune from the
reach of the Federal Trade Commission and the courts," said Eileen
Harrington, the FTC's associate director of marketing practices.

She said her agency had brought about 70 Internet scam lawsuits in the
past five years, but unlike the Charlotte case, investigators knew the
identities of the scam artists.

The operatives who sent Jake Bagwell the bogus e-mail message hid
their identity by using phony return addresses. The trade commission
learned of the breadth of the scam by comparing the number Bagwell
called with its database of phone numbers used in other scams. The
same number turned up in dozens of other complaints.

The injunction prevents American telephone companies from sending
payments to Dominica for the phone calls.

Four states have laws making most spam illegal and many more are
considering similar laws. The N.C. legislature is considering a bill
that would outlaw bulk e-mail software and let N.C. residents use
state courts to sue people in other states who send spam.

The N.C. bill has passed the Senate, and awaits action in the House.

Scams involving junk e-mail and high-priced long-distance services are
nothing new to federal investigators.

In late 1996, an Iowa company was implicated in a scheme that used
e-mail promises of free travel to lure people to make lengthy and
expensive long-distance calls to the Caribbean. In that case, the
operator of the service agreed to settle the case by repaying $111,000
to consumers.

In early 1997, the FTC filed a complaint against several Internet
marketers regarding a scam that involved pornographic Web sites and
phone calls to the former Soviet Republic of Moldova.

Users were told to download a free electronic 'viewer.' The device
turned out to be a program that automatically hung up and re-connected
the user's computer to a phone number in Moldova that charged $2 to $3
a minute. The FTC obtained a court order to shut down the operation.

The number of Americans using e-mail has risen sharply in recent
years, now reaching more than 35 percent of adults.

But as e-mail use has grown, so has spam. Spammers use their messages
to promote everything from adult Web sites and telephone-sex lines to
get-rich-quick schemes and even junk e-mail software.

Online services have been fighting bulk e-mail for years, but finding
and prosecuting those who send it has been difficult. Virginia-based
America Online, the world's largest online service, won one of the
first court cases against junk e-mail in 1996 and has introduced
special controls that allow users to block unwanted e-mail.

Taylor, a retired schoolteacher, said people need to be alert to
e-mail scams. He was so outraged by the scam that he called every
public official, agency and police department he could think of,
including 21 state lawmakers, the FBI and America Online.

Now he's just glad his one-man crusade finally paid off.

"It's been a battle," he said. "But when I get my back up, I get a
little tenacious."

                    -------------------

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sometime in the next day or so I will
publish something here a bit unusual for this Digest -- a rather 
lengthy piece of spam from a fellow who sells spam tools and provides
lots of assurances to readers that unsolicited email is really quite
welcome by most users. His piece will explain that it is quite easy
even for net-beginners to harvest email names according to the
special interest or category they are seeking and then mass mail to
those names. It should be an interesting issue, and I trust everyone
will respond directly to the author with their own personal suggestions
for how to best use his tools. Watch for it here.    PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 15:44:03 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: FTC Cracks Down on E-mail Telesleaze Scam
Organization: LincMad Consulting


The U.S. Federal Trade Commission <http://www.ftc.gov> filed a
complaint in federal district court against unspecified operators of a
scam in which victims received e-mails indicating that their credit
cards were being charged several hundred dollars each for their orders
of sexually explicit materials.  If they had any questions about their
order, they were directed to call customer service at 1-767-nxx-xxxx.
Of course, most people outside the readership of this Digest would
have no idea that area code 767 is the Caribbean island of Dominica
(not the same as Dominican Republic), and that calls might run into
dollars per minute.

This is the first time that the FTC has filed a complaint against
unnamed defendants.  The defendants will be identified through the
normal legal process, but in the mean time, the FTC is seeking an
injunctino to prevent a number of U.S. from forwarding any settlements
for calls from the U.S. to the number in Dominica.

The FTC has been taking a more active interest in "telesleaze" abuses,
including things like recent e-mail spams which list a "remove" number
in area code 473 (Grenada).

For more information on this filing, see the FTC press release:
<http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/9905/audiot10.htm>

For more information about "telesleaze" in general, see my
<http://www.LincMad.com/telesleaze.html>


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 12:32:12
From: John Stahl <aljon@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Global Crossings/Frontier Strikes With Tender Offer For US West


Here is an article from Inter@ctive Magazine Electronic edition
regarding start-up Global Crossings making another expansion move
after making a deal to buy Frontier Corp. and it's 34 independent
operating telcos.

Makes for very interesting conjecture with regards how a startup can
'purchase' it's competitors without putting out any cash. In fact the
article seems to read that US West is paying Global Crossings to
purchase it.

It used to be that one had to raise capital to "buy" another company;
this doesn't seem the way in this 'new' era of creative financing.
Forget "junk bonds", just issue new stock certificates instead!

Article from Inter@ctive on-line:

"Global Crossing Buying U S West 

               By Louis Trager and Carol Wilson
               May 17, 1999 11:50 AM ET 

               The latest telecom merger story has intercontinental
               cable upstart Global Crossing buying regional carrier
               U S West for about $37 billion in stock. 

               In an unusual structure, U S West would first
               purchase about 9.5 percent of Global Crossing for
               $2.4 billion in cash. U S West shareholders would
               receive one Global Crossing share for each U S West
               share they currently own. Global Crossing would
               issue two tracking stocks for the combined entity.
               One tracking stock, designed to keep U S West's
               institutional shareholders happy, would follow U S
               West's phone business and would pay a dividend.
               Another tracking stock would follow Global Crossing's
               ambitious data plans. 

               The merged company also would include Frontier,
               which Global Crossing has agreed to take over for $12
               billion. The new entity will be called Global Crossing
               and will be owned 50 percent by Global
               Crossing/Frontier shareholders and 50 percent by U S
               West shareholders. 

               Investors bid up U S West stock, which started May
               in the low $50s, to more than $60 May 14. U S West
               was lower today in early trading, down 8.4 percent to
               $56.88. 

               Global Crossing shares dipped 4.8 percent early
               today, to $58.44. 

               U S West has achieved greater success in data
               networking than in voice. Through its !nterprise Data
               Networking unit, the company offers network-hosted
               services in major markets besides its 14-state region.
               The carrier recently created a hosting unit which, in
               partnership with Deloitte Consulting and
               USinternetworking, offers businesses network-hosted
               applications. 

               That data business could make a good match for
               Frontier, which is building a national high-speed,
               fiber-optic network and hosts data for big Internet
               players such as Yahoo!. Global Crossing wants to
               develop a portfolio of network-based services
               internationally. 

               It's unclear how Global Crossing could digest two
               acquisitions of larger companies. U S West has a
               market capitalization of $30 billion, compared with
               Global Crossing's $24 billion." 


John Stahl
Aljon Enterprises
Telecom/Data Consultant
email: aljon@worldnet.att.net

------------------------------

From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric Morson)
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 17:00:15 -0400
Subject: New York's 646 Area Code


I tried dialing the (646) 674-9999 test number, and got an intercept
telling me that (212) 674-9999 was not in service.

I dialed five other (212) 674-xxxx numbers at ramdon using the (646)
area code ... they all went through ...

It appears that (646) is in the switch and all calls to the single
activated NXX are processing to the same NXX in the (212) area code.

Any comments?


Eric B. Morson
Co-Webmaster
AreaCode-Info.com
EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com

------------------------------

From: Marsha Lybra <Marsha.Lybra@bigfoot.ebu.ericsson.se>
Subject: PC Cordless Phone System Beta
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 17:30:00 -0700
Organization: Ericsson Data Services Americas


Ericsson is developing a PC Cordless Phone System, which provides an
efficient multi-line, multi-user communication solution for the Small
Office/Home Office as well as for the advanced household.

This system leverages the power of the PC to provide advanced
telephony features, unified messaging, remote message notification,
and customized call answering to differentiate calls between personal
and business calls.  The product offers a Virtual Personal Assistant
by utilizing a speech user interface (SUI), enabling users to simply
speak commands into their cordless handset to perform such functions
as: dial by name, setup conference calls, transfer calls, retrieve
voicemail, email, and fax headers.

We are looking for a limited group of qualified Beta testers to begin
testing the product in the US.  If you are interested in finding out
more details about the product, as well as becoming a tester, please
visit the following web site:

http://beta.cybergenietech.com

There will be several phases to the test process, which will begin early
this summer.

The following are minimum requirements for participating in the program:

- You live within the United States.
- You should be able to give weekly feedback on the product.
- You have at least 1 - 2 phone lines available.
- Your computer has:

Windows 98 preinstalled  (Windows 97 compliant hardware)
A 233 MHz processor or greater
At least 32 MB of RAM  (64 MB preferred)
At least 40 MB free Hard Disk space
Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface (the system attaches to your PC via the
USB port)
CD-ROM drive
Sound card and speakers
Internet access
E-mail account

We will be selecting testers in the next few weeks.

Marsha Lybra
Field Test Coordinator
 &
The Ericsson CyberGenie Team

------------------------------

From: Brody <ADBRODY@erols.com>
Subject: Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 01:10:05 -0700


Hi there,

I'm trying to find out what ever came of the "Postal Telegraph and
Cable Corporation". I found your e-mail on a telegraph related site so
I thought I'd drop a note.

Thanks in advance for any help you can give me.


Brody

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Whatever *did* happen to Postal Telegraph?
I have not heard anything about them in years. I remember once meeting
a man back in the 1960's who was by then retired from Postal Telegraph;
he said he had been a 'repairman' for them. I recall they also had very
nice clocks for their customers just like Western Union. Mark Cuccia
seems to know so many of these things, maybe he will answer.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 16:50:05 -0700
From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: 24-Hour 4.8c Long Distance
Organization: LincMad Consulting


In article <telecom19.85.8@telecom-digest.org>, Fred Goldstein
<fgoldstein@wn.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 08 May 1999, Paul Cook wrote:

>> I often wondered why someone didn't do something like set up the old
>> system of dialing a local number, handing you a dial tone and having
>> you punch in a pin code and then the number you wanted to call.

>> My thought was that the rate for such calls should be cheaper since
>> there would be no "equal access" or 800 fee.  And perhaps there would
>> be a calling card that wouldn't rip people off either by charging
>> enormous rates for connections or whatever miscellaneous call
>> surcharges are imposed.

> There is no "equal access" fee any more.  If you're an IXC, you should
> be paying very similar rates regardless of the type of access you
> choose.  If you're not OFFERED equal access, that's a different
> story ... but there are only a handful of rural indies that don't have
> it yet.

> There are unscrupulous carriers who attempt to take calls on
> "business" lines, rather than pay their access fees.  In such cases
> the caller pays for a local call, which (as Pat noted in the case of
> early MCI) can be more than the "savings", or in a flat-rate area is
> simply money the ILEC is technically owed but not collecting.  I don't
> know how long somebody can get away with this but I know of some
> "VoIP" IXCs who've done it for over a year; LECs seem rather remiss
> about enforcement these days.

AT&T has a product, which they have even put their own name on (unlike
"Lucky Dog"), using Feature Group A access (an ordinary local number
you dial for a secondary dial tone).  It's called Connect'n'Save.  The
rates are 7.5 cents/minute if you use one of their local dial-in
numbers, or 15 cents/minute (plus possible payphone surcharge, waived
for now) if you use the 800 or 877 number.  You have to prepay and
refresh the account in increments of at least $25.

What I found most mystifying, though, is that for several months after
they began marketing this product, they listed a local access number
as "Walnut Creek, CA" even though the number was actually in Santa
Rosa, about 50 miles away, in a different area code, and most
definitely NOT a local call.  They have FINALLY changed the Walnut
Creek access number; it's still in area code 707 (meaning that you
have to dial 1-707-741-0060 from Walnut Creek), although it is at
least a local call from Walnut Creek. 

However, their ads say "Walnut Creek and surrounding cities, but if
you are immediately south of Walnut Creek, in Danville or Dublin/San
Ramon, the number is not local.  What's more, it is a local call from
Walnut Creek to the Pleasanton dial-in number, which is a 7-digit
local call.  In other words, their marketing people don't have a clue.
They should have just kept the 707 number for Santa Rosa and changed
the advertising to show "Pleasanton/Walnut Creek" for (925) 398-0060.

The service is available from Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Miami,
Phoenix, and most of the San Francisco Bay Area (San Francisco, San
Jose, Pleasanton, Walnut Creek [actually Benicia], and Palo Alto
[actually Redwood City]).  You can read about it on
<http://www.connectnsave.att.com>, but don't try to find any reference
to it anywhere else on AT&T's web site, even if you specifically
search for "connectnsave".


** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind **
Linc Madison  *  San Francisco, California  *   Telecom@LincMad-com
URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits
   >>  NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM"  <<

------------------------------

From: Georg Roessler <georg.roessler@de.bosch.com>
Subject: Re: Imminent Exhaustion of the NANP Should be a Wake-up Call!
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 13:55:56 +0200
Organization: Bosch Telecom
Reply-To: georg.roessler@de.bosch.com


Arthur Ross wrote:
 
[..]
 
> Some of my acquaintances who currently live in the Sophia Antipolis
> (Cte d'Azur) area tell me that the scheme I described was indeed
> the way it USED to work up until a few years, except that there was
> only one zone (Paris, 01) and all the rest of the country was
> zone-less -- eight digits was enough.

> Only the French could come up with something this strange, I guess --
> vive la France!
 
Well, this scheme nicely reflects that in France you either live in
Paris or "en province". However, this scheme has been introduced for 
another reason, namely the exhaustion of numbers in Paris with the 
old numbering plan. 

In the scheme before all numbers were eight digits. There were 
almost 100 areas, about one per department. Phone numbers were 
2+6 digits in general; only Paris (the whole metropolitan area) had 
a one digit area code (1) and 7 digit local numbers. Calls within 
your area were 6 digits (7 in Paris); to call to another area required 
a prefix (16), one or two digits for the area code and then the local 
number.

Some time in the eighties, when the 7 digit numbers in Paris became
exhausted, the transition to the above mentioned scheme took place.
The two digit area codes became part of the numbers for all 2+6 
areas. All numbers in Paris were extended by one digit (3 and 4 were
used, depending on the original number, as far as I recall). Calls 
within each of the two remaining areas (Paris, province) had 8 digit
numbers. To call to the other area required the prefix (16) and the
area code (1 digit with value 1 for Paris, 0 digits for the other 
area).

The recent change of the numbering scheme kept the 1+8 digit format
for Paris. The other area is now split into four new areas with
area codes 2, 3, 4, and 5, which results in the same format as 
for Paris. Other area codes are assigned for mobile networks, 
special services (free call, etc.). With this recent transition, 
the prefixes were also changed from 16 to 0 for calls to other 
areas, and for international calls from 19 to 00.

My conclusion is that the somewhat strange concept of two areas only
made sense. Appart from the technical issues, the way how numbers
changed were fairly easy to understand for the users in both cases
(Paris kept its area code 1). 

So I am interested to see how the scheme to extend the NANP will 
look like :-)


Dr.-Ing. Georg Roessler              Mail: Georg.Roessler@de.bosch.com
Bosch Telecom, Frankfurt am Main   Tel./Fax.: +49-69-7505-3813/-3314
In der Theorie sind Theorie und Praxis dasselbe; in der Praxis nicht
                                                      Herbert Franke

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #88
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Wed May 19 21:10:24 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA15585;
	Wed, 19 May 1999 21:10:24 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 21:10:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905200110.VAA15585@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #89

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 19 May 99 21:10:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 89

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Some Good News to Report Today (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Strange Problem (Jim Gallagher)
    Airtouch in NYC? (James Gifford)
    Florida's 941 To Split In September, 1999 (Eric Morson)
    Degrees of Separation (was: Qwest Sued by Marketing Agent) (G. Hlavenka)
    Long Island Assigned 631 Area Code (Eric Morson)
    Re: Long Island Assigned 631 Area Code (Carl Moore)
    10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (Mike Ayotte)
    J1 Signalling Question (Wulf Losee)
    NPA-NXX & Cities (Robert Ricketts)
    Re: NPA-NXX & Cities (Eli Mantel)
    Re: Siemens 2420 (bakie@my-dejanews.com)
    Re: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types? (Richard Campbell)
    Re: Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation (John R. Levine)
    Re: Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation (L. Winson)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 19 May 1999 19:17:16 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Some Good News to Report Today


Today I do not have anything to complain about ... (surprise!) ...
but instead want to tell you about two really great -- at least I
think so -- improvements to the http://telecom-digest.org web site.

The first is the addition of an updated daily telecom news report
compliments of a service called newsreal.com ... now as you well
know, you cannot get anything for free from the web these days it
seems without at the least a banner-ad on it, if not several places
to click if you want to Make Money Fast, buy a used car or turn in
your credit card information. But newsreal.com seems pretty decent,
with a minimum of advertising, and no advertising I could consider
offensive at all. 

The point is, they have great, very detailed news reports and analysis
of interest in the telecom industry each day, and I thought it might
be something you would like to see. I get nothing from it, and all
they get from me are those of you who feel like clicking on whatever
their banner-ad is promoting that day.  Look for a link to it on the
very top page of the web site, in the paragraph which discusses the
other diversions there such as the chat room and the news ticker. A
link there says 'read the daily telecom news.' Try it and pass along
your opinions on whether I should keep it or dump it.

                   ---------------------------------

But that's nothing ... what I *REALLY* want to tell you about is
something that finally got done, after I have thought about it for
years but got no where on it.

  The whole thing, all nineteen years of this Digest and the
  several hundred articles in the archives are finally, once
  and for all ... *totally indexed* with a search engine just
  for intra-site searching. 

Every article, every title, every author, every subject, every phrase,
every word ... all the way back to August, 1981, now indexed and ready
for searching. Every bit of it with anchors you can click on to go
to old articles, etc. Here is what you can do to test it: if you 
have ever written an article which appeared in TELECOM Digest since
1981, or if you are mentioned in an article, or if you contributed a
file which is in the archives, use the link below to go to the search
page then enter your name as the search criteria. The Boolean operator
used is 'OR', so if you do not want to see hundreds of references to
things written by all the people named Linc and hundreds of things
written by all the people named Madison, then quote your criteria
like this, "Linc Madison" instead, and get just what he has written,
at least most of the time.

I say 'most of the time' since I do not yet have it totally fine-tuned
enough to come up with everything -- leaving nothing out -- without
also repeating itself occassionally ... and there have been so many
various theories on how the archiving should be done over the years,
that in order to get a response to everything substantial, I had to
accept responses to a lot of garbage also. For example, if you gave
as your search criteria 'massis.lcs.mit.edu' indeed it would find
it, thousands of times in headers going back over the years. It
tries to put things a little in context so you do not waste time
looking at something meaningless, such as (in our example) Linc
Madison's name in a reply header somewhere but nothing that he
actually wrote. It gives you about ten words on either side of the
search string, in the hopes you can detirmine the context and decide
if you want to see what it has found or not.  Everything that it
finds, useful, garbage or whatever has a hyperlink, even those old
ancient issues of the Digest, so you can click right over to it and
get it if you want it.

One thing to watch out for:  I have it set to return the 'most rele-
vant' items first -- at least it tries -- so it searches first in
things like TELECOM_Digest_Online and the most recent recent issues,
where if you find our buddy Linc in the results you can go right to
the item. Then it continues looking through the special files, and
then continues on to the ancient stuff ... but the old issues are
packed in groups of fifty issues per file, and I have not yet learned
how to unpack those issue by issue automatically without making a
terrible mess of it, and I do not intend right now to sit and unpack
them all manually into day-by-day-every-day-for-nineteen-years files
just so that when the spider runs every day or two, she will will be
able to tell you an exact day, date and issue number 'way back when'. 

So if the spider finds 'Linc Madison' on line 25,539 of a file that is
75,802 lines in length (i.e. fifty of the old back issues in a bundle)
it will report an 'untitled page', set a hyperlink to the *top* of
the batch, and if you click there, surprise, you get a humongous --
and I mean humongous -- file downloaded to you with apparently no
Linc Madison to be found. What you do then is use your own browser's
'find on this page' command to look for him, midst all the articles
in that bundle. But it is better -- much better than what we had.

I run this all with a javascript located off premises. For those of
you who decide to read my source on the /search/index.html page,
you'll note I call for a script to begin, then do SRC js.elsewhere,
then immediatly close the script. This way there is no involvement
with cgi-bin, and no major scripts to keep on that page causing it to
take forever to load. Yes, I know, for all the bad things said about
Java Script, it can improve the usefulness of a web site such as mine
a hundred percent. And yes, I can do better also; give me more time
please, to try and improve the search method and the site in general.

Anyway, go try it now; I will wait here for you to get back and
continue the rest of this issue. Try your name as the search item,
even just your last name if you wish. Then tell me what you think.


             http://telecom-digest.org/search


PAT

------------------------------

From: jim gallagher <gallagher@sprintmail.com>
Subject: Strange Problem
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 17:08:30 -0500
Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc.


I recently switched to a new internet connection number which
Ameritech described to me as being a 5 cent untimed call within zero
miles of my house.  The funny business began when Sprint began picking
up this local call, attempting to charge me local long distance!  I'm
outraged by the telco rep who says that these are legitimate charges
and that I must have this computer set up wrong.  Would someone
explain what is going on and how to go about resolving this issue?


Thanks.

Jim
            
  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  +                                                   +
  +                                                   +
  +                                                   +
  +    "Goodness is something so simple: always to    +
  +       live for others, never to seek one's        +
  +                  own advantage."                  +
  +                                                   +
  +                                                   +
  +  Dag Hammarskjold, 1905-1961                      +
  +  http://www.spirituality.org/issue01/page07.html  +
  +                                                   +
  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This very same thing, identical, came
up here a couple weeks ago, when our correspondent was able to event-
ually prove that the 'competing' telco in his community had gotten the
tables mixed up in their switch. Perhaps you guys could exchange notes
and find someone at Ameritech who is able to get it corrected with
Sprint.  PAT

------------------------------

From: James Gifford <gifford@nitrosyncretic.com>
Reply-To: gifford@nitrosyncretic.com
Organization: Nitrosyncretic Press
Subject: Airtouch in NYC?
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 21:20:30 GMT


I have Airtouch analog cell service, and before a recent trip, I
switched to the "no roaming, no long distance" plan. Then I discovered
in NYC that the phone wouldn't work (I got a Hell Atlantic operator).

I was told by Airtouch that they don't provide service in NYC because of
the massive level of cloning-- even their digital plans don't work there
because they don't have digital service, so the fallback to analog
enables the cloners to work.

Anyone know if this is true, or is Airtouch unable to provide service in
Da Apple for some other reason?


| James Gifford                                 |
| Associate Editor, Computer Telephony Magazine |
|  =  Speaking only for myself in this case  =  |


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Experience has shown that very, very
few cellular companies are willing to provide roaming service in New
York because as you were told, the fraud level is so great. A few
companies with analog service *will* roam there, subject to very
tight rules. For example, when I got an Ameritech cell phone once,
they asked me 'do you intend to roam?'  Not wanting to be in a posi-
tion where I could not if I had to, I said yes. They put me on one
certain prefix, which they said was the ONLY Ameritech/Chicago prefix
enabled to roam in the Rotten Apple, as they laughingly called it. 
And, said the Ameritech rep, 'if you happen to get a chance to talk to
us before you go to New York, let us know you are going to be in NYC;
I will speak to someone there.' I had not had that phone two days and
found I was unable to make LOCAL calls with it around the Chicago
area. I called in to ask, and a technician called be back maybe an
hour later. He told me to turn the phone on and wait a minute ... I
did .. he then said okay, now I want you to dial something (some
three digit code with an asterisk on the front) ... I did ... he
said, 'okay thanks, I got you ...'.   I asked what he had done and
he said he 'took fingerprints' from the phone.'   

His explanation was 'that prefix you are on is sort of special, we
handle it differently than most of the others ...' He would not give
me any further explanation. This was a number of years ago. 

Once several years before that, I was talking to a friend of mine in
Boston. We both had cellular phones and I asked him what his cellular
number was, which he told me. As we chatted, I took my phone and
reprogrammed it to his number and told him to turn his phone off, then
a few seconds later I turned mine on (now with his number on it). I
told him, with your cell phone turned off, now dial your cell phone
number, which he did. Maybe ten seconds later, my phone rang. I had
it close enough to the (landline) reciever that he could hear it
ring ... my god, he said ... was that your phone in Chicago ringing
when I dialed *my* number?  Umm, yes it was. That was how loose and
wide open the cellular carriers were in the middle 1980's ... they
did not check for ESN at all on roamers in those days. 

And for many years, Cellular One/Chicago did not bother to ESN-check
any phones at all in the (old) 312-659-00xx range. 659 was the first
cellular prefix in Chicago, and Cell One had all their own administra-
tive phones in the -00xx range. So late at night and on weekends when
the offices were closed, phreaks would reprogram their own phones to a
number like 312-659-00xx both to chat 'at the cheapest rates possible'
(grin) ... and for situations where a phone number had to be left on a
pager to get a callback a few minutes later when using a real, traceable 
number would just never, never do ... of course if the caller tried
to reach the callee some other time, like the next day, then a Cell
One tech might happen to answer who also happened to be seated at his
computer terminal ... (even bigger grin) and before long Cell One
decided something is amiss here, and closed still another hole that
was big enough to drive a Greyhound Bus through. This would have been
1985-86. Not many cellular carriers like dealing with New York City. PAT]

------------------------------

From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric Morson)
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 12:40:51 -0400
Subject: Florida's 941 To Split In September, 1999


Florida's south-central and southwest coast 941 area code will split on
9/20/99. Mandatory dialing of the yet unassigned code will begin on
5/22/00.

The coastal counties of Manatee, Sarasota, Charlotte, Lee, Collier, &
Monroe will retain 941.  The inland counties of Polk, Hardee, Desoto,
Hendry, Glades, Highlands, & Okeechobee will be reassigned.

See the full text of the press release at:
http://AreaCode-Info.com/headline/1999/fl990519.htm
or
http://www.naplesnews.com/today/local/d324323a.htm


Eric B. Morson
Co-Webmaster
AreaCode-Info.com

EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com

------------------------------

From: Gordon S. Hlavenka <nospam@crashelex.com>
Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com
Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc.
Subject: Degrees of Separation (was: Qwest Sued by Marketing Agent)
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 10:38:35 -0500


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ... I used to sell long distance
> for an agency which resold AT&T through some intermediate reseller.  I
> sold '800 numbers' for another agent who got them third or fourth hand
> from Sprint. Old time readers may recall I did so shamelessly right
> here a couple of times, around 1989-90.

I bought one of those 800 numbers ...

The company was "Hogan" and their customer service was great!  They
actually found a mnemonic 800 number for me, waited a couple of weeks
for portability to go into effect, then jumped on it.  No extra charge. 
I still use that number.  But, guess who I send my money to?

Hogan became Corporate Telemanagement.
Corporate Telemanagement became LCI.
And LCI became Qwest.

And guess who owns a substantial chunk of Qwest?  Microsoft.


Gordon S. Hlavenka    www.crashelex.com    nospam@crashelex.com
              Grammar and spelling flames welcome.
     Yes, that's really my email address.  Don't change it.

------------------------------

From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric Morson)
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 12:36:52 -0400
Subject: Long Island Assigned 631 Area Code


Suffolk County New York will be split from 516 and assigned area code
631, with mandatory dialing and NXX activations beginning in the
Spring of 2000.

No specific date details were given in the press release. All 516
Cellular phones will remain in 516, and rate centers that straddle the
Nassau/Suffolk County line will be split by the code. In other words, it
will literally be a county line split. On day One of the mandatory
dialing period, some exchanges will indeed exist in both 516 and 631.

See the full text of the press release at:
http://AreaCode-Info.com/headline/1999/ny990519.htm


Eric B. Morson
Co-Webmaster
AreaCode-Info.com

EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 14:01:19 EDT
From: Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.MIL>
Subject: Re: Long Island Assigned 631 Area Code


I recall reading it's Amityville, Farmingdale, and Cold Spring Harbor
which lie along the Nassau-Suffolk county line.  Recall the 612/651
split in Minnesota w/r to splitting a prefix, with the concerns about
things like:

1. local calls across the area code border (the old NYC message unit
   zones included all of Long Island but did not include Fishers
   Island).  They'd need the area code (it's needed for calls in
   either direction between NYC and current 516).

2. if prefix ABC is to split along the area code border, try going
   as long as you can before having, say, ABC-wxyz occurring on both
   sides of the split line.

------------------------------

From: mayotte-usenet@riverview.com (Mike Ayotte)
Subject: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List?
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 10:49:41 -0700
Organization: Riverview Systems Group, Inc.


Is there a list of 10-10- numbers in use and the companies that "own"
them on the net?

Thanks in advance.


Mike Ayotte
Riverview Systems Group, Inc.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the Telecom Archives there is a file
of 10xxx carriers which is a bit out of date, however you can generally
take any of them, stick another 10 on the front and be okay. For exam-
ple, AT&T's old 10288 now is 1010288. Isn't it a shame when carrier
access codes now have to be longer than phone numbers themselves used
to be years ago?   ... 

On the same topic, has anyone seen the newspaper advertising by Sprint
lately warning against 'ten-ten' arrangements? Sprint says consumers
had better be careful, some of the ten-tens are as big at ri-offs as
any of the old 809/900 areacode guys used to be, with 'free directory
assistance' and then an outlandish charge for the call itself, or
sometimes the other way around.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 13:49:19 PDT
From: Wulf Losee <wulf@CERF.NET>
Subject: J1 Signalling Question


What are the specifics of J1 signaling that make it distinct from E1
(or for that matter T1) signaling? My searches of the Web haven't
yielded anything useful in English, and none of my technical
references discuss it.

If there are any TELECOM Digest readers who could give me a succint
description of J1 signaling, I would greatly appreciate the tutorial.


Thanks!

 --Wulf

------------------------------

From: BV124@aol.com (Robert Ricketts)
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 17:32:28 EDT
Subject: Re: NPA-NXX & Cities


The following identifes the source of a nifty WINDOWS application that does 
what you ask for and more!

To order by US-mail:
Robert Ricketts
The PC Consultant
PO Box 42086
Houston, TX 77242-2086


To order by e-mail:
Internet e-mail: robert@pcconsultant.com


To order by phone:
888/456-7950 Toll Free

I am away from the office occasionally. My voice-mail system will answer if I 
am away. You can leave your name and number to call back
(I'm alerted when a message is received) or go ahead and place your order. 
The latter is faster!

To get the latest version, connect to our web site: www.pcconsultant.com 


If this URL breaks for some reason, please send e-mail to the above address 
asking for the current URL.

------------------------------

From: Eli Mantel <mantel@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: NPA-NXX & Cities
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 22:29:52 GMT


Clay Koontz wrote:

> I need information on the Area Code and prefixes ... NPA - NXX
> data with Rate Centers (Cities). ... All I need is N. Carolina's
> data.

An unofficial list of prefixes and cities for each area code is
available at http://www.thedirectory.org/


Eli Mantel

------------------------------

From: bakie@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Siemens 2420
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 16:04:42 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.


In article <telecom19.80.6@telecom-digest.org>, support@sellcom.com
wrote:

> the_spectre@my-dejanews.com spake thusly and wrote:

>> Siemens will begin shipment of the Gigaset 2402 sometime in the near
>> future (probably by June).  It lacks some of the features of the
>> Gigaset 2420 (for example, the wired handset, answering machine,
>> auxiliary port, speakerphone), but still supports 8 cordless handsets.
>> It also enables users to "bridge" calls (pick up an extension).  The
>> Gigaset 2420 continues to be a better solution for small office or home
>> office users, but the 2402 is ideal for residential users.  It also
>> will cost less.

> The 2402 is very nice, but a giant step backwards from the 2420.  For
> those who already have a sophisticated voice mail system it could be
> real handy and I suppose it could be located in a more ideal position
> for extra range since it would not need to be so accessible.  I dunno,
> time will tell.  Everything I have seen Siemens make has been excellent.

Any idea of what the price will be on the new 2402 or when it will
really be available?  Does call bridging fix the annoying extension
problem (for residential use) that the 2420 has?  I think I want the
2402. 


Thanks.

------------------------------

From: Richard Campbell <richcam@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: ADSL, Digital Hybrid System, Cable Types?
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 09:06:28 -0500
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services


Yeah, Panasonic systems are really inexpensive.  Unfortunately you
have found out why the hard way.


Rich

------------------------------

Date: 19 May 1999 18:47:14 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> I'm trying to find out what ever came of the "Postal Telegraph and
> Cable Corporation".

Western Union bought and absorbed them in 1943.  They were the last
significant competitor to WU in the telegram and telex business.

(Source: Encyclopedia Britannica)


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L.Winson)
Subject: Re: Postal Telegraph and Cable Corporation
Date: 19 May 1999 23:09:30 GMT
Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS


According to the book, "The Story of Telecommunications" by George
P. Oslin, Western Union was pressure by the Federal Govt to take over
the bankrupt Postal Telegraph about 1945.

Oslin, a longtime former WU employee, describes the forced merger in
very unfavorable terms.  WU was saddled with Postal's 35 subsidary
companies.  All Postal people hired before Mar 1 1941 were guaranteed
jobs for five years at increased salaries.  WU had 208,000 miles of
pole line while Postal had 31,000.  WU had 18,677 offices and 13,500
agencies, Post 3,948.  "Most Postal lines, offices, and equipment
duplicated Western Union's, were useless, and had to be junked.  That
required years".

Oslin's book also details the relationship between domestic and foreign
telegrams and AT&T competition from its TWX service.  Oslin feels
WU got unfavorable breaks from the FCC in many issues.

While not a scholarly work, Oslin's book is a good contemporary
history of Western Union and is recommended as a starting point.
Unfortunately, while WU's 19th century history has been very well
documented, it's 20th century history is often overlooked.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #89
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Thu May 20 15:02:05 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA17491;
	Thu, 20 May 1999 15:02:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:02:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905201902.PAA17491@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #90

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 20 May 99 15:02:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 90

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Data and Telecommunications Dictionary", Peter (Rob Slade)
    Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry (Bill Feidt)
    Net Scam-o-Rama: Datek Censured; Searches Hijacked; BigHub's (M. Solomon)
    U.S. FCC Seeks Good Way To Separate Cable, Net (Monty Solomon)
    Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (John R. Levine)
    Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (Eli Mantel)
    Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (John R. Covert)
    Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (Bob Goudreau)
    Help Needed Researching Polish Telecom (Steffen Beil)
    I Want to Become a Telecom Reseller (Antique & Estate Jewelry and Watches)
    Re: Strange Problem (Steven J. Sobol)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 08:34:14 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Data and Telecommunications Dictionary", Julie K. Peter
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKDTTLDC.RVW   990326

"Data and Telecommunications Dictionary", Julie K. Petersen, 1999,
0-8493-9591-7, U$49.95
%A   Julie K. Petersen abiogen@abiogenesis.com
%C   823 Debra St, Livermore, CA   94550
%D   1999
%G   0-8493-9591-7
%I   CRC Press/Auerbach Publications
%O   U$49.95 +1-800-950-1216 auerbach@wgl.com orders@crcpress.com
%P   820 p.
%T   "Data and Telecommunications Dictionary"

Whichever other communications dictionary you have, you can make room
for this one.  In fact, it is so distinctive as to make comparison
with other glossaries very difficult.

Like Weik (cf. BKCMSTDC.RVW) and Shnier (cf. BKCMPDCT.RVW), a number
of the entries are more encyclopedic than simply defining.  The
subject range is quite broad.  Many fields of communications are
covered, but there is also ample coverage of the computer domain and
of scientific realms touching (sometimes quite tangentially) on
communications.  The strongest emphasis in this work is the historical
background, giving information on a great deal of early development,
as well as quick biographies of pioneers in the area.

It is difficult to determine an area of professional specialization in
this work.  Telephony and radio get good overviews, but more in past
development.  Current technologies are not examined in great depth,
although history is.  A number of popular historical myths are
corrected, although there are some assertions with which I'm not quite
comfortable, and for which I would have liked to see specific
references.

Slang is included.  At times this may lead to some dispute over the
definitions which are, after all, rather informal.  For example,
cheapernet is defined as any inexpensive LAN technology, while I
always heard it used referring specifically to the thinner (RG-58 and
RG-62) version of coaxial cable that became popular for Ethernet (and,
for a brief time, ARCnet).  (And "spam" makes no mention of Vikings.)

I was delighted at the number of entries for Canadian technology and
inventors.  (Not surprised, of course, but delighted.)

The entries for "top level" national Internet domains seem to be a bit
of a waste of space, especially since the domains are listed in
Appendix D.

Not all of the explanations are functionally complete.  For example,
Daniel Bernoulli is described as having done work with fluid dynamics,
and Bernoulli's Theorem mentions the constant sum of the pressure
head, velocity head, and height.  The Bernoulli box is described as
using technology pioneered by Bernoulli, but this material does not
explain the use of a high speed air jet which maintains an air gap
while keeping it vanishingly small.  Since Bernoulli's bio also
mentions electronics, some readers could be forgiven for assuming that
this was his contribution to the Bernoulli drive, rather than the same
principle that keeps planes in the air.

I noted a slight, but general, weakness in regard to the UNIX
operating system, and systems derived from it.  (UNIX has, of course,
a great many connections to modern networking, and particularly the
Internet, so there are a number of related entries.)  Explanations are
not necessarily incorrect, but are often clumsy, in a manner very
similar to those given by people not quite familiar with the
technology.

Virus is not defined: it isn't even included.  The cookie monster
program is characterized as a virus, when the program described was a
completely non-reproducing prank which had to be initiated by a
colleague (generally while you left the terminal unattended but logged
on).  (There was a Spanish "cookie" [galleta] virus, but it ran on
MS-DOS rather than VMS.)  A trojan horse is described only as a
password collector.  Worm is defined only as the Internet Worm, which
is defined as a virus, and refers one to virus.  Which is not defined
 ...

Errors, additions, and corrections will be noted at
http://www.abiogenesis.com/telecomdict/Docs/notes.html.

CRC Press is not exactly common on bookstore shelves (and this cover
isn't snappy), which is a great pity, because this book is written at
the right level, and with the right scope, for the home market.  Get
this as a present for your favorite techie, and I can pretty much
guarantee that they will not be disappointed.  Old ham operators and
telephone workers will be ecstatic.  Professionals may or may not find
it useful in their work, but they will most certainly find it
fascinating reading, with a great many historical points and canned
biographies.  Despite the gaps, I hope a bunch of you buy it, because
I am dying to see what the author can do with good sales and some
feedback on topics to include.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKDTTLDC.RVW   990326

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
              One virus, two virii, three viriii, four viriv ...
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

From: wfeidt@cpcug.org (Bill Feidt)
Reply-To: wfeidt@cpcug.org
Subject: Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:29:32 GMT
Organization: Heller Information Services


Recently I've begun to have an intermittant service problem with my
second Bell Atlantic POTS (I use it for data) line.

Periodically, I lose dial tone on the line and hear a loud hum in its
place.  The condition comes and goes, apparently without BA
intervention.  It happens frequently enough (4 times so far this week)
and for suffiently extended periods (up to 12 hours continuous) to be
very disruptive.

I've reported the problem to BA three times so far.  They send a
service tech out and by the time he arrives the problem has gone away.
BA has installed a demarc box and I've used that to verify that the
problem is "outside the house".

Can anyone suggest a way I can hold BA's feet to the fire on this?
They're always very pleasant when I talk to them, but they're
completely ineffectual when it comes to solving the problem. Any
advice will be gratefully accepted.


Thanks,

Bill
wfeidt@cpcug.org


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I had *exactly* the same problem with 
my phones in Skokie, Illinois last year. Not only would some lines
just have a 'loud humming noise' for several minutes at a time, but
occassionally two of the lines would be  bridged together. I filed
complaints daily for a couple weeks, and the techs could never find
the problem. Now and then a line would be 'dead' i.e. in the sense
of no battery or side tone, then if someone dialed that line it would
ring and the call would come through, then the line would be okay.

Then a tech had a good idea. He asked if I remembered when the work
was being done on the storm sewers that summer. Indeed I did, they
had Dempster Street dug up for several blocks, a trench down the
middle of the street; every day they would work their way east and
finally came past me. Well, the tech said he felt certain 'they' had
damaged the underground cable, because his testing showed that the
cable had an 'intermittant ground' on it. He said they finally had
actually caught it acting up themselves. I asked how they planned
to repair it; he said they would not bother, that he was just going
to put in an order to move everyone off of it (six or eight phones
in that vincinity) and instead put them on an 'arial drop from down
the street'. Thinking the worst, I asked how long that would take and
he said he would put in a work order for the 'guys who do that' and
it would probably be 'later the same day', which in fact it was.

Where before where the box was mounted on the outside wall of the
building and a conduit came up out of the sidewalk right next to
the wall and into that box, what I saw later was that a wire from
the utility pole several feet away now led over to the same box on
the wall and into it. Inside the box, a thick bundle of wires which
had come out of the conduit was cut off right where it entered the
box and the new stuff was all connected. Also in the box, some cryptic
notes on tags tied with strings around the various wires saying
approximatly, 'cable 17, multipled at (some street address down the
block) underground pairs opened, (date).' Everything was fine after
that. 

I saw the guy a couple days later and asked him how he managed to
figure it out so fast and make the neccessary trades, etc. He said
it was quite simple, you just had to be a 'phone man' for about
thirty years; then you can look at a large junction box and the
cable coming in to it and 'see where it all goes in your head a
couple seconds later'; 'where it would take you several hours to
figure out if you ever did' ... 

Ask your telco to look at the possibility of an intermittant ground
on the cable, which comes and goes literally like the weather. If
it rains, water goes in the ground and gets the cable wet, etc. Or
a strong wind yanks the overhead wires around, and one someplace is
just barely connected, or getting grounded under certain conditions.
When they are looking into that, also ask them to make sure all the
multiples between you and the central office are open, that none of
them were accidentally left connected. 

As an example of this, if a multiple on the cable is forgotten about,
maybe it terminates in the basement of some building down the street
 from you. If there is a problem in that building, such as a flood in
the basement, or a fire burns the place down, or whatever, a couple
of phone wires may get damaged, and guess what? You down the street
lose your service as a result until telco swaps the cable and/or pairs.

Also, next time it happens try to *immediatly* get repair service on
the line, and ask them to 'go in on' that pair and test it right then
and there. If *they* can hear it, and assess the trouble, they will
have a better idea what to do. They have tools which are sophisticated
enough that they can identify within a matter of a couple yards where
an underground cable has gone bad; even sitting in their office at a
computer terminal a two miles away.  I hope this helps.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 22:39:59 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Net Scam-o-Rama: Datek Censured; Searches Hijacked; BigHub's


http://www.thestandard.com/articles/mediagrok_display/0,1185,4594,00.html

Net Scam-o-Rama: Datek Censured; Searches Hijacked; BigHub's Secret Plan

Just when you thought it was safe to go back on the Web . . . [cue the
"Jaws" theme], the press was happy to report scams aplenty. You like
trading stocks online? Datek Online, the No. 4 e-broker, was censured
and fined by the SEC for allegedly dipping into customer accounts to
pay bills, and falsifying a financial report last year. Or maybe you
like cheapie over-the-counter Net stocks? MSNBC's Christopher Byron
[Roy Scheider in "Jaws"?] harpoons OTC company BigHub.com for a secret
plan to sell cheaper shares to Wall Street, undercutting current
shareholders. Or perhaps you're not a financial type and just like
using AltaVista's search engine? MSNBC's Brock Meeks [the Richard
Dreyfuss character?] says the latest "snake in the grass" scam
involves porn sites hijacking links to legitimate sites by tricking
search spiders.

Despite the hue and cry about the latest Net scams, as Microsoft might
say: "Where's the harm?" Datek Online reached an agreement in which it
admits no wrongdoing, and fined CFO Moishe Zelcer already resigned
last July. Though Datek looks like it dipped into customer money, it
didn't lose any in the process. CBS MarketWatch's William Watts saw
the punishment as a follow-up to SEC chair Arthur Levitt's warning to
e-brokers to keep pace with increased trading activity. Datek was
fined $50,000 and Zelcer $10,000. Zelcer was also suspended from the
brokerage industry for 90 days.

The New York Times' David Barboza noted that Datek used customer money
improperly on 12 occasions, according to the SEC, and exposed it to
greater risk in the case of a market downturn. Barboza gave a nice
capsule on the firm: "Datek began as a small Brooklyn brokerage firm
that specialized in day trading and developed a long history of fines
and suspensions related to, among other things, manipulating the
stocks of small companies." After a scotched IPO, the company revamped
its image with a new set of execs formerly at Waterhouse Securities.
Datek says it was all just "flawed calculations," and that back-end
systems have been fixed.

SEC officials aren't the only feds with a heavier workload because of
the Internet. Over at the Federal Trade Commission, agency officials
are matching wits with clever porn scammers. In a wire story run by
the Miami Herald and other newspapers, AP writer Kalpana Srinivasan
reported FTC officials filed suit on Tuesday against perpetrators of a
scheme that had prompted 20,000 complaints to America Online. The
defendants are as yet unnamed, but the FTC says they will be soon. The
elaborate scam spammed Web surfers with warnings that their credit
cards were about to be hit by big charges unless they dialed a long-
distance telephone number. Callers to the number heard a breathy
come-on for more than routine customer service - and also got a pricey
international call on their phone bill. Tracking the complex scams is
like the Whack-a-Mole arcade game, Ray Everett-Church of the Coalition
Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail told Srinivasan: No sooner does
the mole get hit by the mallet in one place than it pops up in
another.

Meanwhile, MSNBC went Net-scam crazy with its pair of stories. Byron
has had a field day with OTC stocks (chum in the water to him), and he
drubs BigHub for failing to disclose financial details. Of course it's
all legal, since penny stocks don't have to file disclosures with the
SEC and have free rein to goose stocks with press releases. In this
case, Byron found that a special confidential offering for Street
insiders lets them buy convertible preferred shares that become
$4-per-share common stock in 30 days. The problem? The stock is now
trading at an inflated $15 per share, so they'll net a 300 percent
return overnight, while diluting everyday shareholders' stock by 50
percent or more.

MSNBC's Brock Meeks finds that a man traced to Portugal had set up
porn sites under the .nu domain, from the tiny Polynesian island of
Nuie. Apparently, he copied pages from legitimate news and even kids'
gaming sites, so that search spiders would find terms like "news" or
"kids games" and associate his URLs. When unsuspecting surfers
searched for the benign keywords, they ended up jumping to his porn
pages by being redirected seamlessly from the duped pages. Meeks says
the extent of the scam isn't known, but that it extends to engines
beyond AltaVista. He notes that it's offensive and likely illegal, but
mainly for stealing trademarked material - so the onus is on the
purloined sites to take action. Of course, the overtaxed FTC is
working overtime to keep up with all the online scams, but that's
getting harder by the day.

SEC Fines Datek
http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/current/datek.htx

SEC Punishes Online Broker in Fund Shift
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/05/biztech/articles/19brok.html

FTC Pursues Case Against Unnamed Sender of Junk E-mail
http://www.herald.com/content/today/business/brkdocs/013015.htm

How BigHub Raised Big Money
http://www.msnbc.com/news/byron.asp

Scam Diverts Surfers to Porn Sites
http://www.msnbc.com/news/270689.asp

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 23:37:40 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: U.S. FCC Seeks Good Way To Separate Cable, Net


By Aaron Pressman

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Federal Communications Commission Chairman 
William Kennard said Wednesday his agency had authority to prevent 
discrimination by cable companies offering high-speed Internet service 
but added that he had not yet heard an appealingly simple proposal to do 
so.

The comments by the top U.S. communications regulator came at a 
congressional briefing on Capitol Hill where America Online Inc.
 Chairman Steve Case argued for either an FCC rule or a new law 
prohibiting cable companies from requiring their customers that buy 
high-speed Internet access to also buy Internet services like e-mail and 
Web page hosting from a cable-owned firm.

"I do think the FCC has jurisdiction," Kennard, the top U.S. 
communications regulator, said disputing the cable industry's view that 
the FCC lacked such authority. "The more difficult question, in my view, 
is if we assert jurisdiction what do we do? I don't agree with Steve 
Case that it's a real easy matter to just craft some regulations that 
ensure nondiscrimination."

Case, who is backed by other Internet service providers and consumer 
groups, argued that the cable industry's bundle of high-speed access and 
Internet service would eliminate healthy competition on the Internet.

"We just want consumers to have a choice when they want an ISP (Internet 
service provider)," Case said. "There is an easier route. It doesn't 
require onerous regulation ... But even if it wasn't easy -- and I think 
it would be -- that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. The question is 
more a question of right or wrong as it relates to developing this 
medium."

Milo Medin, chief technology officer at AT&T Corp.'s AtHome Corp.
 Internet unit, responded that requiring cable companies to allow other 
Internet service providers onto their network would drive up costs and 
lead to a difficult regulatory tangle.

"You get into the same kind of regulatory Vietnam that's happened with 
the phone companies," Medin said.

The FCC considered the issue twice earlier this year, in assessing 
AT&T's acquisition of cable giant Tele-Communications Inc. and in a 
congressionally required review of high-speed services. In both cases, 
the agency declined to impose any unbundling or nondiscrimination rules.

During those proceedings, many people, including AOL, brought unbundling 
proposals to the FCC, but all would have led to complex and difficult 
regulations, Kennard said.

Kennard said the best response was for regulators to ensure the 
development of more high-speed pathways into consumers homes. Such new 
paths could come from wireless, satellite or electric utility companies.

Kennard conceded that different rules currently applied to cable firms 
and telephone companies, which are prohibited from limiting consumer 
Internet service choice on their high-speed offering known as digital 
subscriber line or DSL.

"We have a disparity -- that's clear -- and it's stark and there is a 
certain unfairness about it," he said. "So we're faced with the problem 
of whether we're going to regulate up or not regulate at all and just 
hope for new competition."

"From where I sit, it makes a lot of sense to try to promote as much 
competitive entry as we can through new pipes and new services so that 
we can get out of the business of regulation ultimately," he added. 
"That's the ultimate long-term solution ... but it's now a question of 
timing and how we get there." 

------------------------------

Date: 19 May 1999 21:38:57 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


In article <telecom19.89.8@telecom-digest.org> was written:

> Is there a list of 10-10- numbers in use and the companies that "own"
> them on the net?

This page has the definitive list:

http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/carrier_id_codes.html

It has about 1,860 defined numbers along with the owning carrier,
contact person, and the contact's phone number.  Keep in mind that
many IXCs don't want dial-around customers, and either reject call
attempts from non-customers or charge a price intended to make you not
want to come back.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: Eli Mantel <mantel@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: 10-10 Dial-Around Company List
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 04:30:29 GMT


The following page provides links to downloadable files containing carrier 
access codes and a variety of other "number resources":

http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:22:05 -0400
From: John R. Covert <no.spam.covert.maps.on@covert.org>
Subject: Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List?


There is a complete list at www.nanpa.com, the official site for the
North American Numbering Plan Administration.

 /john

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:28:19 -0400
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List?


mayotte-usenet@riverview.com (Mike Ayotte) wrote:

> Is there a list of 10-10- numbers in use and the companies that "own"
> them on the net?

NANPA (who administers the 101-XXXX Carrier Identification Code number
space) keeps a fairly up-to-date list of CIC assignments online at
http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/text_db/dcic_990430.zip .


Bob Goudreau			Data General Corporation
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com		62 Alexander Drive	
+1 919 248 6231			Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

------------------------------

From: Trainee_Tokyo@asia.hypovereinsbank.com
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:06:21 +0900
Subject: Help Needed Researching Polish Telecom


Hi there,

As you can see, I am a trainee in Tokyo, working for the German
HypoVereinsbank. I am working on collecting information about the East
European Telecom market, especially Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic.
Your homepage is definitely the largest and covers so much information
 -- great. I've searched through it, but couldn't find anything on the
Polish market. I'm pretty good supplied with info about the other two
countries, but I still have a lack on Poland. I am sure one reason is
the underdevelopement compared to other European countries.  

Do you have any information on this topic? Can you help me out? Or do
you know where I can find any information.  I've checked the Polish
homepage, the largest Telecom companies.  I am looking for figures
concerning future expectations, size and development of the market so
far and of companies in it. Governmental stockholding on such
companies, just any information would be fine.

Please respond.

Thanks a lot in advance,

Steffen Beil

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 20:10:58 -0400
From: Antique & Estate Jewelry and Watches <masona@antiqueandestate.com>
Subject: I Want to Become a Telecom Reseller


Could you please direct me to info regarding how to become a reseller of
long distance service.

Thank you,

Alex

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By my printing your request, perhaps a
few of the people who do marketing and/or have reselling agreements
and are looking for agents will contact you with their plans. Good
luck with it. Who knows, maybe in ten years you will have grown to be
the fourth largest carrier in the USA, and whoever is running this
Digest at that point in time will print all sorts of scurrilous
attacks about you every week or so ... (grin)  ... and some telecom
historian will write that 'Alex Long Distance got its start many
years ago in the watch and jewelry business.'     PAT]

------------------------------

From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net (Steven J Sobol)
Subject: Re: Strange Problem
Date: 20 May 1999 02:35:18 GMT
Organization: North Shore Technologies Corp. 888.480.INET


On Wed, 19 May 1999 17:08:30 -0500, gallagher@sprintmail.com allegedly said

> I recently switched to a new internet connection number which
> Ameritech described to me as being a 5 cent untimed call within zero
> miles of my house.  The funny business began when Sprint began picking
> up this local call, attempting to charge me local long distance!  I'm
> outraged by the telco rep who says that these are legitimate charges
> and that I must have this computer set up wrong.  Would someone
> explain what is going on and how to go about resolving this issue?

I am in Ameritech territory. If you're in the Northeast Ohio area
I may be able to provide some information for you. I would need to know:

(a) the city from which you are dialing, and
(b) the city you're calling

Disclaimer: I'm not a telco employee. I'm just someone who runs an ISP, has
more contact with the phone company than he'd like to have, and sometimes
has the type of information you're asking for. :)

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This very same thing, identical, came
> up here a couple weeks ago, when our correspondent was able to event-
> ually prove that the 'competing' telco in his community had gotten the
> tables mixed up in their switch. Perhaps you guys could exchange notes
> and find someone at Ameritech who is able to get it corrected with
> Sprint.  PAT

The ISP whose dialups I resell set up a couple dialup banks at the ICG
Communications facilities in Garfield Heights, Ohio, just outside
Cleveland.  They have a number, 440 424-0032, which is a local call
for Cleveland and all of Cuyahoga County, and additionally is local to
western Geauga County.

They ran into problems with Alltel customers in Geauga County being
billed long distance because 440-424 is a new exchange, and Alltel
screwed up when they entered the information for that exchange into
their billing system.

Perhaps the same thing is happening here? Is the originating phone or
the line being called serviced by Ameritech, with the other line being
serviced by someone else, perhaps a CLEC? If so, this could be a
simple mistake. (Wait. Ameritech doesn't make mistakes. <g>)


Steve Sobol - President, North Shore Technologies Corp. 888.480.INET [4638]
North Shore is your authorized SkyTel reseller, combining the power and
unmatched convenience of SkyTel's nationwide paging network with North Shore
innovation and customer service! Call or e-mail today for details.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now you are speaking the truth. Ameritech
does not make misteaks and I do not make misteaks either. It is my
computer that makes all the misteaks, just like Ameritech's computer.
PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #90
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Thu May 20 16:45:22 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA22945;
	Thu, 20 May 1999 16:45:22 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:45:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905202045.QAA22945@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #91

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 20 May 99 16:45:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 91

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Do You Feel Like a Number? (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Private Personal Computing? (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Long Island Assigned 631 Area Code (Stan Schwartz)
    Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503 (David A. Jensen)
    Bell Atlantic Holders Approve $80.9 Billion Purchase of GTE (Monty Solomon)
    Re: DNA Dragnet (Richard Freeman)
    Re: Which Countries Use a-law vs. u-law Codecs? (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Siemens 2420 (support@sellcom.com)
    Gigaset 2420 Handsets - Different Volume Levels? (mikey94025@my-dejanews)
    Re: Some Good News to Report Today (Ernie Longmire)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 20 May 1999 15:33:33 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Do You Feel Like a Number?


It used to just be a grim joke: one day all Americans would be 
issued numbers to use instead of names. Well, we are about half-
way there. So far, we are still permitted to have individual 
names, but our social security numbers are rapidly becoming our
national ID numbers.

This not only expressly conflicts with what President Roosevelt
and the Social Security Administration promised us, but is just
one more step in the direction of total control of each person
by the government.

Social Security began in 1935, and the present numbering system for
it began a year later in 1936. In 1962, the Internal Revenue Service
began requiring it on all tax returns. Individuals get SSNs, while
coporations and other employers get FEINs ... the same difference, it
is the same database, just the way the number is parsed for the latter
is different.  

Starting in 1970, all banks were required to obtain your number. In
1982, anyone receiving any sort of government handout was required
to present their number. As a practical matter today, many states
and and most educational institutions simply use your SSN as their
identification number for you also. 

I am told that a federal law recently passed allows for federal
takeover of birth certificates, death certificates and driver's
licenses. Under this law, even if you choose to not identify yourself
with your Social Security number, it still would have to be presented
when you wish to obtain a driver's license or any form of state
identification card. (Some states issue ID cards in lieu of driver's
licenses to people who request it.) Numbers will be issued to new
born babies immediatly as part of the process of issuing their birth
certificates. 

But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any
airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will definitly
require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions. 

Imagine your grandchildren growing up never knowing a time in which
transactions were done without the need to present a national ID 
number so the government could snoop into your business. If indeed
the government begins enforcing the 'show your SSN to buy an airline
ticket or board an airplane' rule, watch for Greyhound's and Amtrack's
business to pick up considerably. 

In these times, the phrase 'public servant' translates into 'public
master', and surely they must be in their glory about now. Maybe with
some effort, we can get Congress to repeal this law, but don't count
on it. George Orwell was only a few years off in his book '1984', when
Big Brother was just a teen-ager. Now he is coming of age.

October 2, 2000 is the date. Do mark your calendars!


PAT

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 01:48:59 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Private Personal Computing?


Once it's connected to the Internet, the personal computer isn't very
personal any more. In fact, it's becoming more and more like the
"telescreen" in George Orwell's novel 1984.

Computer servers throughout the Internet now collect and store 
information about you from the keystrokes you enter in perceived privacy 
at home and office. Government investigators and lawyers in civil cases 
are going after these computer records with warrants and subpoenas - and 
you may not even be notified when they look at yours.

http://www.lawnewsnet.com/stories/A1544-1999May17.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 10:03:57 PDT
From: Stan Schwartz <stannc@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: stannc@no1spam.yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Long Island Assigned 631 Area Code


In TELECOM Digest V19 #89, Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric Morson)
wrote:

> Suffolk County New York will be split from 516 and assigned area code
> 631, with mandatory dialing and NXX activations beginning in the
> Spring of 2000.

Newsday http://www.newsday.com is reporting a tentative permissive date
of 11/1/99.  They have a large Q&A section on their site today, which
looks like a graphic so I was unable to copy it here.

Carl Moore <cmoore@ARL.MIL> wrote:

> I recall reading it's Amityville, Farmingdale, and Cold Spring Harbor
> which lie along the Nassau-Suffolk county line.  Recall the 612/651
> split in Minnesota w/r to splitting a prefix, with the concerns about
> things like:

> local calls across the area code border (the old NYC message unit
> zones included all of Long Island but did not include Fishers
> Island).  They'd need the area code (it's needed for calls in
> either direction between NYC and current 516).

I didn't think that 516/718 had any 'protected' cross-border exchanges
anymore.  AFAIK, the calls were rated as local, but 1+NPA+7D were
required for cross-NPA local calls.

> if prefix ABC is to split along the area code border, try going
> as long as you can before having, say, ABC-wxyz occurring on both
> sides of the split line.

I have family who live in the 516-752 prefix (on the Nassau - not
changing - side), so hopefully I'll be able to provide a blow-by-blow
account of what works and what doesn't after the permissive and
mandatory dates.  I'm wondering if a call to their house using 631-752
will work for a period of time.   About 15 years ago, when we moved to
that area, we were asked to call 911 and make sure our calls were
routed to the correct police department (Nassau or Suffolk) and to
contact NYNEX (BA) if they weren't.  Hopefully, they've improved the
location tables since then.

 - Stan

------------------------------

From: David A. Jensen <david.jensen@teldta.com>
Subject: Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:49:18 -0500


Patty Winter (pwinter@best.com) wrote:

> I hope this AC madness can get fixed soon ...

There are almost 20 numbers for each man, woman and child in the NANP
and we are running out of numbers? This is really silly. Here's my
solution which semsibly retains the ten digit number:

WW-XX-YYY-ZZZ where 

WW is the region code. This code is not limited to one state or
country but covers a logical region. Extremely large regions can have
adjacent region codes reserved and move wireless and/or data services
in an adjacent region code (Example: the NYC region could have 69 as
the region code and 60 as the wireless/data code, 68 reserved for
growth, Chicagoland 24/25, LA 52/51, DC 32/31, etc.).

XX is an optional subregion. Larger metro areas would just use this as
part of the number, Smaller NANP countries or states would use these
as their own sub-region code(s) instead of an entire area code.

YYY would be the prefix assigned to carriers as it is today, but with
only 1000 numbers at a time.

ZZZ would be the final digits. 

Overlay/Split problems could go away until we actually need more than 6
billion numbers.


Dave Jensen

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 23:12:19 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Bell Atlantic Holders Approve $80.9 Billion Purchase of GTE


http://www.businesstoday.com/topstories/bell05191999.htm 

Bloomberg 

Wednesday, May 19, 1999


Atlanta -- Bell Atlantic Corp. shareholders approved the No. 1 U.S. 
local phone company's acquisition of GTE Corp. for $80.9 billion, 
leaving one major approval needed to create the largest U.S. phone 
company. 

At a shareholder meeting in Atlanta, Bell Atlantic said investors 
holding 64 percent of its outstanding shares voted for the transaction. 
GTE shareholders approved the sale yesterday.

The combination faces a more challenging hurdle at the U.S. Federal 
Communications Commission, where Chairman William Kennard has said phone 
company mergers will get tough scrutiny. If completed, the combination 
will vault the new company ahead of AT&T Corp. as the largest U.S. phone 
company with a third of the local U.S. phone market and the most 
wireless customers.

Shares of New York-based Atlantic rose 11/16 to 56 9/16 in early 
afternoon trading, while GTE rose 3/4 to 65 13/16.

Bell Atlantic and Irving, Texas-based GTE need approval from the FCC and 
regulators in about 12 states.

Earlier this month, the combination won U.S. antitrust clearance when 
the Justice Department approved it after the companies agreed to sell 
wireless operations in 65 local markets, including Chicago; Houston; 
Dallas; Richmond, Virginia, and Tampa, Florida. The Justice Department 
said it's one of the largest such divestitures ever required in a 
merger.

The FCC must determine whether Bell Atlantic-GTE can continue to offer 
long-distance service to GTE's 100,000 customers in Bell Atlantic's 
territory in the Northeast.

Bell Atlantic is barred from offering long-distance service within its 
local phone markets until it opens those markets to competition. GTE, a 
major provider of Internet service, uses long-distance lines to transmit 
data.

The FCC's staff has already found certain problems with another large 
local phone acquisition. The staff has said SBC Communications Inc.'s 
plans to buy Ameritech Corp. should be rejected as anticompetitive 
unless changes are made.

Under the GTE acquisition, which was announced July 28, each GTE share 
will be swapped for 1.22 Bell Atlantic shares. 

------------------------------

From: rfreeman@netaxs.com (Richard Freeman)
Subject: Re: DNA Dragnet
Date: 20 May 1999 14:53:51 GMT
Organization: newsread.com ISP News Reading Service (http://www.newsread.com)


On Tue, 18 May 1999 15:47:14 GMT, Free Spirit <Burn@D.man> wrote:
> My biggest concern for the new reliance on DNA evidence in criminal
> cases is that it is much easier to 'plant' DNA evidence at a crime
> scene than it is to fake a fingerprint.

An interesting scenario ...  Of course, chances are that the person
doing the planting would leave some DNA himself.  Then again, if the
planted DNA turns out to be in the database, and the person doing the
planting isn't, then guess which lead the cops will follup up on ...

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Police have long had the right to take
>> is that fingerprints -- once years ago the latest technology in
>> people identification -- are rather feeble when compared with DNA 
>> type-casting. DNA records are just a bit too-perfect for comfort

Actually, in the manner in which they are currently used, fingerprints
are still considered the best method of identification.  They are
considered unique for all practical purposes.  Of course, a partial
fingerprint is a lot more prone to error, but if you are dragged to court
because your fingerprints are a perfect match to those found on a gun and
they have good prints to show the jury, you are pretty much done for ...

The main advantage of DNA is that with PCR technology you need virtually
no sample at all to make an identification, and simply wearing gloves
does little to keep you from shedding DNA.  Unfortunately, the manner in
which it is currently used is less able to make unique identification
than a fingerprint is.  There are ways of using DNA to make much more
certain identifications, but because of how courts operate, they are slow
to be introduced as evidence.  I believe that they are also more
difficult and expensive to use.  Not that I am a forensic chemist or
anything -- just a lowly biochemistry grad student ...


Richard T. Freeman <rfreeman@netaxs.com> - finger for pgp key
3D CB AF BD FF E8 0B 10 4E 09 27 00 8D 27 E1 93 
http://www.netaxs.com/~rfreeman - ftp.netaxs.com/people/rfreeman

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Which Countries Use a-law vs. u-law Codecs?
Date: 19 May 1999 20:20:59 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.87.6@telecom-digest.org>, Toby Nixon
<tnixon@Microsoft.com> wrote:

> Does anyone know where to locate a list of which countries use A-law
> and which use mu-law G.711 PCM codecs in their national networks? I
> searched the ITU web site and didn't find anything useful.

Anything built under the influence of the European PTT-industrial complex
uses A-law.  Anything built by one of the tentacles of the Bell System
(or, in some cases, the U.S. military) uses mu-law.  No, it's not exactly
a comprehensive list, but it's a good rule of thumb.


Thor Lancelot Simon	                        tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 21:51:08 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A federal judge Tuesday froze the assets of a
company that used bogus e-mail messages to trick people into making
pricey $2-a-minute international telephone calls to an adult sex-line
service.

The order by Federal District Court Judge Richard Voorhees in Charlotte, 
North Carolina, will block U.S. telephone carriers from sending 
fraudulently obtained funds to a phone company in the tiny Caribbean 
island of Dominica, said the Federal Trade Commission, which brought the 
case.

In the meantime, the U.S. government will try to track down the 
unidentified defendants, who have used false e-mail return addresses to 
hide their identity while sending out their bulk e-mail messages, which 
are commonly known as "spam."

The FTC said American Online Inc. had received 20,000 complaints about 
the problem.

The scam is a variation on the old practical joke by a Hollywood 
director, who sent a telegram that said simply: "Disregard previous 
wire."

In this case, consumers received e-mails saying their orders were 
"received and processed" and their credit cards were billed for anywhere 
from $250 to $899.

The consumers had ordered nothing. The e-mail helpfully suggested 
calling a representative in area code 767, which serves Dominica, an 
island in the Windward group of the West Indies about 375 miles (600 km) 
southeast of Puerto Rico.

Consumers were not told the phone rates were up to $2 a minute. People 
who called were connected to what the FTC described as "an adult 
entertainment audiotext service with sexual content."

Customers later received telephone charges for their international calls 
to Roseau, Dominica, from the Cable and Wireless (Dominica), Ltd., phone 
company.

"This scam used low-down tactics and high-tech tools to rob consumers in 
their own homes," said Jode Bernstein, director of the FTC Bureau of 
Consumer Protection.

The FTC voted 4-0 to file the complaint. 

------------------------------

From: support@sellcom.com
Subject: Re: Siemens 2420
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 03:48:21 GMT
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com


bakie@my-dejanews.com spake thusly and wrote:

> Any idea of what the price will be on the new 2402 or when it will
> really be available?  Does call bridging fix the annoying extension
> problem (for residential use) that the 2420 has?  I think I want the
> 2402. 

I am not sure about the price yet.  What do you mean by call bridging?


Steve

http://www.sellcom.com  
(Opinions expressed, though generally wise and 
accurate are not officially positions of SELLCOM) 
Cyclades / Siemens (May REBATE) / Y2K ODIU support / Zoom / Palmer Safes
(Tech assistance provided without warranty express or implied)
Check us out at http://www.thepubliceye.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think 'call bridging' usually means
call conferencing, allowing three or more parties to all be on the
conversation at the same time.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: mikey94025@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Gigaset 2420 Handsets - Different Volume Levels?
Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 02:42:28 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.


I purchased a Siemens Gigaset 2420 recently with two additional
handsets.  I noticed that the additional handsets had 5 volume
settings, but the one that came with the base unit had only 3.

It bugs me that I have handsets with different software.  I called tech
support and they said that the number of volume levels was the only
difference, and that there was no way to "upgrade" my handset.

 - M

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:51:30 -0700
From: elongmi@basis.com (Ernie Longmire)
Subject: Re: Some Good News to Report Today
Reply-To: lazlo@studio-nibble.com


In article <telecom19.89.1@telecom-digest.org>, you say...

> Every article, every title, every author, every subject, every phrase,
> every word ... all the way back to August, 1981, now indexed and ready
> for searching. Every bit of it with anchors you can click on to go
> to old articles, etc. Here is what you can do to test it: if you 
> have ever written an article which appeared in TELECOM Digest since
> 1981, or if you are mentioned in an article, or if you contributed a
> file which is in the archives, use the link below to go to the search
> page then enter your name as the search criteria.

Hi, Pat!  I gave this a shot, searching for "Lazlo", and brought up
three hits.  I don't think the indexing is complete, though, because
the first result is a response to an article I wrote that appeared in
V10#907 -- but the original article doesn't appear in the results
list.  The other two hits look like index entries to articles that
also didn't turn up in the results list.

Just a QA FYI ...

  ::: Ernie Longmire (elongmi@basis.com)
  ::: Online Services Coordinator, BASIS International Ltd.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, I am seeing the same thing. Some
of the problem has to do with the way things were archived over the
years. Oh! How I wish I could start over from years ago and know then
what I know now, regards consistency in archiving, storage and
retrieval, etc. Try also using the article name, or some phrase from
the article name. Or if it says something like 'in reply to (name)'
with a Usenet message ID of the form 'telecom-digest x.y.z@place then
x is the volume number, y is the issue number, and z is the message
within the issue. Pull the appropriate x and y file from the archives
and ask your own browser to then find y and z within it.

Truth be told, the whole archives is becoming a monster; I think about
it now and *never* would have organized it as I did if I were starting
over. And when I look at the archives now, and consider the overall
needs of users plus what so many other telecom-related sites have to
offer, there are times I have thought the best thing to do would be
to login, take a seat on the telecom-archives directory and do some-
thing like \rm -f * or something equally unsociable and let it all
slide in the bit bucket. Then go have a good cry perhaps and tell 
myself it was all fun while it lasted, and find some other way to get
on with my life. I think back to the 1980's when comp.dcom.telecom
and this Digest were the only place on the net to get telecom infor-
mation, period, and realize that now I could not begin to keep up
with everything, even if I *really tried* ... I got email the other
day from a lady who said, 'are you the fellow who puts lovely back-
grounds on his web pages such as clouds.jpg and plays classical music
midi files for users to compensate for the fact that he has no real
information of any value to provide otherwise? ...'

Yeah lady, that's me. At least I do not use frames and I have yet to
yield to the temptations offered by the banner-message people, the
click-here-to-Make-Money-Fast-on-the-Internet crowd, and those who
believe pop-up advertising with windows you cannot close out of are
the best way to attract new friends and customers. 

I will keep working on the search thing and see what can be done. In
the meantime if you find it useful, enjoy it and let it help enhance
your experience at http://telecom-digest.org or if you prefer to go
directly to the search engine and by-pass Leon Boellman's Tocatta from
the Gothic Suite and other French organ music, then set your browser
to enter direct at http://telecom-digest.org/search  instead.    PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #91
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat May 22 21:56:37 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA05049;
	Sat, 22 May 1999 21:56:37 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 21:56:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905230156.VAA05049@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #92

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 22 May 99 21:56:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 92

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Chat Room Rebuilt From Scratch (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    AT&T Now CHARGES For BASIC Numbering/Dialing/Geographic Info! (Mark Cuccia)
    Book Review: "Windows NT Domain Architecture", Gregg Branham (Rob Slade)
    Cone of Silence About ICANN Engulfs IETF, IANA, etc? (Ronda Hauben)
    Court Strikes Down Fee Cuts Applied To Bells (Monty Solomon)
    Prices For 5ESS & Alcatel SDH ADM (mobassharahmed@my-dejanews.com)
    PBX and MP3 - Help (Kurt Bewersdorf)
    Using V&H to Calculate Distance (Scott Prugh)
    FCC Rules Online (Harold Hallikainen)
    CFP: Computer Research for Wireless Systems Mobile Computing (Wm Gilreath)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 22 May 1999 15:11:06 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Telecom Chat Room Rebuilt From Scratch


The 'chat room' which was being offered as part of http://telecom-digest.org
has been removed and replaced with something different.

It had been operated remotely by myself from an account on xoom.com
but those people are so full of advertising and unwanted email
that I finally got very tired of it. Plus, when you were using the
applet they provided, not only was it full of advertising messages but
when you exited, it dropped you into one of their pages where you
got to read a few more ads as you exited.

All that is over with.

Now the chat room -- still located at http://telecom-digest/chat is
part of an advertising free IRC network called irc.ram-page.com
and there are two ways you can use it.

One, simply go to our chat room area if your browser is java-enabled
and you will be defaulted into channel #telecom-topics ... with all
the usual IRC commands at your disposal. You can change channels,
or do anything you usually can do on IRC.

Two, if your browser is not java-enabled or you simple prefer to use
an IRC client in the usual way, you would connect to irc.ram-page.net
and /join #telecom-topics, where the channel description is 'Friends
of TELECOM Digest'.  

I am listed as the channel operator, and a bot runs the room 24 hours
per day when I am not there. You may or may not need to use a password
for the /nick of your choice, depending on if someone else has it,
or you personally happen to be an IRC operator on that network, etc.

Most important, *no advertising*, fairly rigid standards by the 
administrators, and security seems to be pretty well under control.
Meet other TELECOM Digest readers there in the late evening hours
Eastern time, or if you get tired of #telecom-topics visit the various
other channels available. 


PAT

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 12:29:11 CDT
From: Mark J Cuccia <mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu>
Subject: AT&T Now CHARGES For BASIC Numbering/Dialing/Geographic Info!


Yes, you read the subject line correctly. AT&T's Operators now will CHARGE
you to inquire about an Area Code (and we ALL know how the changes in area
codes these days is EXTREMELY confusing!), a location of an NPA-NXX code,
country/city code info for locations outside of North America, and other
similar numbering/dialing/geographic information! :-(

It started this past Monday 17 May 1999.

If you dial (101-0288)-0('#'/0) from a "non-restricted" line, and ask an
AT&T operator for such BASIC and NECESSARY numbering/dialing/etc. info so
as to PROPERLY and MORE EFFICIENTLY place customer-dialed calls via their
network, the AT&T OSPS Operator will put the auto-quote on which states
that "this service is now provided by AT&T 'double-oh' info", and to
please hold while your call is connected. They DON'T tell you that anytime
you are connected to their 'double-oh' info pseudo-directory that you are
charged NINETY-NINE-CENTS, whether or not their pseudo-directory is able
to find the directory listing or other such info that you are inquiring
about - and I assume you are charged ONCE the AT&T 'double-oh' operator
'supes' back to the initial operator.

If you dial ANY of the AT&T Operator/Card 800- dialup access numbers (or
from a foreign country, the AT&T-USA-Direct access numbers) to cut-thru to
a live operator (from both "restricted" and "non-restricted" lines), or if
you dial (101-0288)-0('#'/0) from a "restricted" line (i.e. one that is
flagged as public/coin/payphone, PBX, maybe cellular-trunk, etc), upon
inquiring about BASIC dialing information from the initial live operator,
she DEMANDS your calling-card number. If you ask why you need to give her
your calling-card number (an AT&T-issued one and MOST NANP LEC-issued
cards are honored; I don't know about cards issued by non-NANP companies
such as someone visiting from a foreign country, and using an
'89'+country-code+etc. card), she THEN will tell you so that she can bill
the 'double-oh info' charge to the card!

The supervisors and the customer service reps with AT&T all say that "all
carriers" are now billing customers for inquiring about such dialing
information (NOT true!), and that the FCC has permitted them to charge for
this (I haven't yet checked with the FCC).

The other day, I did call (collect) the number for complaints to AT&T's
Exexutive Headquarters somewhere in central NJ (Bedminster? Bernardsville?
Basking Ridge?). They took down my complaints and concerns, but unless the
FCC or Congress (ha-ha) orders them to reverse themself, I SERIOUSLY doubt
that AT&T is going to truly consider providing good customer service in
this area.

I am able to get area code, NPA-NXX info, country/city code, dialing info,
etc. from MCI, (US)Sprint, LCI-Qwest, Stentor/Bell-Canada, and many others
without having to give any card number or being charged in any such way.

I do have some of the better service plans with AT&T for direct dialed and
calling card calls, both domestic/NANP and international. But I also have
accounts and discount plans (dialed and card) with OTHER carriers as well,
such as with MCI, (US)Sprint, LCI/Qwest, etc. In some cases, the OTHER
carriers are giving me services/rates/plans which are FAR BETTER than what
AT&T gives!

It certainly seems that since 1991 or 1992, AT&T has REALLY gone DOWNhill
in its provision of service to its customers. I could go on about all of
the STUPID things they have started in the 1990's, but you can read about
them in previous Digest submisssions, from the Archives. Even though AT&T
_HAS_ started up with some decent discount plans here and there, some of
their ATTITUDES towards their customers and REAL long-distance telephone
service just repulse me. They are _NOT_ the same AT&T even in the first
five or six years after the 1984 divestiture.

Is AT&T trying to chase away their loyal customers? I know that ALL of the
long distance carriers are guilty of one thing or another... including
chasing away loyal and dedicated long-time EMPLOYEES who KNOW what the
Bell System's dedication of service to the customer was for about 100
years. It is really ironic that AT&T has since ABANDONED this ethic of
service, when for the first several years in the post-divestiture period,
their commercials and advertizements in the later 1980's boasted about
their PROUD heritage of quality telephone/customer service.

For the past serveral months this year, and even MORE so now, I'm making
FEWER calls over the AT&T network, and FAR more calls over Sprint and
LCI/Qwest using the accounts I have with them on other lines or card
numbers. AT&T has REALLY become a double-ZERO, as far as I am concerned.

Yes, Pat, it has been some time since I've posted to the Digest. I've
just become burned-out and dis-illusioned by what I've been seeing
going on in the telephone industry over the past year or so! :-(


mjc


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Burned out and dis-illusioned? No kidding!
Nothing is the same any longer is it? I will quote the title of a book
by Thomas Wolfe: "You Can't Go Home Again" ... Ma Bell doesn't live
there any longer.  PAT]  

------------------------------

From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca>
Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 08:22:57 -0800
Subject: Book Review: "Windows NT Domain Architecture", Gregg Branham
Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca


BKWNTDMA.RVW   990411

"Windows NT Domain Architecture", Gregg Branham, 1999, 1-57870-112-0,
U$39.95/C$57.95
%A   Gregg Branham www.altusnet.com info@altusnet.com
%C   201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN   46290
%D   1999
%G   1-57870-112-0
%I   Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP)
%O   U$39.95/C$57.95 800-858-7674 http://www.mcp.com info@mcp.com
%P   298 p.
%T   "Windows NT Domain Architecture"

Most NT books will show you the dialogue boxes that are used to set up
domains.  Some may even tell you, in simplistic terms, what a domain
is, and these generally also mention trust relationships.  A domain
architecture, however, is a complicated beast, and worthy of
substantially more discussion.  Which Branham intends to provide.

Chapter one outlines the workgroup and domain models for Microsoft
networking, with particular emphasis on the security complications of
workgroups.  Domain controllers and some of the mechanisms for
authentication are reviewed in chapter two.  The SAM (Security
Accounts Manager) is covered in chapter three, in some detail. 
Chapter four describes basic trust relationships, but could benefit
from some discussion of more complicated examples.  Various domain
models are presented in chapter five, but, again, the deliberation
could be extended, particularly where more complex security relations
are involved.  Good, solid information about domain structures and
realities helps with domain planning in chapter six.  Domain
reconfiguration, in chapter seven, points out some of the possible
traps to avoid.  

Chapter eight not only provides reliable information about domain
security, but also takes care to expose some of the more prevalent
security myths surrounding NT.  User and groups relations with domains
and trust relationships is dealt with quite thoroughly in chapter
nine.  Scripts, policies, and profiles are handled well enough in
chapter ten that NT administrators might find it worth investing in
the book even without needing to design domains.  Chapter eleven's
coverage of resource permissions is good, but perhaps should
concentrate more on the effect of trust relationships in the complex
mix of permissions and rights.  The function and operation of the
NETBIOS server resource browser is discussed in chapter twelve.  DHCP
(Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol), WINS (Windows Internet Naming
Service), and DNS (Domain Name Service) operation is covered well in
chapter thirteen, but usage and setup could stand some additional
material.  Appendices cover issues that can have an impact on domain
design, such as performance of individual machines for load balancing
to eliminate bottlenecks.

The material is very well supported with frequent citation to the
relevant Microsoft Knowledge Base articles.  In addition, while
Branham does not go to great pains to point out design problems with
NT, he does not gloss over them, either.  There are numerous points
raised about the differences between NT and the coming 2000 version.

In large measure, Branham succeeds in presenting information that is
covered poorly, if at all, in most NT texts.  There is a great deal of
technical detail that will be useful both in tuning a network and in
diagnosing trouble.  Some work should still be enhanced in the realm
between the broad concepts and the internals level specifics.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999   BKWNTDMA.RVW   990411

======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade@vcn.bc.ca  rslade@sprint.ca  slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com
Just because you are into control doesn't mean you are in control
                                        - Larry Wall
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev    or    http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade

------------------------------

From: rh120@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Subject: Cone of Silence About ICANN Engulfs IETF, IANA, etc?
Date: 22 May 1999 18:03:09 GMT
Organization: Columbia University
Reply-To: rh120@watsun.cc.columbia.edu


Thought folks reading TELECOM Digest would find the following article
by John Horvath in TELEPOLIS of interest. Ronda

                                 ----------

   Cone of Silence
   ICANN or Internet Democracy is Failing
 
    by John Horvath
 
        URL: http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/2837/1.html
 
   an excerpt follows:
 
        "...There's a battle being waged behind the scenes that many
   of us don't know about - even those whose lives have now become
   dependent on computer mediated communication systems like the
   Internet. The process to hand over government control of the
   Internet to a private body - a process which was formulated
   last summer and initiated toward the end of that same year
   - has been rife with problems that various sides are continually
   struggling to deal with.
 
   While many people who use the Internet will have heard about this
   process and the organisation involved -  ICANN , to which the whole
   process has become synonymous - the truth of the matter is that for
   the vast majority it is something relatively unknown. Indeed, there's
   been a "cone of silence" over the issue, and for those involved that's
   just the way they like it.
 
   In order to try and break this cone of silence and to better
   understand what is really at stake, what will be looked at is the
   origin and evolution of the process and the organisation it has
   created, ICANN. Its first moves and the corresponding negative
   reaction that gave the whole process a stillborn start will be
   examined, along with ways in which attempts have been made to rescue
   the process. This will be followed by a more in-depth look at those
   for and against ICANN and the process, along with some observations as
   to how and why the silent complicity that surrounds the issue exists.
 
   In the end, it will be shown how the issue is not just one involving
   the transformation of the Internet from a government body to a private
   one, but strikes at the very heart of democracy in the digital age. It
   also affects the emergence of a new form of civic discourse, one that
   transcends the limits of physical space. In fact, it's something which
   will profoundly change our lives, and unless more attention is paid to
   what is actually going on behind the scenes, a future will be built
   for us that will run counter to many of our hopes and expectations."
 
   (see URL for rest of article)
  
   Also there is an ICANN meeting in Berlin scheduled for
   May 25-27.
 
 
                  The Amateur Computerist
                  Vol. 9 No. 1 Winter 1998-1999
25 Year Anniversary of TCP/IP         DNS: Short History Short Future
The Internet: Public or Private       Role of Govt in Internet
    write for free copy rh120@columbia.edu or ronda@panix.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 23:25:41 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Court Strikes Down Fee Cuts Applied To Bells


http://news.lycos.com/stories/business/19990521rtbusiness-telecom-court.asp 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. Appeals Court Friday struck down a key 
regulation that annually reduces the billions of dollars long distance 
companies must pay local phone companies for completing their calls. 

The Federal Communications Commission in 1997 decided that the $20 
billion or so of fees paid primarily to the regional Bell companies and 
GTE Corp. by long distance companies should decline by 6.5 percent per 
year. 

Friday's decision threw into question over $1 billion of expected fee 
reductions scheduled for July 1, but the court said it might be willing 
to temporarily set aside its ruling while the FCC reconsidered the rate, 
known as the X-factor. 

FCC officials were still studying the decision Friday but planned to ask 
for a temporary stay 'promptly,' a spokeswoman said. 

The 6.5 percent figure is intended to reflect increased productivity at 
the local carriers but the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
said the agency had not provided an adequate explanation of how it 
reached the 6.5 percent rate. 

The FCC 'failed to state a coherent theory supporting its choice,' the 
court wrote. 

Long distance carriers like AT&T Corp. and MCI WorldCom Inc. are already 
paying billions of dollars less in so-called access charges due to the 
FCC-ordered reductions. Local phone carriers say each one-tenth of one 
percent reduction equals about $23 million in cuts. 

Access charges, which are added to each minute of a long distance call, 
are higher than the actual cost to the local carriers of connecting and 
completing calls. But there is little agreement over how much and how 
fast the charges should be reduced. 

Local carriers argue amounts above cost are used to subsidize phone 
service, keeping monthly charges affordable in rural and low income 
areas for example. 

Mike Glover, assistant general counsel at Bell Atlantic Corp. said the 
local carriers, 'have always believed that the FCC decision overstated 
the amount of the annual reductions that can be justified.' 

Long distance carriers maintain the extra fees simply pad the profits
of the local carriers.

"Nothing in today's decision even remotely suggests that the local 
companies' access charges are justifiable," said AT&T general counsel 
Jim Cicconi. "In fact, the record in the FCC's current access reform 
proceedings confirms that the productivity factor should be much higher, 
and access reductions substantially greater than would otherwise 
occur." 

Industry analyst George Reed-Dellinger of HSBC Washington Analysis said 
the FCC had never provided an adequate rationale for raising the 
X-factor to 6.5 percent in 1997. 

"The best I could say is that it was ambitious -- the worst that it was 
illegal," said Reed-Dellinger. "At first blush, I don't think the Bell 
companies get money back but at the margin there is reduced pressure for 
them to reduce rates in the future."

------------------------------

From: mobassharahmed@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Prices for 5ESS & Alcatel SDH ADM
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 07:15:34 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.


I need to do a report and I need some rough prices.  Please can
someone give me rough or incicative prices for Alcatel SDH ADM (Add
Drop Mux) and a 2400 Line (80 E1 trunks) Lucent 5ESS CDX.

I need this before Monday so any rough estimates would suffice.

Please send copy to e-mail as I may miss this in the NG.


Rgds.

------------------------------

From: Kurt Bewersdorf <kbewersdorf@datapakservices.com>
Subject: PBX and MP3 - Help
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 10:07:48 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services


I have announcements recorded for my PBX, sitting on my PC in MP3
format.  Can anyone suggest a way to get them onto my PBX.  I was
thinking that there is probably a piece of equipment out there that
will allow me to do this.  What I'm looking for is suggestions ... If
there is a piece of equipment that can do this, I would need for it to
have an audio jack (that can be plugged into the audio out on my
computer) as well as a jack that a telephone handset could be plugged
into.  Anyone seen anything like this?


Kurt

------------------------------

From: Scott Prugh <sprugh@telution.com>
Subject: Using V&H to Calculate Distance
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 19:28:20 -0500
Organization: EnterAct L.L.C. Turbo-Elite News Server


I found the following in TELECOM Digest:

Within North America, rate distance is calculated using the "V&H" system.
V stands for "vertical" (north-south position) and H for "horizontal"
(east-west position). Each exchange is represented by a location expressed
as a V&H co-ordinate. A rate distance can be calculated from two V&H
co-ordinate sets based on Pythagorean Theorem, i.e. rate distance =
sqrt((V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2)/10 where (V1,H1) is the V&H for one end of a
call, and (V2,H2) represents the other end of a call.


Seems pretty easy.  So I pulled out my LERG and took the switch coordinates
for two switches:

SW1 = 'PSWYNJPIDS5'          (v1,h1) = (5080,1444)  -- PISCATAWAY
SW2 = 'ACMEWAXARS1'       (v2,h2) = (6102,8901) -- SEATTLE

And plugged away:

rd = sqrt( (5080-6102)^2 + (1444-8901)^2 )/10
rd = sqrt( -1022^2 + -7457^2)/10
rd = sqrt( 1044484 + 55606849)/10
rd = sqrt( 56651333)/10
rd = 7526/10
rd = 752

This is obviously wrong, since Seattle is more that 752 miles from
Piscataway.

What's wrong here?  Is the formula I have dated?


Regards,

Scott


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is not a matter of the formula being
'dated', since mathematical truths remain true regardless of when they
are pronounced. Two plus two has always equalled four. And I do not
really the earth has expanded *that much* if at all since the above
formula was given. Perhaps some readers can look it over and examine
your work to detirmine what went wrong.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Harold Hallikainen <harold@hallikainen.com>
Organization: Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.
Subject: FCC Rules Online
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 20:06:42 -0700


Some readers here might be interested in my FCC Rules web site at
http://hallikainen.com/FccRules .  There you'll find the complete FCC
rules in hypertext format.  Every time a rule mentions another rule,
there's a link to the other rule.  At the end of each rule is a
history of the rule from the Federal Register.  Many of these FR cites
have links to the Federal Register article (though I have to add these
links by hand, so it's a bit slow going).  The Federal Register will
then cite an NPRM or Report and Order from the FCC.  There are then
links to these documents at the FCC (though, again, these links are
added by hand, so it takes time...).  Finally, also at the bottom of
each rule are links to view the rule in previous years, to search the
Federal Register for cites of the rule, and to search the FCC's web
site for cites of the rule.

    For an example of something where the FR and FCC cite links are all
in place, try looking at 73.1400.

    I hope readers find the pages useful.  Meanwhile, I'll be back to
read more of comp.dcom.telecom!


Harold

------------------------------

From: William F. Gilreath <william.gilreath@usm.edu>
Subject: CFP: Computer Research for Wireless Systems and Mobile Computing
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 21:51:48 -0500
Organization: AMC Internet


Call for Papers
Special Issue of International Journal for Computer Research on
Wireless Systems and Mobile Computing

Due to the rapidly expanding technology of wireless and mobile
communications, mobile users with portable computers should be capable of
accessing information anywhere and at anytime. This new communication
style will significantly affect the distributed computing environments.
In this special issue, we focus on all aspects of wireless systems that
support mobile computing. In particular, all aspects of distributed
computing with mobile communication capability. This will include the
following general themes, but are not limited to:

 Mobile communication network architecture
 Mobile network management
 Mobile applications Local and Global)
 Performance modeling of mobile computing systems
 Design and analysis of mobile computing algorithms
 Fault-tolerance for mobile computing
 Adaptive mobile communication protocols
 Distributed databases for mobile computing
 Energy efficient hardware/software designs
 Wireless and Location Dependent Information Systems
 Security and authentication
 Systems and services
 Internetworking standards

Authors are invited to submit postscript files (no more than 35
double-spaced pages) to {guizanim@umkc.edu} according to the following
timetable.

Submission Deadline   January 31, 2000
Acceptance Notice   June 30, 2000
Publication Date   November 2000

Mohsen Guizani
Electrical & Computer Engineering
University of Missouri-Columbia
5605 Troost Avenue
Kansas City, MO 64110-2823, USA.
Tel: (816) 235-1550
Fax: (816) 235-1260
guizanim@umkc.edu

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #92
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sat May 22 22:37:09 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA06595;
	Sat, 22 May 1999 22:37:09 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 22:37:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905230237.WAA06595@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #93

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 22 May 99 22:37:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 93

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (Monty Solomon)
    Australian Number Portability (David Clayton)
    Smartjack and CSU (Kevin Lundy)
    Re: Strange Problem (Bill Levant)
    Re: Strange Problem [too?] (R R M Tweek)
    Re: Airtouch in NYC? (Jason A. Lindquist)
    Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability (John S. Maddaus)
    Re: Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Career in Telecommunications (Casey Mak)
    The Web Page You Have Reached is BACK! (Jennifer Martino)
    Seeking Telephone Answering Software and Hardware (jgy2001@email.com)
    Re: NPA-NXX & Cities (Mike Fox)
    Re: Bell Atlantic Holders Approve $80.9 Billion Purchase GTE (B. Margolin)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 22 May 1999 15:58:09 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan


http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9905204videocell
(Online News, 05/20/99 11:50 AM)
By Michael Drexler

TOKYO -- The world got its first glimpse at what could be the future
of mobile telephony this week when Japanese component vendor Kyocera
Corp.  unveiled the first cellular phone able to transmit a caller's
picture and voice simultaneously.

The 165-g (5.8-oz.) VisualPhone uses 32K-bit/sec. analog technology to
transmit two color images per second through a camera mounted on the
top of the handset. The recipient can view the caller via a 2-inch
active-matrix LCD.

A Kyocera spokesman said that the VisualPhone will retail for around
40,000 yen ($322) and that the company expects to sell 50,000 units in
the first year following its release. The phone will ship in Japan
from the end of July, Kyocera said. The device is currently being
shown at Business Show '99 Tokyo, which began here Tuesday and will
end tomorrow.

The Kyocera phone is a primitive example of what in coming years could
be a flood of phones that handle multiple data types, including voice
and video. Both handset makers and mobile service providers are
preparing for the debut in coming years of third-generation (3G)
mobile phones, which will be able to receive high-capacity wideband
services and high data-rate transmissions.

One of the contenders for the 3G cellular crown is Wideband Code
Division Multiple Access (W-CDMA) technology, which is being
championed by the mobile unit of Japanese telecom carrier Nippon
Telegraph & Telephone Corp. (NTT).

Though standards bodies won't decide on a 3G standard until November,
W-CDMA received a boost in March when two cellular giants,
L.M. Ericsson Telephone Co. in Sweden and Qualcomm Inc. in the U.S.,
decided to harmonize their efforts in pursuing the next generation of
mobile technology.

Japanese vendor NEC Corp. has developed a number of component
technologies for video phones, but a spokesman said today the company
will hold off on a product of its own until W-CDMA debuts.

"The market has not really developed yet for video phones, and NEC
won't produce a handset until 2001 when NTT launches W-CDMA," said
Yasuhito Jochi, a spokesman for NEC.

Jochi explained that current cellular technology data speeds are too 
slow to warrant consumers embracing video phones, perhaps the main 
reason why major telecom vendors have yet to jump on the video phone 
bandwagon. 

Kyocera's video cell phone uses a mini-cellular technology found only
in Japan, called personal handyphone (PHS). The transmission
technology sends data at 32K bit/sec., making for jerky video
images. W-CDMA, on the other hand, will be able to send 380K bit/sec.,
or more than 10 frames per second, creating smoother video, according
to NEC's Jochi.

To use the video capabilities of Kyocera's VisualPhone, the caller must 
look into the camera by holding the handset in front of his or her face. 
The phone is equipped with an extra speaker to make the voice of the 
person to whom the caller is talking loud enough to be heard from a 
maximum of 40 cm (about 16 inches) away, the company said. 

The phone measures 5.4 cm by 14 cm by 2.9 cm (2.1 x 5.5 x 1.1 inches) 
and is powered for approximately 60 minutes by a lithium ion battery. 

Other vendors have been dabbling in video phones, but Kyocera's 
VisualPhone is the most comprehensive product to date. 

The initial reaction to Kyocera's video cell phone from some attendees 
at the Business Show in Tokyo this week was negative. Critics said that 
the device was too big, too heavy, and not stylish enough to have much 
impact on the fickle Japanese cellular market, according to Toshiaki 
Iba, a senior analyst at Tokyo-Mitsubishi Securities Co. 

"Kyocera's phone is a kind of beta version," said Iba. "Still, it is a 
first." 

PHS carrier DDI Pocket will market the phones in Japan. Kyocera doesn't 
currently have plans to market the phones overseas, according to a 
Kyocera spokesman. 

(Rob Guth in Tokyo contributed to this story.) 

------------------------------

From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton)
Subject: Australian Number Portability
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 10:04:26 GMT
Organization: Customer of Connect.com.au Pty. Ltd.
Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au


Westel secures intelligent deal 
By Helen Meredith 

The telecommunications community has made a surprise move aimed at
ending uncertainty over the introduction of number portability, with
prime industry body, the Australian Telecommunications Users' Group
(ATUG), yesterday announcing it had entered into a commercial
agreement that would deliver portability across the entire market.

ATUG members said both users and new carriers were fed up with the
tactics of the incumbent carriers and the slow pace of decision making
in government agencies in delivering this key element of a competitive
marketplace.

The ATUG has entered into a commercial agreement with the Perth-based
Westel Group, to build an independent advanced intelligent network
(IN) and database that can be accessed by any of the service providers
to enable them to offer their customers number portability.

The managing director of ATUG, Mr Allan Horsley, said the decision to
work with Westel was borne out of intense frustration at the delays in
delivering number portability during the past 18 months or so.

"This is a commercially driven proposal to offer number portability.
It will comply with all codes related to key issues such as security,
and will offer the underlying data that enables all carriers to
participate in an industry-wide number portability," Mr Horsley said.

Westel chairman, Mr Lindsay Fischer, said: "We have been working on a
complex number portability solution for more than two years. This has
resulted in our licensing relevant software from US company
Reprotech."

Reprotech is a shareholder in Westel subsidiary, Concentrix, which
will be the entity charged with delivering IN services and number
portability.

The CEO of the yet-to-be-named unit, Mr Graham Bickley, said: "The
intelligent network services will be available to all those service
providers who do not have them, enabling them to offer portability."

He said the service would span geographic location, service providers,
mobile service and non-geographic numbers such as those with the
prefixes 1800, 13 and 1300.

The announcement caused significant activity in Westel stock
yesterday, although analysts said the real impact would come as the
implications of the agreement were better understood.

Industry watchers say the move would be unlikely to please Telstra,
which has used a call-forwarding arrangement with C&W Optus to deliver
portability, but is now in dispute with them over the arrangement.

Telstra group manager, industry regulation, Mr Peter Darling, said the
carrier would be seeking clarification of yesterday's move, adding:
"We believe that the existing industry self-regulation code is
effective in proceeding towards number portability."

One.Tel spokesperson, Ms Sandy Slessor, welcomed the move, saying:
"When we open the doors to our national GSM network in early 2000, we
want to be able to offer our customers number portability. At present
consumers are being held to ransom because their business is tied to a
number, tied to a carrier. That is not competition."

Westel said the new system would provide access to all the customer
databases of the carriers and would involve co-location of equipment
in their switches.

"We will do all the switching and `click the ticket'," Westel CEO, Mr
Peter Farrah, said.

System trials would be completed by the end of the year and rollout
carried out progressively from early 2000 on.

Professor Reg Coutts, director of the Centre for Telecommunications
Information Networking (CTIN), said: "Industry groups have been
looking to accelerate this process. But the incumbents are in no hurry
to move." 


David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag
you down to their level then beat you with experience.

------------------------------

From: Kevin Lundy <klundy@home.comnospam>
Subject: Smartjack and CSU
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 22:22:38 GMT
Organization: @Home Network


Is there any recommended maximum distance from the smartjack to the
CSU?  I have a new T1 voice service that is giving me hell.  It's an
intermittent problem - slips, dropped calles, static, etc.

Every time we have a problem, the techs can loop up the smart jack and
stress test error free.  They loop the CSU, and they see errors.  So
we replace the CSU, and problem is still there.  This much is
repeatable.  Which to me indicates a problem of some sort with the
cable between the CSU and smartjack.  A grounding problem, a distance
problem, a flakey termination, etc.  But then the techs come on site
and put a test pack on the cable at my CSU and it tests fine.

Any thoughts of wisdom out there?


Thanks!

------------------------------

From: Wlevant@aol.com (Bill Levant)
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 18:32:47 EDT
Subject: Re: Strange Problem


> I recently switched to a new internet connection number which
> Ameritech described to me as being a 5 cent untimed call within zero
> miles of my house.  The funny business began when Sprint began picking
> up this local call, attempting to charge me local long distance!  I'm
> outraged by the telco rep who says that these are legitimate charges
> and that I must have this computer set up wrong.  Would someone
> explain what is going on and how to go about resolving this issue?

  This happened to me about a month ago, but it was Hell Atlantic, not 
Ameriwreck that did it. 

  Almost certainly, the problem is with Ameritech, not Sprint, because
the call should never GET to Sprint.  Once Sprint gets it, though, the
only thing they know how to do is route it (and charge for it as local
toll).

   Almost certainly, your ISP buys local telephone service from a
CLEC, not from Ameritech; the Bells seem to have trouble figuring how
to route calls to the other guys.

  The Ameritech switch that serves your home has an error in its
"translations" for the first three (or if you're dialing 10 digits,
the first six) digits of the ISP's number, causing a local call to be
routed as local-toll.

If you can talk to someone in "translations" (which the business
office probably won't let you do) it's a ten-second fix.  Call the
business office, ask for a supervisor, and keep going up the chain
until you get someone who understands that IT DOESN'T MATTER (AND THE
SWITCH CAN'T TELL) WHETHER YOU OR YOUR COMPUTER DIALS, A LOCAL CALL IS
A LOCAL CALL IS A LOCAL CALL.  PERIOD.

Once I got to that person, it took about 24 hours for them to call me
back and tell me it was fixed.  And it was, too.

Ameritech should reverse the erroneous toll charges (which are their
fault anyway).

I couldn't get Bell Atlantic to do that, because Worldcom (my IXC)
doesn't bill through Bell; BA instead gave me a credit, making it all
come out the same in the end.

  Note : If you have permissive 10-digit dialing, make sure Ameritech
checks BOTH the 7-digit and 10-digit translations; in my case, the
problem only occurred with 10-digit dialing !

Hope this helps.


Bill

------------------------------

From: tweek@netcom.com (R R M Tweek)
Subject: Re: Strange Problem  [too?]
Organization: http://www.io.com/~tweek/cocowhine/index.html
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 14:36:46 GMT


Re: "Local "Long Distance""

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This very same thing, identical, came
> up here a couple weeks ago, when our correspondent was able to event-
> ually prove that the 'competing' telco in his community had gotten the
> tables mixed up in their switch. Perhaps you guys could exchange notes
> and find someone at Ameritech who is able to get it corrected with
> Sprint.  PAT

Perhaps someone in the SFBAY PacBell service area can tell me if I'm 
crazy or not, but I may have experienced something similar last night.

The PacBell service area I am in runs along the coast from Santa Cruz,
north to the Oregon border (or nearly ...  definately encompasing the
two areas involved with my experienced problem.)

I have PacBell service for my dial tone, the original service which
was in place at the time of the divestiture.  About a month ago, fed
up with AT&T's desire to bill for not using them, I dropped any and
all long distance PIC on my lines.

Last night, I had a need to call someone on a cellphone in the 408
area code.  I got the "a long distance company is required for this
call" intercept.  I was calling from (925) to (408).  From the same
(925) number, I was able to complete a call to a (408) landline, but
to the (408) cellphone number I received the intercept.  The entire
(408) area is within the same service area (unlike the further south
(831) which is split between two service areas).

The person on the cellphone was IN San Jose, and not roaming in some
other service area.  

Am I missing something here, that in order to call through to a cell
provider one needs to go via long distance lines, or might the routing
tables here be messed up as well?


Michael Maxfield
tweek@netcom.com

BTW, dialing the cellphone via 1010811, I did get a busy signal, which is
understandable because the instant I hung up the person with the cellphone
rang my line.


tweek@netcom.com    tweek@io.com   | See the web site which Doctor Laura is
DoD #MCMLX       tweek@ccnet.com   | bitching so much about.  Go Ask Alice.
sigtst@tweekco.ness.com            |   http://www.goaskalice.columbia.edu

------------------------------

From: jlindqui@enterprise.uiuc.edu (Jason A. Lindquist)
Subject: Re: Airtouch in NYC?
Date: 22 May 1999 02:47:11 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


James Gifford <gifford@nitrosyncretic.com> writes:

> Then I discovered
> in NYC that the phone wouldn't work (I got a Hell Atlantic operator).

> I was told by Airtouch that they don't provide service in NYC because of
> the massive level of cloning-- even their digital plans don't work there
> because they don't have digital service, so the fallback to analog
> enables the cloners to work.

Bell Atlantic certainly does have CDMA digital service in New York.
There's no technical reason why an Airtouch digital phone would not
work there.

Well, either that, or they like throwing away money on all the
BAM-labeled handsets I see rolling out of Qualcomm's factory,
bound for Broadway ...


Jason Lindquist  <*>     "Mostly though, I think it gave us hope, 
linky@see.figure1.net     That there can always be a new beginning.
KB9LCL                    Even for people like us."
                            -- Gen. Susan Ivanova, B5, "Sleeping In Light"

------------------------------

From: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net (John S. Maddaus)
Subject: Re: New Billing Charge: Local Number Portability
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 14:27:56 GMT
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Reply-To: jmaddaus@NO_SPAM.usa.net


rfc1394a@aol.com (Paul Robinson) wrote:

> oldbear@arctos.com (Will Roberts) writes black@csulb.NOSMAP.edu
> (Matthew Black) writes:

>>> GTE California has started billing this residential customer $0.38 for
>>> local number portability.  I never requested any such service and am
>>> curious if this is some new universal fee.

>> Local Number Portability (LNP) is the FCC-mandated ability to keep 
>> your same telephone number even if you switch Local Exchange 
>> Carriers.  The idea is that no one would leave the incumbent RBOC if 
>> they had to change to a new phone number. I'd guess that this charge 
>> is a result of GTE attempting to recover the cost of providing LNP.  I'd 
>> be curious if this is an across-the-board charge on all customers or 
>> something related to your having taken your phone number to a 
>> different local telco.

It is across the board.  In NH (which originally was NOT going to be a
LNP area )  I had called the local PUC to inquire whether or not we
would be forced to subsidize Bell Atlantic's roll out of LNP in the
Boston Metro Area.  Needless to say, the PUC and BA have had their ups
and downs in the state and NH had set a precedent by suing PSNH
relating to Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant overcharges to customers (in
fact they opened up the electric market, we are or were served by
Canadian, San Fran electric companies).  However, even the PUC
admitted that we would likely see an across the board increase.  

At one point a PUC type asked me why the state should prevent such a
charge simply because I chose not to use a feature available to me?
Talk about clueless.  I reminded him that we are still one area code
for the state, no CLEC competition to date, and wasn't the normal
attitude to pay only for services received?  No answer.

However, since that conversation, I have seen the announcement that NH
will receive the benefits of LNP so something has changed.  Perhaps
enough people who didn't want the service chose to make enough waves
that BA promised to implement it (they didn't say when) just to help
recover costs for other areas and avoid a problem.  Promises come
cheap.  In any case, it's hollow as far as I'm concerned.  I have
serious doubts that the DMS-10 in my town and old old New England
Tel/Nynex infrastructure in NH will support LNP.  BA says they have no
plans to upgrade equipment.  I doubt very seriously that many of the
COs are SS7 networked.

When I worked for GTE, I was amazed to learn that over 50% of our COs
were not SS7 capable and there were no immediate plans to roll out
newer equipment even in markets where LNP was mandated (and there were
some that overlapped in Ameritech territory that could not support
LNP).  With the two merging, we fit GTE's rural mode perfectly and
don't expect anything to change, except for customer service going
from second to last to last place.  I too will give BA the boot once a
credible CLEC with their own equipment starts to play.  No 56K
capability, limited CID, tired of hearing that features are not
available in my area (a bedroom community to NH's largest city).
BAH!


John S. Maddaus
Merlin Communication Systems
jmaddaus@usa.net

------------------------------

From: nospam.tonypo1@nospam.home.com (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: Re: Facilities-Based Local Exchange Competition
Organization: Providence Network Partners
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 22:05:09 GMT


In article <telecom19.81.7@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor
noted:

> My point all along with both local and long distance competition has
> been that the competitors should have been required to make the same
> capital outlay on outside plant which AT&T had to make. They should
> have been required to devote the same amount of resources to research
> as AT&T put into Bell Laboratories. If I had been the judge, I would
> have instructed the competitors to build their network, solicit
> subscribers, etc and that the only thing I would do is order the Bell
> System to treat the newcomers at 'arms length'; to provide a supply
> of telephone numbers in a fair way. And when the new competitor was
> ready to interconnect, I would order Bell to open its front door and
> hand a bunch of wires out saying, 'here are your pairs ...'. If the
> competitors were so afraid of Bell being unfair, as the judge I
> would have ordered that Bell only had the right to make one demand,
> that being that competitor met technical standards, numbering plan
> requirements, things like that. 

The problem with making them meet certain technical standards is that 
Western Electric was at the time, the largest manufacturer of switching 
gear. Sort of like the hold Microsoft has on the desktop/laptop arena. 

The sad part of all this is now we're trying to standardize all the 
interconnections, making it possible for any company to make a piece of 
telecom gear that's compatible with every other piece of gear. It'd be a 
perfect world were this truly the case but we're moving towards it faster 
and faster. 

> Do you realize that in the fifteen plus years since divestiture that
> have passed, had any of the competitors seriously begun construction
> of their own network, outside plant, etc they could have had it done
> by now?  *Then* we would see honest competition, and if, after all
> that effort the competitors could sell it for less, let it happen.  PAT] 

There is one company that comes immediately to mind when you say this. 
Brooks Fiber installed a switch in downtown Providence, Rhode Island. 
Then they strung a humungous fiber loop around most of the city. At my 
office I'm two blocks from the loop so they had to draw in a Bell 
Atlantic fiber to connect back to their switch. They pay Bell Atlantic 
for those facilities but they also have their own outside plant vis a vie 
the fiber.  

Then there's Cox Communications. Granted, they're pretty much the 
monopoly cable company here in Rhode Island but they've got 
infrastructure in place to offer cable, digital cable, internet access 
and in a month or two phone service with power provided by THEIR system. 


== Tony Pelliccio, KD1S formerly KD1NR
== Trustee WE1RD

------------------------------

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com>
Subject: Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List?
Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 20:43:49 GMT


In article <telecom19.90.5@telecom-digest.org>, John R. Levine
<johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

> In article <telecom19.89.8@telecom-digest.org> was written:

>> Is there a list of 10-10- numbers in use and the companies that "own"
>> them on the net?

> This page has the definitive list:
>
> http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/carrier_id_codes.html

> It has about 1,860 defined numbers along with the owning carrier,
> contact person, and the contact's phone number.  Keep in mind that
> many IXCs don't want dial-around customers, and either reject call
> attempts from non-customers or charge a price intended to make you not
> want to come back.

What I've been wondering is if anyone has compiled pricing details for the
10-10 codes, so that consumers can compare them easily to find the ones
that best match their calling patterns.


Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 00:14:10 EST
From: Casey.Mak@wirechf.xg.com (Casey Mak)
Subject: Re: Career in Telecommunications
Organization: Chapter 91 - Telephone Pioneers of America


Hi Kendall,

I work at the a telco in Canada and what the editor has suggested is
certainly a good start.  If you can get a job at the repair service
bureau, or as a service representative in the Business Office, you
will certainly learn a lot about a telco's operations.  The
University of Colorado has an excellent telcom technology program.

I understand that it's the only university in North America that
offers a Masters degree in telecommunications.  You might want to look
at the programs offered by the U of Colora do (in Denver, I believe?)
since you live there.  People have told me that telco networking
people don't know a whole lot about internetworking WANS and LANS.
Generally, telcos, being carriers, know about WANS, but have limited
knowledge of LANS -- computer people are generally more knowle2dgeable
on LANS.  So if I were to take courses, internetworking LANS and
WANS might be a good place to start.  Certainly working at a telco and
taking courses would allow you to gain some working experience that
has practical relevance to the theory you learn in school.  You can
also ask if the colleges in Colorado have any hands-on courses.
Kendall, I hope this helps.  Best of luck.


Casey

------------------------------

From: Jennifer Martino <jmartino@cotse.com>
Subject: The Web Page You Have Reached is BACK!
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 23:34:55 -0500
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises


The Web Page You Have Reached
http://www.cotse.com/twpyhr/
Over 150 telephone sounds/recordings!

The Church of the Swimming Elephant
http://www.cotse.com
pheer the swimming elephant

------------------------------

From: 777jy <jgy2001@email.com>
Subject: Seeking Telephone Answering software and hardware
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 09:50:31 -0700
Organization: No Spam Please
Reply-To: 777jy <jgy2001@email.com>


Dear Friends,

I am seeking to design and build a telephone answering systems.

Hardware:

Can you recommend any PC telephone answering cards?  How does
telephone cards integrated with sound card to play greetings and
record incoming messages and recognize DTMF key in reply from caller?

Software:

Can you recommend how to write our own Microsoft Windows based
telephone answering software with caller ID and DTMF key in reply from
callers?

Thank you very much for your suggestion. 


John

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 16:56:00 -0400
From: Mike Fox <mikefox@ibm.net>
Organization: not organized!
Subject: Re: NPA-NXX & Cities


I have DeLorme's Street Altas Six, which is a mapping program that costs
about $50, and among its many features is the database you are looking
for.


Mike

Clay Koontz wrote:

> Hi,

> I am a small business in telecommunications and I need information on
> the Area Code and prefixes ... NPA - NXX data with Rate Centers (Cities).
> Can you supply this data?  If not were can I get it?  All I need is
> N. Carolina's data.


"We're not against ideas.  We're against people spreading them."
(General Augusto Pinochet of Chile)

------------------------------

From: Barry Margolin <barmar@bbnplanet.com>
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Holders Approve $80.9 Billion Purchase of GTE
Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 21:18:54 GMT


In article <telecom19.91.5@telecom-digest.org>, Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> http://www.businesstoday.com/topstories/bell05191999.htm 
> Bloomberg 
> Wednesday, May 19, 1999

> Atlanta -- Bell Atlantic Corp. shareholders approved the No. 1 U.S. 
> local phone company's acquisition of GTE Corp. for $80.9 billion, 
> leaving one major approval needed to create the largest U.S. phone 
>company. 

To set the record straight, this is considered to be a merger of equals,
not an acquisition.  Bell Atlantic isn't much bigger than GTE: BEL has
about 140,000 employees, GTE 114,000; BEL's market capitalization is about
$85 billion, GTE's about $62 billion.  The board of directors of the new
company will have an equal number of directors designated by the two
original companies.

The only sense in which it might be considered an acquisition by BEL is
that shares of GTE stock will be converted to 1.22 shares of Bell Atlantic
stock; presumably it was considered easier to pick one company's stock to
retain, rather than creating a brand new entity and converting both
company's stock to it.  I believe the conversion rate was based on the
ratio of the two company's stock prices when the merger was announced, with
no premium or discount (the ratio of their closing prices today is 1.213).


Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #93
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sun May 23 00:38:04 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA11341;
	Sun, 23 May 1999 00:38:04 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 00:38:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905230438.AAA11341@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #94

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 23 May 99 00:38:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 94

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    6M Lawsuit Against Spammer - Has Merit! (Babu Mengelepouti)
    Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Eli Mantel)
    Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Monty Solomon)
    Telecom Update From IDG.net (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US/European Connectivity? (Chris Herot)
    Have Idea re Filtering Telemarketing Calls (Bug Hunter)
    Re: Internet Pioneers (Ed Hew)
    Re: DNA Dragnet (Mike Riddle)
    612/952/xxx Split (Dave Garland)
    Re: Strange Problem (Brian Vita)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 22 May 1999 15:51:13 -0700
From: Babu Mengelepouti <dialtone@vcn.bc.ca>
Reply-To: dialtone@vcn.bc.ca
Organization: US Secret Service
Subject: 6M Lawsuit Against Spammer - Has Merit!


 From the {Seattle Post-Intelligencer}

http://www.seattle-pi.com/local/spam20.shtml

Thought you might enjoy this!

:)
               Firm faces $6 million junk
               e-mail lawsuit 

               Fortune 500 business charged by state law

               Thursday, May 20, 1999

               By JANE HADLEY 
               SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER 
               CONSUMER AFFAIRS REPORTER 

               Another lawsuit has been filed under the state's
               anti-spam law, but this time it's not against a
               small-time operator.

               The target of the $6 million lawsuit is a Fortune
               500 company.

               CTX Mortgage, a wholly owned subsidiary of
               Dallas-based Centex, flooded a Mount Vernon
               Internet service provider with misleading junk
               e-mail, the lawsuit filed in Skagit County Superior
               Court alleges.

               The first few lawsuits filed under the state's new
               law banning fraudulent junk e-mail were filed
               against much smaller, sometimes elusive,
               operators.

               The extent of the alleged damage in this case also
               is significantly worse than in earlier cases, said
               Brady Johnson, Seattle attorney for Connect
               Northwest, a Mount Vernon-based Internet
               service provider.

               Johnson said CTX overwhelmed Connect
               Northwest's network by sending 5,800 unsolicited
               e-mail messages April 8 and 9 advertising home
               mortgages.

               Under the state's anti-spam law, it is illegal to send
               unsolicited commercial e-mail with misleading
               subject lines and with phony return addresses and
               false headers hiding the origin of the mail.

               The law provides a $1,000 penalty for each illegal
               e-mail sent through an Internet service provider's
               server. That adds up to $5.8 million if Connect
               Northwest can prove it received 5,800 illegal
               spams.

               The CTX spam was illegal in all respects, Johnson
               said. The subject line for the messages touting
               home mortgages said "a gift for you."

               CTX apparently used a computer program that
               generates likely e-mail addresses, Johnson said.
               Though some of the addresses are valid, many are
               not. For each bad address, Connect Northwest
               generated an automatic "message undeliverable"
               response back to the sender. But since the return
               address on the mortgage e-mail was phony, that
               message was also bounced, Johnson said.

               The rapidly escalating number of messages were
               eventually cut off by filters, but not before bringing
               down Connect Northwest's primary and backup
               mail servers and shutting down service to
               customers for a short time. If owner and system
               administrator Alex Free had not been present, the
               service disruption would have been much worse,
               Johnson said.

               CTX issued a statement yesterday saying it was
               investigating the incident. "What we have learned is
               that the e-mails in question represent an isolated
               incident involving an outside vendor," the company
               said.

               Johnson said CTX is trying to "distance itself" from
               its vendor, which sent the e-mail, but legally should
               not be let off the hook for the vendor's alleged
               misdeeds.

               Free called CTX Mortgage April 8 to notify them
               that their junk e-mail was causing problems for his
               system.

               "They didn't seem too concerned," Free said, in a
               prepared statement. CTX put him in touch with a
               company lawyer who said he didn't see any
               problem with their e-mail campaign, the statement
               said.

               But yesterday CTX, which refused to be
               interviewed, released its own response asserting:
               "CTX takes the anti-spamming laws seriously and
               immediately stopped the activity pending
               investigation of this matter. It is contrary to CTX's
               policy to make any type of inappropriate
               solicitation."

               Jim Kendall, president of Telebyte Northwest, a
               Silverdale-based Internet service provider, was
               excited at news of the suit.

               "Hallelujah," he said.

               "A lawsuit this major, this is a precedent setter," he
               said.

               Kendall said spam is a serious headache for
               Internet service providers, and the state's law is
               essential.

               "If we don't get control of (spam), we're in real
               danger of losing the Internet," Kendall said. "It's
               becoming an avalanche of garbage that's filling up
               our e-mail boxes and the e-mail pipe. Technical
               solutions will not cure the problem. It will only
               mitigate and slow it."

               Kendall estimated that even after Telebyte puts in
               place filters and technical fixes, about 10 percent
               to 20 percent of the e-mail that comes through
               Telebyte servers is spam.

               Assistant Attorney General Paula Selis, who has
               brought two lawsuits under the law and is close to
               bringing a third, said, "The law is doing what it's
               meant to do if it can be effectively used by private
               individuals or, in this case, by an Internet service
               provider to protect its own private network."

               Johnson brought the state's first suit under the law
               on behalf of four individuals last year. But the
               alleged spammer, a Los Angeles man, dropped out
               of sight, and Johnson never could serve him with
               the suit. Johnson said yesterday a private detective
               found the man and he will soon be served.

               None of the suits filed in state courts under the law
               has yet gone to trial. Johnson said he's been eager
               to resolve some of the questions about the law in
               court, and because CTX is a large company that
               will defend itself, some of those questions may start
               to be cleared up.

               One aspect of the law alleged spammers are
               expected to question is how difficult it is for them
               to determine whether recipients of their e-mail
               messages are Washington residents.

               But Johnson said in this case, that shouldn't be an
               issue, because Connect Northwest states on its
               home page that all its subscribers are Washington
               residents.



               P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at
               206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattle-pi.com


                        ==========================

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is good news! Large companies in
particular need to have their feet held to the fire. Notice how when
this mortgage company and its attorney were first contacted what a
we-could-care-less attitude they had. Hopefully the litigation will
give them something to care about. I have a thing here I have been
meaning to send out and hopefully will get to it in a day or two. It
is a peice of spam I got from a guy selling his spamming services. He
quotes {USA Today} and a couple other major newspapers telling about
what a great deal unsolicited email is, because it is 'free' to the
sender.  PAT] 

------------------------------

From: Eli Mantel <mantel@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 21:44:10 GMT


> The e-mail helpfully suggested calling a representative in
> area code 767, which serves Dominica...

The creation of multiple area codes for the Caribbean has made it
difficult to distinguish them from U.S. and Canadian area codes, yet
the pricing is vastly different.  Rather than have the FTC pursue
individual perpetrators taking advantage of this confusion, it seems
like it would be highly preferable for the FCC to dictate the use of
the international dialing prefix and country code for calls to the
Caribbean.

Although the use of "01" and "011" as international dialing prefixes
in the U.S. makes this somewhat problematic, it would solve the
problem for good rather than requiring that everybody be paranoid
whenever they dial into an area code they don't immediately recognize.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:44:59 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Sex Sites Getting Screwed


http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/19777.html 

by Craig Bicknell 
3:00 a.m.  20.May.99.PDT

Since they first set up shop online, porn sites have had a problem with 
something they call the "gak factor." 

Husbands run up a credit-card bill at Soozee's Smut Shop, then go "gak" 
when their wives see the monthly statement. Most, of course, deny any 
knowledge of the nefarious charges. 

The wife then calls the bank that issued the card, reports the charge as 
bogus, and the bank cancels it. The adult-entertainment site is out the 
price of the subscription. Beyond that, it has to pay the bank a penalty 
fee for the so-called charge-back. 

"That's always been a big problem," said Seth Warshavsky, CEO of the 
Internet Entertainment Group, which operates adult-oriented Web sites. 

More and more merchants say that the problem of charge-backs from 
legitimate customers has spread beyond the realm of adult sites. 

"If the customer is savvy, all he has to do is say, 'fraudulent fee,' 
and the charge disappears," said the owner of an online job-classifieds 
site who asked not to be identified. "Towards the end of 1997, we 
started seeing these charge-backs. It started getting worse in 1998. In 
1999, it's gotten horrific." 

Calls for comments from Visa and Mastercard were not returned on 
Wednesday. 

Some experts say credit-card companies are so anxious to make consumers 
feel safe about shopping online that they've made it too easy to dispute 
charges. In many cases, if a customer disputes an online charge, the 
issuing bank will remove it with no questions asked. 

It's illegal to willfully dispute a legitimate charge, but some card 
holders do it with impunity. 

"It's a very significant issue for the card association, and a very 
significant issue for the Net," said Tom Arnold, chief technical officer 
for CyberSource, a company that makes fraud-detection software for 
online merchants. 

Arnold said that he hasn't noticed the increase in bogus disputes that 
some merchants claim. But many adult-site operators think that the rate 
is increasing and some blame themselves. 

Adult sites frequently offer a free week's membership that reverts to a 
paid membership if the surfer doesn't cancel after seven days. 

As a result, legions of surfers who didn't read the fine print have 
called to dispute the charges. In the process, they've found how easy it 
is to have a charge removed. 

"They're finding out, 'Hey, we've got a huge loophole here,'" said one 
adult-Web-site operator, who did not want to be identified. 

Over time, a sizeable population of savvy Web surfers have figured out 
how to go on a spending spree on the Web scot-free. 

"It's getting us a little nervous -- you can see the wave coming," said 
the owner of the job listings site. 

Phony disputes are a bigger problem for sites that sell digital goods -- 
like subscriptions or downloadable software -- than they are for sites 
that ship products by mail. 

"For shipped goods, if you've got proof of delivery, that's a way [for 
the merchant] to resolve a disputed charge," said CyberSource's Arnold. 

Still, if the product is relatively cheap, many companies decide that 
it's not worth the hassle to battle the disputes, he said. 

While some merchants have been clamoring for a change in the way the 
banks resolve online disputes, they claim that the card companies have 
refused to act. 

"They are focused on the consumer," said Barry Bahrami, the owner of 
Commercial Illusions, which makes anti-fraud software. "They have no 
real incentive to help the merchant. They'd rather get the money from 
the charge-backs." 

Other merchants agree. "The credit-card companies aren't addressing a 
blatant situation," said the owner of the jobs listing site. "And it's a 
blatant situation that could affect all e-commerce." 


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll tell you another hassle that
merchants on the net have that they are not very anxious to talk about
and that is the 'abandoned shopping cart' situation. For whatever
reason, people will go to a commercial site on the web, start pushing
around their 'shopping cart' picking out nice items, then just walk
out, and go to a different web site leaving their cart full of
goodies sitting there. 

Then you have cases like Bank One, which recently merged with First
Chicago Bank, and in the process also merged their web pages, making
a TOTAL disaster out of it in the process. http://www.bankone.com
has been inaccessible for several days now, at least to First Chicago
customers as a result of the way the designers of the new site (for
both banks) got things screwed up. What's not a bit funny is the
total lack of security they now have. They seem to think they can 
keep customer's money and accounts hidden away on real deep pages at
the site, so they use these URLs that have about two hundred
characters in them. I guess no one explained to them how 'cut and
paste' works, and how if you study the arrangement of the URL (as to
where the social security number is placed in it, etc) that you can
get into any account you want. For several days now at Bank One's
web site http://www.bankone.com no one seems to be able to get access
at at, and the bank's 'On Line Access Services' people are NOT taking
any phone calls at 800-482-3675. First Chicago is telling their
customers 'nothing we can do, we cannot login either, nor can we
reach them on the phone to get any status reports ...'   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 16:04:47 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Telecom Update From IDG.net


WORLD'S FIRST VIDEO CELL PHONE DEBUTS
     (Source: Computerworld) The world got its first glimpse at what
could be the future of mobile telephony this week when Japanese
component vendor Kyocera unveiled the first cellular phone able to
transmit a caller's picture and voice simultaneously.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125365

LOW EURO INTERNET USAGE: IT'S THE PHONE BILL, STUPID
     (Source: IDG.net) If the Internet is going to be a mass medium in
Europe, carriers and ISPs are going to have to move away from charging
users according to the minutes they spend online.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125366

FCC FAVORS LAST-MILE COMPETITION, NOT NEW REGULATIONS
     (Source: InfoWorld Electric) ISPs that have raised questions
about the disparity in the way U.S. telecommunication and cable
companies are regulated were handed a set back when William Kennard,
chairman of the FCC, spoke out against any further regulation.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125367

AOL, YAHOO TOPS IN APRIL POPULARITY
     (Source: Computerworld) America Online remained the most-popular
online destination, with its combined Internet and proprietary network
sites reaching an estimated 46 million surfers last month, according
to Media Metrix Inc. in New York.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125368

CELL-PHONE SAFETY AT ISSUE IN ITALY
     (Source: IDG.net) A major Italian company is supplying its
employees with cellular telephones that can be fitted with separate
headsets -- and Italians are wondering what hidden truths the CEO
knows about cell-phone safety.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125369

NORTEL SPINS OUT ETHERLOOP, YESWARE UNIT
     (Source: InfoWorld Electric) Nortel Networks today announced the
formation of Elastic Networks as a separate company to handle the
continued development and marketing of EtherLoop and YesWare products.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125370

GATES: MICROSOFT PUSHES TELECOM FOR SOFTWARE OPPORTUNITIES
     (Source: InfoWorld Electric) Microsoft is investing billions in
the telecommunications industry in order to facilitate further
software sales, Chairman and CEO Bill Gates said Wednesday.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125371

ASCEND PROMOTES FLEXIBLE DSL FOR ASIA
     (Source: IDG.net) DSL technology will outpace cable modems as the
preferred high-bandwidth access method to the Internet. However,
vendors need to offer a range of DSL options to suit business and
consumer needs, according to Matthew Young, international development
manager for the DSL business unit at Ascend Communications.

http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=125372

Copyright (c) 1999 International Data Group. All rights reserved.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Which Cellular Provider Allows US/European Connectivity?
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 01:41:59 GMT
From: Christopher Herot <Christopher_Herot/CAM/Lotus@lotus.com>


I have an Omnipoint account in Boston that I use when traveling in
Europe.  One advantage of GSM is that it supports data calls.  The
connection is only 9600 bps, but it sure is convenient in a part of
the world where public analog phone jacks are rare.  It even works at
160 kph on the freeways.

You do have to call Omnipoint (once) to turn on data and international
roaming.  Both times I did this I had to call back because having the rep
enter your request into the billing system doesn't guarantee your account
gets provisioned on the switch.  The worst of it was waiting 30 minutes on
hold (from Europe no less) before I got a person who immediately passed me
on to the tech support people.  Once I got past the first level of people
(who tried to tell me "I don't think we have service in Europe") the real
tech support people were very knowledgeable and helpful.

------------------------------

From: The Bug Hunter <no.spam@spam.go.away>
Subject: Have Idea re Filtering Telemarketing Calls, Implementation Needed
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 11:57:57 -0400


For a long time, I've had what I considered a neat product idea for
controlling intrusive telemarketing calls.  I didn't pursue it although
I was sure that somebody someday would come up with a *low cost*
implementation for the consumer market.

Well, maybe I didn't look hard enough, I haven't seen the product show
up in the consumer market.

Here's the idea: have a *low cost* device that would present the caller
the impression of a private phone switch with *many* potential
extensions.  If the caller doesn't know the extension (which in effect
is an access code), he would only get an answering machine.  If he has a
valid "extension", depending what it is and the time of day, his call
may get through or he may still get an answering machine.  Different
"extensions" are given to different groups of people the machine owner
associates with.

For example, I may have a code for my extended family, another for
co-workers, another for neighbors, another for professional society A,
yet another for professional society B ...

If anybody makes a mistake and somehow an "extension" leaks to the
telemarkets, the "extension" will be "retired" and replaced with
another.

I've seen low cost products that offers a subset of these capabilities
but not all the flexibility.  I've seen products targeting small
businesses that provides PBX-like functions, but they are too expensive
for home use.

Anyone knows how to implement the above system with low cost
off-the-shelf (or slightly modified) hardware/software?


Thanks in advance.

--The Bug Hunter

P.S.  Please respond by posting.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, your product was developed
and sold on the market about fifteen years ago under the name
'Privecode'.  It functioned almost identically to your description. It
sat on the line and answered instantly when a call was put on your
line. Your own phone never even rang. It would tell the caller, 'Enter
your privecode number please', and this would be a three digit number
you had programmed in. If the person entered the correct number, the
privecodebox would warble at you; you would pick up any phone and
speak. If the person did not enter the correct number, they went
straight to the answering machine. You could also assign a three digit
code which always went to the answering machine as well. It was
manufactured about 1975-80 by a company called 'International Mobile
Machines' in Bala Cynwyd, PA. It sold for about $200.    PAT]

------------------------------

From: edhew@xenitec.xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew)
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"
Organization: Canadian UUCP Map Coordinator <path@cs.utoronto.ca>
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 18:51:50 GMT


In article <telecom19.83.7@telecom-digest.org>, Marc Schaeffer
<schaefer@alphanet.ch> wrote:

> Robert Eden <rmeden@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> UUCP    - (anyone update the maps lately?)

> Well, no, I don't think I updated them since 1991. However, UUCP
> is still alive, mainly as a leaf-node cheap transfer protocol (especially
> in countries where Internet access is not that cheap and where
> people still have some UNIX knowledge).

Over the last few years, I've gone from twice/month updates to
monthly, and now to quarterly.  They're just not used in the critical
routing way they once were.  In fact, as I mention below, they no
longer can be used reliably.

If we look at the Canadian UUCP maps, the vast majority of the bulk is
in the ones automatically generated from the CA domain registrations.
The ones humans actually submit continue to dwindle.

These days I tend to refer to them as the "pathalias maps", since
almost all of the sites mapped in Canada actually move most of their
traffic via smtp.  They're still in the "UUCP maps" to enable the very
few senders who don't have access to DNS to determine email routing.

That stated, the fact that the onslaught of SPAM has forced most
well-managed sites to disable all but specifically authorized relaying
has effectively broken most of the published link data.  Therefore I'm
of the opinion that the UUCP mapping project should in fact be wound
down; I don't see the point of publishing what is unfortunately in
most cases now years-outdated and broken map data.

In article <telecom19.87.8@telecom-digest.org>, Ron Bean
<rbean@execpc.com> wrote:

> James Wyatt <jwyatt@RWSystems.net> writes:

>> The term 'internet' was (or I thought) only applied to machines that were
>> directly IP connected to 'The Net'.

>> In short, you weren't really on The Internet unless you could
>> directly telnet to other machines on 'The Net'.

> At the time someone said:

> "If you can type 'ping nic.ddn.mil' and get a response, then you're on
> the internet".

That was the difference between being on the "directly connected
Internet", vrs just hopping your files and email through cooperative
sites using UUCP, back when the 'net was a friendly cooperative
place vrs what it has now become (largely the opposite).

> Even just getting access to Usenet was a Big Deal before programs like
> "UUPC" (UUCP for PC's) and Fidonet gateways came along.  Before then
> you had to have an account on a unix box, and unix machines were
> expensive. That all changed when the '386 came along and several
> companies licensed the unix source from AT&T.

Actually, the advent of the '286 gave us just enough horsepower to run
UNIX ... well, actually, it was SCO Xenix based on AT&T UNIX SysV R2.
Worked like a charm for me back in '86 - way cool, and cheap; it cost
me less than CDN$5K, including hdw, o/s and devsys back then.


  Ed Hew <edhew@xenitec.on.ca>                 http://www.xenitec.on.ca
  XeniTec Consulting Services | Standard International Training Centers
  rlogin Corporation  |  SCO newsgroup godfather | USENET biz authority
  moderator: comp.unix.sco.announce, can.uucp.maps | biz FAQ maintainer
  CA Domain Registry | Canadian UUCP Map Coordinator | (yes,+other hats)

------------------------------

From: Mike Riddle <mriddle@novia.net>
Subject: Re: DNA Dragnet
Date: 22 May 1999 08:27:05 -0500
Organization: Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish & Short
Reply-To: mriddle@oasis.novia.net


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Police have long had the right to take
> fingerprints from persons who are arrested, and we do not hear too
> many complaints from civil liberties advocates about that. I would
> assume by extension that police have the right to gather whatever
> identifying information they can from arrested people, but the catch
> is that fingerprints -- once years ago the latest technology in
> people identification -- are rather feeble when compared with DNA
> type-casting. DNA records are just a bit too-perfect for comfort
> it would seem compared to fingerprints, handwriting analysis and
> all those older techniques, although the most banks have started
> using thumbprints on checks they cash now; had you noticed that?
> Ah, DNA and cookies; what a combination as we enter Century 21.  PAT]

This gets a bit off the Telecom path, but the problem with DNA
is that (except in paternity cases) its best ability is to rule someone
out, not in.  For example, even with the most pro-prosecution "spin"
possible, the DNA samples used in the O.J. trial still could have
matched several thousand black males in the L.A. area.

DNA matching appears to have almost a scientific "certainty," but
as applied there are almost always dualling experts over what the
probabilities are and whether the probabilities were drawn from an
appropriate sample; e.g., if the suspect is an African-American with
Native American and French  ancestry as well, a comparison sample
drawn from Warsaw wouldn't be suitable for probability determination.
Yet, at least in the early days of DNA and even now in many cases,
errors only somewhat less egregious routinely occur.

The policy question is whether to allow such "scientific" evidence
when it has a tendency to sway juries beyond its statistical basis.

Perhaps someone with a longer (and better) memory than I have
can recount whether fingerprints went through a similar "growing
phase."

And to bring it back to telecom, what makes it all possible these
days is high-speed communications and digital imagery techniques
to query the database.  Without such, comparison would take so
long as to be almost completely ineffective.

------------------------------

From: dave.garland@wizinfo.com (Dave Garland)
Date: 22 May 99 11:24:12 -0600
Subject: 612/952/xxx split
Organization: Wizard Information


Speaking of Minnesota, the PUC announced today that 612 (Minneapolis and
north/south/west suburbs) will be split Feb. 15, with Minneapolis (and
suburbs Richfield and Ft. Snelling) retaining 612, and the burbs receiving
new area codes, one north of I394 and one south of it.  The new codes will
be 952 and another as yet undesignated.  As before, the split will be
along municipal boundaries.


-Dave

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 18:48:53 -0400
From: Brian Vita <brian_vita@cssinc.com>
Subject: Re: A Strange Problem


At 03:02 PM 5/20/99 -0400, TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> Also, next time it happens try to *immediatly* get repair service on
> the line, and ask them to 'go in on' that pair and test it right then
> and there. If *they* can hear it, and assess the trouble, they will
> have a better idea what to do. They have tools which are sophisticated
> enough that they can identify within a matter of a couple yards where
> an underground cable has gone bad; even sitting in their office at a
> computer terminal a two miles away.  I hope this helps.   PAT]

When was there someone actually sitting at a terminal in the CO a
couple of miles away.  More likely it's a couple of hundred miles
away.  The CLEC that provides my computer's DSL line is sitting in San
Francisco and I'm in Peabody, MA!  She'll run a Harris test on the
line and tell me that my demarc is 3248' from the CO.  I found that
impressive.


Brian Vita, President
Cinema Service & Supply, Inc.
75 Walnut St.
Peabody, MA  01960-5626  USA
Sales & Service ->(800)231-8849 US & Canada
Sales & Service Fax ->(800)329-2775
Business Office -> (978)538-7575
Business Fax -> (978)538-7550

***Visit Our Web Site at www.cssinc.com***
Check out our new online webstore for cinema supplies!
CSS, Inc. is a proud member of ITEA & NSCA

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #94
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Sun May 23 02:26:05 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA15296;
	Sun, 23 May 1999 02:26:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 02:26:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905230626.CAA15296@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #95

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 23 May 99 02:26:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 95

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Why Do RBOCs Form CLECs? (Brian G)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Louis Raphael)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Tom Heathcote)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Ken Stox)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (David Isenberg)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Dave)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Clive Dawson)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Ryan Shook)
    An Update on the WUTCO Clocks (Gary L. Spohn)
    Re: Help Needed Researching Polish Telecom (ahnon@my-dejanews.com)
    How to Find Nearest Fiber POP (Daniel J. Wentzel)
    Re: Strange Problem [too] (John Levine)
    Re: "Internet Pioneers"   (John 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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: brian g <briang@bellatlantic.net>
Subject: Why Do RBOCs Form CLECs?
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 02:54:26 GMT


I've seen articles stating how RBOCs are forming CLEC divisions to
market advanced network services.  Why wouldn't they just sell these
sevices, such as public ATM, through the existing LEC group?


bg

------------------------------

From: Louis Raphael <raphael@cs.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?
Organization: Societe pour la promotion du petoncle vert
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 06:23:35 GMT


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote:

> It used to just be a grim joke: one day all Americans would be 
> issued numbers to use instead of names. Well, we are about half-
> way there. So far, we are still permitted to have individual 
> names, but our social security numbers are rapidly becoming our
> national ID numbers.

I'm reading your post, having just finished signing and sealing about
80 letters (with more to come) to our [Canadian] legislators regarding
some (Federal) inter-departmental committee's plan to introduce
National ID cards. This happens a few months after the Quebec
government tries to revive a plan to introduce provincial ID piecemeal,
starting with the stocking of everyone's name, parents' name, picture
(!) and address (!) and a (now) "voluntary" ID card. 

Essentially, a complete merging of the Medicare and Drivers' licenses
data, with pictures retained. The federal plan is in the name of
"preventing benefits fraud" (which would usually be paid by the
provinces!), the provincial plan has the same (stated) aim, as well as
"increased efficiency." It seems to me that, these days, everyone
wants to number, catalogue, and file us away -- in the name of
preventing benefits fraud (Canada) or in the name of terrorism
prevention (US, as far as I can tell). All with very little public
discussion, or even awareness. 

The *real* reasons for these plans don't require much paranoia to
realize.  The bureaucrats *want* to know what *you* are doing, and
when you're doing it. They feel that *you're* a threat. With marginal
tax rates over 50%, it isn't surprising, either :-(.

> This not only expressly conflicts with what President Roosevelt
> and the Social Security Administration promised us, but is just
> one more step in the direction of total control of each person
> by the government.

It always starts small, and then gets bigger and bigger and bigger.
These promises are always broken. In a way, those intrusions which
develop slowly and are apparently voluntary (as if Canadian SINs, US
SSNs or -- for many people -- drivers' licenses, really are) are worse
than the more direct ones, which people realize the impact of more
readily.

Also, not only governments are guilty of this -- credit bureaus are
among the worst offenders. The interesting thing is that (in Quebec),
data collection by private organizations is highly regulated ... so
much so that, if the Quebec gov't were to be considered a private
organization, it's own plan would be illegal, in my opinion (IANAL).

[snip]
> I am told that a federal law recently passed allows for federal
> takeover of birth certificates, death certificates and driver's
> licenses. Under this law, even if you choose to not identify yourself
> with your Social Security number, it still would have to be presented
> when you wish to obtain a driver's license or any form of state
> identification card. (Some states issue ID cards in lieu of driver's
> licenses to people who request it.) Numbers will be issued to new
> born babies immediatly as part of the process of issuing their birth
> certificates. 

I understand that they've "mandated" (what a hateable word) the states
do do things in certain ways, with the ever-present threat of
withholding federal money. Essentially, the federal gov't of the US is
taking over state jurisdictions by fiscal kidnapping, a creative
technique that the framers of the US constitution probably didn't
foresee, else they would have specifically forbidden it. This type of
takeover I don't see as being so likely here in Canada: so long as the
Quebec independence movement strong, the federal government has that
much more incentive to stay out of provincial affairs. Indeed,
provincial practices in such matters varies significantly.

I doubt that I'm the only one who feels less human once he's referred
to as a number. I must admit, from what I've seen and read about, this
type of numbering is even more prevalent in the US than it is here (a
lot of people here like to ask for SINs, but unless there are tax forms
to be filled, they usually drop the issue if you leave it blank). To
believe that there was once a time, within living memory, when people
were taken at their word. Funny how they didn't tend to lie as often,
isn't it?

> But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
> will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any
> airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
> is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
> some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will definitly
> require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions. 

That's completely ridiculous. I've noticed (on trips to the US) that
airlines are now requiring ID with name matching the name on the
ticket, in order to board the plane (supposedly in the name of
preventing terrorism?). The purpose is obviously to catalogue people's
movements - any terrorist capable of building a bomb is certainly
capable of getting fake ID, or of finding a way to steal someone's
boarding pass (they check when you're getting the boarding pass, not
when you're actually boarding).  Obviously, the aim is to monitor
citizens' movements in *general*, and not to prevent terrorism.

> In these times, the phrase 'public servant' translates into 'public
> master', and surely they must be in their glory about now. Maybe with
> some effort, we can get Congress to repeal this law, but don't count
> on it. George Orwell was only a few years off in his book '1984', when
> Big Brother was just a teen-ager. Now he is coming of age.

Once they know where you are, what you're doing, how much you're
earning (and possibly what your fingerprints are, etc), they pretty
much own you. Which is close to the current situation. Sometimes, I
think that one of the reasons for increasing *random* violence among
certain groups of our societies is because people increasingly feel
like tracked animals, and are increasingly right about feeling that
way.

> October 2, 2000 is the date. Do mark your calendars!
             ^^^^
There are days when I hope that the y2k affair *isn't* hype, and that
major computer systems will lose data in a major way. We'd probably be
better off. Computers could have made our lives much better, but often
I think that they will only serve to enslave us. The incompetence of
bureaucrats seems to be the only thing which keeps our situation from
being even worse.

Notice my (randomly chosen) .sig - I think that it is quite
appropriate for this post.


Louis

 "Appeasers are those who would feed the crocodile in hopes that he would
 eat them last."  -- Winston Churchill


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think if all the government computers
(or at least a good number of them) go haywire on January 1 that will
be a good thing.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: tom@nospam.demon.co.uk (Tom Heathcote)
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 05:12:34 +0100


TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote...

> It used to just be a grim joke: one day all Americans would be 
> issued numbers to use instead of names. Well, we are about half-
> way there. So far, we are still permitted to have individual 
> names, but our social security numbers are rapidly becoming our
> national ID numbers.

> In these times, the phrase 'public servant' translates into 'public
> master', and surely they must be in their glory about now. Maybe with
> some effort, we can get Congress to repeal this law, but don't count
> on it. George Orwell was only a few years off in his book '1984', when
> Big Brother was just a teen-ager. Now he is coming of age.

How do (or will) these various organisations across the US (banks, 
educational institutions, state governments, and airlines) cope with people 
who (like myself) don't have a Social Security Number?


Tom Heathcote
TomHeathcote<AT>email<DOT>com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Then you will have to get a number or
the bank won't be able to work with you.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 21 May 1999 11:43:07 CDT
From: stox@dcdkc.fnal.gov (Ken Stox)
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?


In article <telecom19.91.1@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest Editor
<ptownson@telecom-digest.org> writes:

<SNIP>

> In these times, the phrase 'public servant' translates into 'public
> master', and surely they must be in their glory about now. Maybe with
> some effort, we can get Congress to repeal this law, but don't count
> on it. George Orwell was only a few years off in his book '1984', when
> Big Brother was just a teen-ager. Now he is coming of age.

> October 2, 2000 is the date. Do mark your calendars!

Reminds me of an interesting poster I saw a couple of years back, it
was a picture of an all seeing eye with the logo: NSA, 1984, We're
behind schedule.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I saw something like that. It was a
picture-poster of a person identified as 'Big Brother' and it was
painted in such a way that no matter from which direction you looked
at it, it appeared the eyes were looking right at you. If you walked
a bit to the left or right, it appeared the eyes moved also and were
always staring at you. The caption of course told us that 'Big Brother
is watching you'. Where I saw it was in a public men's restroom in
Chicago, taped up on the wall. 

When I went in the same place a couple weeks later, the poster was
hanging there, but it had been defaced.  Someone had used a pocket
knife or some sharp tool to gouge out the eyes and a marking pen to
scribble some obscenity on the face. The last time I was there, *most*
of the original poster was there, but Big Brother's head had been cut
off and was missing; in its place a computer generated picture of two
heads sort of stemming from one neck; Clinton's face looking one way
and Gore's face looking the other way. Out of Clinton's mouth was a
bubble message saying "When I get impeached or run out of office I
will get a job selling used cars."  To which someone underneath had
added the notation, 'why not try pimping or dealing drugs' ... 

Ah, isn't it fun to read "the people's view of the news" each day
 ... so much more interesting than the dry columns of the {New York
Times} and certainly more truthful than any of Kay Graham's ragsheets
such as {Washington Post} or News Weak.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 07:58:25 -0400
From: David Isenberg <isen@home.com>
Organization: isen.com
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?


PAT,

I, too, am VERY concerned about the erosion of our freedom to travel.
I can't get used to presenting goverment ID at the ticket counter --
something inside me grates.

I am curious, though, about this Oct 2, 2000 thing.  Is it a new law?
An executive order?  A court decision?  Who set the date?  If I knew
more, I'd have more ammo when I raise a stink!


David I


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My source was Kansas State Sentator
Stan Clark, then later a newspaper from Kansas City, Missouri and
one from Topeka, KS. According to Clark, it was slipped through on
the tail end of some other legislation in April, apparently without
much notice. There was to be an 18 month 'grace period' while various
agencies, etc reprogram their computers and their employees, thus
18 months from then was October, 2000. October 1 is a Sunday, there-
fore it commences on the first workday of that month.  PAT] 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 06:33:55 -0700
From: Dave <dstott@2help.com>
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?


Our moderator wrote:

> But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
> will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any
> airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
> is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
> some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will definitly
> require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions. 

This ought to significantly increase the number of Canadians living in
the US; since Canadians don't need passports to be here and don't have
Social Security numbers, I guess you, er, they could buy airline tickets
and not have to supply an SSN.  Or will the US Gov't require some ID
number from our northern brethren (and sistren) as well?


Dave Stott
2HELP Consulting
Phone: (480) 831-7355
  Fax: (480) 831-1176
 Free: (888) 43-2HELP

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 10:28:52 CDT
From: Clive Dawson <clive.dawson@amd.com>
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?


Hi Pat,

Regarding your recent message in the Digest, "Do you Feel Like a Number?",
would you know where I can find more info on the new federal law you
mentioned?  In particular, if there's a source for the stuff about
Oct. 2, 2000, could you please pass it along?

Many thanks,

Clive Dawson

P.S.  Many thanks for your work involving the Internet Pioneers stuff!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are quite welcome. The references
have been pouring in over there; the page with links now has about 35
main 'root' links and many of those have a large number of pages under
them at their respective sites; some of it is incredible stuff .. how
about almost all the RFCs ever issued, from number 1 in April, 1969
through a couple thousand, thirty years later. You can watch the
internet get built. Also there is now an audio interview with Vint
Cerf, a nixpub list from 1993, and a lot more. It is all available
at http://internet-history.org .... regards sourcing on the day that
Big Brother is appointed chairman of the board, see my notes above.
That's all I have on it right now.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 17:27:11 EDT
From: Ryan Shook <rjshook@uwaterloo.ca>
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?


> But the best it seems, is yet to come. Starting October 2, 2000 you
> will need to present your SSN to *board any airplane or purchase any
> airplane ticket*, use *any government services* -- regardless if it
> is a welfare program or you just want to call the police and report
> some incident, although Medicare and welfare programs will definitly
> require the number -- or to conduct any bank transactions. 

I find this hard to believe, please cite a reference.

As for airplanes, what about non-American residents? A Canadian in the
US on business who needs an emergency ticket can't be required to have
a SSN.


 Ryan Shook Mechanical Engineering |              RJShook@uwaterloo.ca
 Amateur (HAM) Radio Lic.:VE3 TKD  | www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/u/rjshook
                        E-Commerce: E-Caveat Emptor


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See above messages.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 19:28:39 -0400
From: Gary L. Spohn <gspohn@mciunix.mciu.k12.pa.us>
Organization: Spring-Ford Area School District
Subject: An Update on the WUTCO Clocks


Pat,

	Just an update and FYI on my Western Union clocks.  I have a
WUTCO clock operating now for over 16 straight months on the same two
Duracell 'D' batteries.  I think, in part, the longevity is that I
have replaced the red lamp with an LED.  I took the base from an old
bayonet lamp and replaced the lamp with one of those 10mm red LEDs.  I
soldered the LED in line with a resistor to the base.  The base was
stabilzed by putting hot glue inside before putting the resistor and
LED in place while still hot.  Now, each hour when the clock is
synchronized by a tone decoder set on KYW Philadelphia the red alert
draws less than 20 ma rather than 200.  


gls


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am pleased to hear it is still
working. I no longer have either of my clocks. I needed money and
sold them both, but got a fair price.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: ahnon@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Help Needed Researching Polish Telecom
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:18:49 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.


I will be in Poland this summer.  I doubt I can get much in terms of
numbers for you, but sometimes qualitative experience is just as
important (I'm a telecom marketing person).  Let me know the types of
things you're looking to discover.

However, for market plans and such, I'm sure they're available b/c they
just privatized and had to let that stuff become available to support
their offering.  This doesn't help specifically, I know, but you could
probably find out who their investment bank/advisers were through the
information resources to which you likely have better access than I.

I can tell you off the bat that there is simply not enough wireline
infrastructure.  As in most developing and Northern European countries,
the telecom explosion is occurring through wireless.  The central phone
"store" in Cracow features ISDN as the newest product (last summer).
Folks seem content having to go to a central place to make phone calls.

Let me know through another post -- I get way too much spam to offer
my email in any form.

------------------------------

From: wentzeldj@evolution.org (Daniel J. Wentzel)
Subject: How to Find Nearest Fiber POP?
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 07:21:18 +0100
Organization: Deep Bends


Hello all,

I am living in Bavaria, Germany and want to know how do I determine
where the nearest fiber optic POP is to me?  I want to get an idea of
the distance to pull dark fiber to my location.


Danke,

Dan Wentzel

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 01:37:17 EDT
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Strange Problem  [too?]
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> Last night, I had a need to call someone on a cellphone in the 408
> area code.  I got the "a long distance company is required for this
> call" intercept. ...  The entire (408) area is within the same
> service area (unlike the further south (831) which is split between
> two service areas).

Maybe, maybe not.  When they split NPAs, it's not uncommon to leave
existing cellular prefixes in the old NPA, so that cell customers don't
have to reprogram their phones.  When 908 split to 732 in New Jersey,
for example, the landline prefixes in Lakewood and Toms River moved
 from 908 to 732, but the existing cell prefixes didn't.  (New
prefixes, both cell and landline, are in 732.)

So it's quite possible that the rate center for this 408 cell number
is in Salinas or somewhere that used to be in 408 and is indeed an
inter-LATA call from where you are.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 01:37:27 EDT
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: "Internet Pioneers"


>>> UUCP    - (anyone update the maps lately?)

>> Well, no, I don't think I updated them since 1991. However, UUCP
>> is still alive, mainly as a leaf-node cheap transfer protocol (especially
>> in countries where Internet access is not that cheap and where
>> people still have some UNIX knowledge).

UUCP will be around for a long time, since it's still one of the better
ways to transfer mail over an intermittent dialup connection.

But as Ed noted, what's going away is bang paths, and the sooner the
better.  There's no particular connection between an address with
exclamation points in it and a uucp connection.  In the early 1990s,
my connection was a uucp dialup to a friend's system, but my e-mail
addresses were all <whatever>@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, since I'd arranged
to register that domain (it still works) and had my neigbor's system
set up as the MX host to receive the mail.  Conversely, for several
years after I had a full-time TCP/IP connection, you could still send
me mail as iecc!johnl@world.std.com, even though the connection was
all SMTP.

The reason we put up with bang paths is that a lot of systems had lame
little client programs like uupc that didn't handle non-bang
addresses, and people didn't use MX addresses effectively, notably at
uunet where for ages and ages they rewrote all the addresses of their
uucp clients' mail into bang format, even when they had perfectly good
non-bang MX addresses.

These days, the cheapo client is linux with a full suite of mail
applications, and everyone has an MX.  So regardless of whether the
connection is TCP/IP, uucp, or carrier pigeon, the mail addresses look
the same, and no bangs need apply.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #95
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Mon May 24 14:17:15 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA27447;
	Mon, 24 May 1999 14:17:15 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 14:17:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905241817.OAA27447@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #96

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 24 May 99 14:17:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 96

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Refinements Made to Search Engine (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    An Anonymous Email Service For Us (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (Arthur Ross)
    Re: Airtouch in NYC? (Arthur Ross)
    Re: Delivery of Tariff Services (William Wheeler)
    Re: Simemens Gigaset 2020 (support@sellcom.com)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (Gil Stamper)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (Richard Campbell)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (Daniel J. Cody)
    Re: Why Do RBOCs Form CLECs? (MCSMAN)
    Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Ron Bean)
    Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Bill Ranck)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 24 May 1999 01:58:10 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Refinements Made to Search Engine


The other day, reader Lazlo pointed out that an index reference to an
article of his was present, but the article itself did not show up 
in the index. After a bit of digging around, I found what appears to
be the trouble.  

      * The spider was stopping short of reading the whole file
        in the case of the huge back issues files .... *

In any file longer than 100 K, the spider was stopping at that point
and going no further. So if you showed up early in a local index,
but very deep in one of the old files, you were getting missed.

I do not actually run the spider myself; it is a free service to this
group given by whatUseek.com which provides 'intrasearch' on sites
that request it. I've had some correspondence with the administrator
and a few exceptions to his usual rules have been made in the case of
the telecom-digest.org site.  One, instead of the spider running once
each week, it now runs on my demand, as often as once each day if
requested. Thus, the latest issues get picked up fairly soon. The
second exception he made for this group is that the spider will now go
to a depth of 500 K as needed, which would only be the case in the
very old back issues archives. I asked him how about making the spider
eat a whole meg as needed ... he looked at me like I was nuts, which I
probably am, but said okay; now the spider goes absorbs almost all of
those old files. Three, he greatly expanded the number of files per
site he would handle in our case. The 'typical' site he deals with is
much smaller, and much less detailed.

So you should see a substantial improvement in the search engine used
on telecom-digest.org effective immediatly. On my side, I have to quit
packing the old issues in such large bundles effective immediatly.
Starting with the current volume as of this past January 1, you will
see *individual issues* in the archives rather than clusters of 
fifty issues. If I can figure out how to do so successfully, I will
'unpack' at least one or two prior year's worth as well, which will
give us close to one hundred percent on the search engine for all 
intents and purposes. 

If you are looking in the very old issues and the spider gives an
HTML link to an entry in one of the local indexes I have kept but
does not somehow find the actual item itself, note what the local
index says for a reference, then pull the associated cluster and
use your browser's 'find' command to narrow things down a bit more.
But now that the spider is going a meg deep into the file, there is
not a lot that should be missed. The last time the spider was run
it was set for 500K, but watch for a re-indexing later this week.

We are getting all this for *free* from whatUseek.com and when I
first heard it was 'advertiser supported' I was a little leary
about it, but it is something that has been needed here for many
years, and the 'advertising' is very seldom, and very low-key when
it does appear on the spider's result pages. So do me a favor 
please, and click on the ads there occassionally; he is doing us
a big favor by covering as much territory as we have here. His
output is also available to the entire net in his search engine.


PAT

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 02:24:00 EDT
From: TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: An Anonymous Email Service For Us


The other piece of news from over the weekend is that we now have
available for use an anonymous email service. I say 'anonymous'
since when you use it, you just select whatever name you want to
use. Your email address then becomes username@telecom-digest.zzn.com
and you are free to send and receive email that way.

I envision it mainly as a way for people who do not want to use their
'main' email address to send messages (here or to other newsgroups)
because of the spam and privacy-invasion problems on the net. On
the other hand, maybe your 'main' email address is now so polluted
with spam that you want to start over from scratch. Either way, you
are welcome to one of these addresses for free. They can be used
as 'throw-away' addresses, meaning when they become too spam-ridden
you just dump it and start another one. 

There are some good system-wide spam filter rules built in, and each
user can also a few additional rules as desired. You can have it
check up to three POP mail accounts if you wish, and it will transact
with you in about a dozen different languages. 

So the way to get your very own username@telecom-digest.zzn.com email
address is by going to http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice and
following the simple steps to set it up. It should take you a couple
minutes at most. Be as creative as you like with names chosen, but
do NOT spam or do other offensive things. If that happens, I have
no choice in the matter, that mailbox will be closed. There is a bot
which looks after things there when I am not around, and although it
has no sense of shame (grin) -- so use the box as you wish -- it
does know how to count and make some logical decisions about the
volume of mail it sees and types of phrases used, etc. At the telecom-
digest postoffice, your privacy is absolute. Even I will not know
who belongs to which box, nor what names you are using. 

I hope you enjoy it!   http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice


PAT

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:24:35 -0700
From: Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan


> http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9905204videocell

> TOKYO -- The world got its first glimpse at what could be the future
> of mobile telephony this week when Japanese component vendor Kyocera
> Corp.  unveiled the first cellular phone able to transmit a caller's
> picture and voice simultaneously.

[snip breathless marketing hype]

Pat, et al -

This seems to be a phenomenon that recurs with a cycle time of about one
generation -- takes that long for the old generation of enthusiastic
engineers and marketing folks to forget about the last attempt, and to try
to sell the picturephone again. It's similar to the marvelously periodic
phenomenon of Motorola trying to break into the computer business ...
equally futile. Reminds me of those airplane seat back screens that
apparently thought that the formost activity on the mind of airplane
passengers was checking stock prices and playing dumb video games. I think
these are mostly gone now. And then there are all those LEO systems ....

Bell Labs was trying to do this back in the 1950s (actually, I think they
had it in mind pre-WW-II, but the technology most definitely wasn't up to
it then). I actually saw some of this stuff, as my dad was good friends
with a bunch of the folks at the BTL Crawford Hill (NJ) Radio Research
laboratory back then. They had developed a whole family of transmission
components for plumbing 50 GHz carrier systems around the country, with
these pipes hung on telephone poles. Existing transmission plant didn't
have enough capacity to support the anticipated, non-compressed, video
traffic. Was really neat, clever stuff, if you're a radio geek. That part
worked fine. Problem was, nobody wanted the product, as they found out when
they belatedly did the market research. I don't think they ever really got
around to productizing the subscriber terminal.

They tried again, I think it was about 15 years ago, with a CCD camera, LCD
display gizmo, digital video compression algorithm, compressed enough that
it would work over any ordinary analog subscriber line. Price was almost
reasonable too - something like $1500 at retail as I recall. Nobody wanted
that one either, even though, IMHO, it worked reasonably well.

Seems like it must be the Japanese' turn to find this out. I was shown a
mockup of a similar product a few months ago by some of the 3G wireless
crowd. Same general idea. Gets a lot of points for good technical design.
But, just like all those other attempts, it won't sell, IMHO. I doubt that
human behavior has changed all that much - I think people still don't want
picturephones!

I'm awfully skeptical about all this "wireless data" hype. I can't find
ANYONE with a credible notion of what all those "killer apps" are that are
going to consume these high data rate wireless services. If its only
e-mail, they should forget the exotic services. An awful lot of e-mail
equals not-very-much speech. A friend, who shall remain nameless because he
works for a Fortune 500 company, that probably would not be thrilled by his
sarcasm, suggested that the killer app is a guy driving down an LA freeway,
downloading porno movies, and talking on the sex line. This is about the
most credible thing I've heard of. Sad.

   -- Best
   -- Arthur

   -- Dr. Arthur Ross
      2325 East Orangewood Avenue
      Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730
      Phone: 602-371-9708
      Fax  : 602-336-7074

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:37:05 -0700
From: Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: Airtouch in NYC?


jlindqui@enterprise.uiuc.edu (Jason A. Lindquist) wrote:

> James Gifford <gifford@nitrosyncretic.com> writes:

>> Then I discovered
>> in NYC that the phone wouldn't work (I got a Hell Atlantic operator).

>> I was told by Airtouch that they don't provide service in NYC because of
>> the massive level of cloning-- even their digital plans don't work there
>> because they don't have digital service, so the fallback to analog
>> enables the cloners to work.

> Bell Atlantic certainly does have CDMA digital service in New York.
> There's no technical reason why an Airtouch digital phone would not
> work there.

> Well, either that, or they like throwing away money on all the
> BAM-labeled handsets I see rolling out of Qualcomm's factory,
> bound for Broadway ...

That CSR should be sent back to kindergarten. BAM's CDMA service works
just fine in NYC. I use it regularly (daughter is in school there)
with my QCOM phone, which is homed on Airtouch in Arizona. Daughter
has a Sprint PCS CDMA phone. It works fine there too.

I do recall, tho, that I had to specifically REQUEST Airtouch that I be
allowed to roam in NYC. Default was, they told me, to NOT allow it, the
rationale being pretty much as above.

One of my complaints has been that international calling from portables
seems to be blanket forbidden from NYC, this too for fraud protection
reasons. Apparently a very large percentage of fraudulent calls are
international. Too bad, as I often could have really used it, e.g., when
sitting in the airport waiting for flight to Europe somewhere, which I do
fairly regularly.

   -- Regards,
   -- Arthur

   -- Dr. Arthur Ross
      2325 East Orangewood Avenue
      Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730
      Phone: 602-371-9708
      Fax  : 602-336-7074

------------------------------

From: William Wheeler <wuffa@inetarena.com>
Subject: Re: Delivery of Tariff Services
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 10:27:50 -0700
Organization: so many books too little time


John Starta wrote:

> I need some advice. I'm trying to order a tariff service from my telco
> (USWest) and they're refusing delivery saying either 1) I'm too far
> away from the CO; or 2) the switch/CO is incapable of providing the
> service.  (Their reason alternates depending upon the department I
> speak with.) I know for a fact that I'm not too far away as I have
> ISDN service, and the network disclosure information they have filed
> with the local utilities commission indicates that all switches/CO's
> servicing my city are capable.

> Is there some way of forcing USWest to uphold their commitment? Aren't
> telco's required to deliver tariff services?

As I am getting the same thing from USWEST here in Portland let me know
if you get anywhere with them.

------------------------------

From: support@sellcom.com
Subject: Re: Simemens Gigaset 2020
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 23:49:15 GMT
Organization: www.sellcom.com
Reply-To: support@sellcom.com


stiewe@my-dejanews.com spake thusly and wrote:

> I just moved from Germany to San Francisco and am trying to hook up my
> Gigaset 2020 phone. Besides the problem with the electric currency and
> the difference in wiring, Germany uses the black and yellow wire vs.
> US uses the green and red, I have problems making the phone ring! Has
> anybody dealt with this problem and knows an solution?

> Any help is greatly appreciated!

You may wish to also investigate the legality of using that phone here
in the US as it might be using an unapproved frequency.

Regarding the wiring, there are only two ways to hook up two wires.
If neither way works then there are probably also differences here
with the ring signal.  (there may also be voltage differences and a
lot of other differences as well, I recommend caution and research).

Siemens has a US tech support number of 877-267-3373


Steve
http://www.sellcom.com  
(Opinions expressed, though generally wise and 
accurate are not officially positions of SELLCOM) 
Cyclades / Siemens (May REBATE) / Y2K ODIU support / Zoom / Palmer Safes
(Tech assistance provided without warranty express or implied)
Check us out at http://www.thepubliceye.com

------------------------------

From: gstamper@us.hsanet.net (Gil Stamper)
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:00:55 -0400
Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here!


Having just gone through a 90 node T-1 installation, I will tell you
to recrimp the cable connections at the CSU and at the SmartJack.
Also check the ground resistance between the CSU and the SmartJack.
They don't need to be grounded together, but there should be minimual
resistance.  Next check the LBO at both the CSU and the SmartJack.
Some of the runs I just went through were in excess of 130 feet, but
we did have to adjust the LBO on the channel banks and on the
SmartJacks to accomodate the longer run.


Gil

------------------------------

From: Richard Campbell <richcam@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:34:40 -0500
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services


Make sure that the Smartjack is grounded properly.  If it was not,
then check your CSU to make sure it was not damaged by the smartjack.
Of course, always check the cabling.


Rich

------------------------------

From: Daniel J. Cody <dcody@oracular.com>
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 01:27:47 -0500


Kevin Lundy wrote:

> Every time we have a problem, the techs can loop up the smart jack and
> stress test error free.  They loop the CSU, and they see errors.  So

Where are they looping it from? The smartjack or your endpoint. This
will tell you exactly where the problem is. I have a 150 foot piece of
CAT-5 from my smartjack to router and don't get any errors. For you,
there could be electrical interferance(shielded CAT-5 would take care of
that) or your CSU might not be config'd correctly. On my Adtran TSU120
there is an option to tell it how far your line is from the smartjack,
and I assume it makes some corrections based on what you tell it. More
info would be A Good Thing(tm).

 ..djc.

------------------------------

Date: 24 May 1999 13:29:13 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
From: mcsman@aol.com (MCSMAN)
Subject: Re: Why Do RBOCs Form CLECs?


The LEC has tariffs to obey. The CLEC does not have to obey the same
tariffs.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:32:41 CDT
From: Ron Bean <rbean@execpc.com>


Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> writes:

> http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/19777.html

> Some experts say credit-card companies are so anxious to make consumers
> feel safe about shopping online that they've made it too easy to dispute
> charges. In many cases, if a customer disputes an online charge, the
> issuing bank will remove it with no questions asked.

If this were not the case, credit cards would quickly become unusable.
I'd cancel mine in a minute.

It's bad enough that some company I've never heard of can add
stuff to my phone bill, without having to prove that I ever did
business with them.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll tell you another hassle that
> merchants on the net have that they are not very anxious to talk about
> and that is the 'abandoned shopping cart' situation. For whatever
> reason, people will go to a commercial site on the web, start pushing
> around their 'shopping cart' picking out nice items, then just walk
> out, and go to a different web site leaving their cart full of
> goodies sitting there.

Those "carts" should time out after a while, unless the programmer was
really stupid. Unlike a physical store, there are no actual "goodies
sitting there" until the user completes the order. It's like filling
out an order form from a mail-order catalog, and then not mailing it.

I've run into a couple of sites that crashed my browser, so that it
was impossible for me to complete an order. I eventually copied down
their snail-mail address and sent the order that way.

------------------------------

From: Bill Ranck <ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed
Date: 24 May 1999 14:16:00 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA


Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> Adult sites frequently offer a free week's membership that reverts to a 
> paid membership if the surfer doesn't cancel after seven days. 
> As a result, legions of surfers who didn't read the fine print have 
> called to dispute the charges. In the process, they've found how easy it 
> is to have a charge removed. 

Well, this is just bad business practice, and I personally see no
reason it should be rewarded.  It reminds me of these telemarketers
who call me, and when I ask, "what are you selling?" they say, "Nothing,
we want to give you blah-blah."   Well, I know damn well that at some
point that "free trial" whatever will become a not free billable of some
sort.  And, yes, consumers should read the fine print, but it's still
a bad business practice and I can't feel too sorry for the scam^H^H^H^H
merchants in these cases.

> Over time, a sizeable population of savvy Web surfers have figured out 
> how to go on a spending spree on the Web scot-free. 

Now, don't get me wrong.  I am *not* in favor of people using credit
card fraud to get things.  I think those folks who knowingly dispute
legitimate charges should be held accountable.  But that "knowingly"
piece needs to be clear.

> "For shipped goods, if you've got proof of delivery, that's a way [for 
> the merchant] to resolve a disputed charge," said CyberSource's Arnold. 

Clearly, for on-line subscriptions, software downloads, and other
hard to track items the merchant needs to make sure that their 
network storefront makes it very clear what they are selling and
that a purchase is taking place.  Better written user interfaces
and order confirmation processes are what is needed, not whining 
about how unfairlife is.

> While some merchants have been clamoring for a change in the way the 
> banks resolve online disputes, they claim that the card companies have 
> refused to act. 
> "They are focused on the consumer," said Barry Bahrami, the owner of 

Awww!  Poor babies.  Big daddy won't make the mean kid down the block
stop taking my lunch money.  Oh, boo hoo.  Come on!  Merchants have to
protect themselves, not rely on some outside authority to intervene
for them when they haven't done sufficient work to prove their case.
Life is not fair and business even less so.  You have to look out for
yourself, etc.

If people are taking advantage of a company on line, then that company
better figure out its own solutions for catching the deadbeats.

> Other merchants agree. "The credit-card companies aren't addressing a 
> blatant situation," said the owner of the jobs listing site. "And it's a 
> blatant situation that could affect all e-commerce." 

Again, I don't want to see legitimate on-line merchants being hurt by
fraud, but there are two sides to this issue, and there are plenty of
questionable sites that try to pull a fast one on the consumer.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll tell you another hassle that
> merchants on the net have that they are not very anxious to talk about
> and that is the 'abandoned shopping cart' situation. For whatever
> reason, people will go to a commercial site on the web, start pushing
> around their 'shopping cart' picking out nice items, then just walk
> out, and go to a different web site leaving their cart full of
> goodies sitting there. 

This, in my opinion is just plain bad programming.  If an "abandoned
shopping cart" is a problem, then they need better programming.  I
know in some web sites I've seen you can't find out the shipping costs
for things without putting them in the shopping cart.  If I'm pricing
things, I want to know shipping cost as well.  If I change my mind and
abandon an on-line shopping cart, so what?  Why should that be a
problem at all?  It's not like they have to physically reshelve the
items.


*****************************************************************************
* Bill Ranck                +1-540-231-3951                    ranck@vt.edu *   
*    Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Computing Center    *
*****************************************************************************

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #96
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue May 25 13:52:10 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA19187;
	Tue, 25 May 1999 13:52:10 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 13:52:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905251752.NAA19187@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #97

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 25 May 99 13:52:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 97

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Update (Canada) #184, May 24, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement)
    Bell Atlantic and V-SPAN Alliance (Josh Cartagenova)
    Big Banks Move on Net Security (Monty Solomon)
    Copyright Bills May Limit Access to Facts (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (Charlie C.)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (Steve Pinkston)
    Re: Strange Problem (Cortland Richmond)
    Re: AT&T Now CHARGES For BASIC Numbering/Dialing/Geographic Info! (M Black)
    More Spam With 800 Numbers (webnerd)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 25 May 1999 10:23:15 -0400
From: Angus TeleManagement <angus@angustel.ca>
Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #184, May 24, 1999


************************************************************
*                                                          *
*                      TELECOM UPDATE                      *
*    Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin    *
*                  http://www.angustel.ca                  *
*                 Number 184: May 24, 1999                 *
*                                                          *
*    Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by     *
*             generous financial support from:             *
*                                                          *
*  AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/   *
*  Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/         *
*  Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/       *
*  MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/     *
*  Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ *
*  Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/       *
*  TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/    *
*                                                          *
************************************************************

IN THIS ISSUE: 

** Vancouver Wants Cost Plus 25% for Rights-of-Way
** Clearnet Launches Prepaid Service
** Shareholders Okay Atlantic Telco Merger
** Minacs Acquires Phonettix
** Nimiq Takes Flight
** Telus Plans National Chain of Web Portals
** Bell Mobility to Cut Staff by 10%
** Call-Net Says It's Undervalued
** RIM's BlackBerry Adds Paging, Enterprise Server
** Royal Society Says Cellphone Radiation Risk Is Low
** National Wireless Safety Week
** 780 Code Mandatory in Alberta
** US West, Global Crossing to Merge
** Acquisitions Bring Loss at Mitel
** Telus Tops One Million Wireless Customers
** Revere Drops Prepaid Cards
** How to Locate Telecom News, References

============================================================

VANCOUVER WANTS COST PLUS 25% FOR RIGHTS-OF-WAY: The City of Vancouver
has asked the CRTC to rule that carriers who want access to municipal
rights-of-way should pay the cost of maintaining the ROW plus a 25%
mark-up.

** In a related filing, Vancouver says Ledcor is not a 
   Canadian carrier as defined in the Telecom Act and 
   therefore has no right to ask the CRTC for access to the 
   city's rights-of-way. (See Telecom Update #179)

http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8690/c68-01.htm
http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8690/l8-01.htm

CLEARNET LAUNCHES PREPAID SERVICE: Clearnet Communications has
introduced a prepaid PCS service, called "Say When," with airtime
rates identical to its postpaid plans. A $29.95 monthly minimum
payment includes 100 local minutes. The start-up kit (price: $149.99)
includes a digital-only Qualcomm 1960 handset.

** Clearnet's first-quarter revenue was $68.8 Million, 71% 
   higher than last year. EBITDA losses fell 38% to $45.4 
   Million. Revenue per unit fell 5% to $53.59. (See Telecom 
   Update #179)
 
SHAREHOLDERS OKAY ATLANTIC TELCO MERGER: More than 99% of Bruncor,
Island Tel, MTT, and NewTel shareholders have voted to approve the
merger of the four telcos into a single company. (See Telecom Update
#175)

MINACS ACQUIRES PHONETTIX: The Minacs Group, based in Pickering,
Ontario, is acquiring 80% of the shares of Toronto-based Phonettix
Intelecom. Both companies are call center outsourcers.

NIMIQ TAKES FLIGHT: Telesat Canada's Nimiq (Canada's first direct
broadcast satellite) was successfully launched into orbit May 20.

TELUS PLANS NATIONAL CHAIN OF WEB PORTALS: Telus has expanded its BC
news and information Web portal, MyBC.com, and announced plans to set
up similar regional and local sites across Canada. The Globe and Mail
reports that some of Telus's projected portal names are owned by
others.

BELL MOBILITY TO CUT STAFF BY 10%: Bell Mobility will drop 300 of its
3,200 employees in the next few months. The company blames a decrease
in revenue per subscriber and the rise of lower-revenue prepaid
service.

CALL-NET SAYS IT'S UNDERVALUED: Call-Net, the parent of Sprint Canada,
says the company is "grossly undervalued": its U.S. fiber alone is
worth more than its equity value. Sales to businesses and carriers now
generate 64% of Call-Net revenue.

** At the company's May 19 annual meeting, CEO Juri Koor said 
   he wants to significantly expand Call-Net's relationship 
   with U.S.-based Sprint Corp. (See Telecom Update #180)

RIM'S BLACKBERRY ADDS PAGING, ENTERPRISE SERVER: Research In Motion
has added paging services from PageMart Canada as an optional feature
of its BlackBerry wireless e-mail device.  BlackBerry can also now be
linked to enterprise e-mail servers.

ROYAL SOCIETY SAYS CELLPHONE RADIATION RISK IS LOW: A study by the
Royal Society of Canada, commissioned by Health Canada, has found no
evidence that radio-frequency fields emitted by wireless base stations
and handsets are injurious to health. The report endorses the wireless
health guidelines contained in the Federal Government's Safety Code 6.

http://www.rsc.ca/english/RFreport.html

NATIONAL WIRELESS SAFETY WEEK: During National Wireless Safety Week
(May 24-30), the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association and
wireless carriers are publicizing safety issues in cellphone use on
the road.

http://www.cwta.ca/policy/driving.htm

780 CODE MANDATORY IN ALBERTA: Use of the new 780 Area Code, which has
replaced 403 in northern and central Alberta, is now mandatory.

US WEST, GLOBAL CROSSING TO MERGE: International carrier Global
Crossing has made a US$35 Billion deal to merge with US West, a
regional telco in the midwest and western U.S. The Canadian Imperial
Bank of Commerce owns 17% of Global Crossing.

ACQUISITIONS BRING LOSS AT MITEL: Mitel's sales for the quarter ended
March 26 were $329 Million, 18% more than last year. One-time charges
of $34 Million, mostly due to acquisitions, led to a net loss of $18.9
Million.

TELUS TOPS ONE MILLION WIRELESS CUSTOMERS: BCT.Telus reported
first-quarter wireless revenue of $191 Million, down 4% from last
year. The number of subscribers rose 15.7% from the previous year and
has now topped 1,000,000.

REVERE DROPS PREPAID CARDS: Calgary-based Revere Communications, which
formed a partnership with Telus last year to market prepaid calling
cards, has decided to abandon the business due to "increased
competition and low profit margins." (See Telecom Update #115)

HOW TO LOCATE TELECOM NEWS, REFERENCES: You just can't find a key
telecom fact? The Angus TeleManagement Web site contains several
resources that may help you put your finger on it:

** Telecom Update provides a search engine that scans all its 
   weekly issues since 1995.

** Detailed yearly subject indexes locate articles printed 
   since 1995 in Telemanagement: The Angus Report on Business 
   Communications in Canada.

** Our Telecom Links section lists more than 500 
   organizations of interest to Canadian telecom 
   professionals, including all those mentioned in Telecom 
   Update or Telemanagement.

** The Telecom Calendar provides contact information for 
   more than 100 conferences and seminars in Canada and 
   internationally.

http://www.angustel.ca

============================================================

HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE

E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca

FAX:    905-686-2655

MAIL:   TELECOM UPDATE 
        Angus TeleManagement Group
        8 Old Kingston Road
        Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7

===========================================================

HOW TO SUBSCRIBE (OR UNSUBSCRIBE)

TELECOM UPDATE is provided in electronic form only. There 
are two formats available:

1. The fully-formatted edition is posted on the World 
   Wide Web on the first business day of the week at 
   http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html

2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of 
   charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to 
   majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should contain only the two words: subscribe update

   To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail 
   message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message 
   should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address]

===========================================================

COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus 
TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further 
information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, 
please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 
225.

The information and data included has been obtained from 
sources which we believe to be reliable, but Angus 
TeleManagement makes no warranties or representations 
whatsoever regarding accuracy, completeness, or adequacy. 
Opinions expressed are based on interpretation of available 
information, and are subject to change. If expert advice on 
the subject matter is required, the services of a competent 
professional should be obtained.
============================================================

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 17:06:50 -0400
From: Josh Cartagenova"<JOSHC@vspan.com>
Subject: Bell Atlantic & V-SPAN Allianced


V-SPAN				
Joshua Cartagenova				
Marketing Manager							
610-382-4056						
joshc@vspan.com		

V-SPAN & BELL ATLANTIC JOIN FORCES TO PROVIDE A COMPLETE 
COMMUNICATION SOLUTION

Bell Atlantic and V-SPAN partner in a preferred provider agreement for
videoconferencing & gateway services

	
	King of Prussia, PA * May 24, 1999 V-SPAN, the largest
privately held videoconferencing network management and gateway
service provider, and Bell Atlantic Data Solutions Group (DSG) are
pleased to announce a preferred service provider agreement. In this
co-marketing partnership, Bell Atlantic will direct all customers in
their 13-state territory to V-SPAN for multipoint videoconferencing
and gateway services.  "V-SPAN is excited to provide comprehensive
gateway and multipoint videoconferencing services to Bell Atlantic
customers. 

The agreement further solidifies the necessity of partnerships in
today's business environment by combining 'best of breed' resources to
offer customers a complete solution", states Ken Hayward, president of
V-SPAN.  The collaboration between Bell Atlantic Data Solutions Group
and V-SPAN now offer customers a single source for hardware, network
procurement, installation and maintenance, multipoint
videoconferencing network management and gateway services. DSG's
front-end service coupled with the back-end videoconferencing service
and support from V-SPAN enables Bell Atlantic customers to fully
benefit from a comprehensive communication solution.

About V-SPAN:

V-SPAN is a worldwide leader in the delivery of "virtual meeting
management services" to corporations, government, and educational
institutions. The organization is primarily engaged in providing
seamless multipoint videoconferencing connectivity and gateway
services to the interactive visual communications marketplace.

V-SPAN services include: gateway connectivity between traditional
(ISDN) and new media networks (i.e.: Internet, wireless, cable modems,
XDSL, POTS & public/private switched), videoconference network
management, award-winning Managed Conference Services Group,
multipoint bridging services, Internet streaming, Web-Enhanced
Teleconferencing, worldwide scheduling & reservations and help desk
services. V-SPAN Corporate headquarters is located in King of Prussia,
PA with offices nationwide. For additional information about V-SPAN
services and unrivaled customer dedication, please contact
1-888-44V-SPAN or visit our Web site at www.vspan.com.

About Bell Atlantic:

Bell Atlantic is at the forefront of the new communications and
information industry.  With 43 million telephone access lines and nine
million wireless customers worldwide, Bell Atlantic companies are
premier providers of advanced wireline voice and data services, market
leaders in wireless services and the world's largest publishers of
directory information.  Bell Atlantic companies are also among the
world's largest investors in high-growth global communications
markets, with operations and investments in 23 countries.
	
About Bell Atlantic Data Solutions Group

Bell Atlantic Data Solutions Group (DSG) is dedicated to providing
globally integrated network solutions that seamlessly connect
businesses with their customers, partners and employees.  DSG provides
all aspects of data networking from the management and operation of
customer networks and network integration, to network transport and
advanced IP services such as intranets and extranets, virtual private
networks, web hosting and multimedia services.  DSG will offer
complete, end-to-end solutions through third party alliances and
partnerships it will form nationally and globally.


                    Joshua Cartagenova
                     Marketing Manager
                            V-SPAN
Virtual Connectivity...Anyplace @ Anytime

1100 First Ave, Ste 400 - King of Prussia, PA 19406
Ph: 610-382-4056  Fx: 610-382-1099  E: joshc@vspan.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 04:56:26 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Big Banks Move on Net Security


By Tim Clark
Staff Writer, CNET News.com 
May 21, 1999, 1 p.m. PT 

Worried that problems on home computers may make Internet banking 
insecure, a group of major U.S. banks is expected to unveil a plan this 
summer to open a lab to test the security of Web browsers and PC 
hardware and software. 

"The banks feel that firewalls and what they have internally is in great 
shape, but the link is to the consumer and PC environments [where they 
find security more suspect]," said Catherine Allen, chief executive of 
the Banking Industry Technology Secretariat, a division of Bankers 
Roundtable. 

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,36923,00.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I can tell you that Bank One is having
a *horrible* problem right now with their 'online banking' since their
merger with First Chicago. First Chicago customers were able to see
all their accounts and do various things with a very high degree of
security. First Chicago insisted on browsers having 128 encryption,
and their software took complete control of the user's browser while
connected; i.e no use of history buttons or address bar allowed. 

Starting May 12, Bank One took over, and First Chicago customers have
been mostly locked out, only rarely able to get through. Many of the
accounts that were previously shown on line are no longer available
that way. Most results to get through to the 'online banking' at Bank
One get stalled due to the volume of business they are trying to
handle. **There is little or no security**. If you know how to cut
and paste URLs you can roam around on all sorts of 'deep pages' at
their site. 

Most of last week, Bank One's 'Online Banking Unit' simply refused
to answer the phone at all. After endless busy signals, if you 
finally reached their customer service at 800-482-3675 you got just
a recorded message saying 'time on hold will be at least six minutes'
with a lot of condescending advice on how to apply for a mortgage
or to be sure and include the 'payee phone number' when you made an
online bill payment. The 'six minutes on hold' turned into at least
45 minutes on three separate occassions, at which point the connection
was dropped. I put it on a speaker phone each time and just left it
there while I did other things; I have yet to actually speak live to
any person there. If you call First Chicago, they are very apologetic,
and say that yes, they know First Chicago customers are presently
having a 'hard time' (what an understatement!) logging in, and that
no, they are not able to reach anyone personally at Bank One either
to find out what is going on. All they get is the 'six minutes on hold'
recorded message also that never goes away. 

The complete lack of security at Bank One's site (http://www.bankone.com)
is what scares me; I have little enough money as it is without having
some smart person who happens to know my social security number decide
to cut and paste URLs with all the cute little symbols Bank One puts
in the 'address' thinking they can keep people out of where they do
not belong. I will try them again later today and see if I can both
get through to a live person and/or actually log in.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 05:03:36 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Copyright Bills May Limit Access to Facts


By Courtney Macavinta
Staff Writer, CNET News.com 
May 21, 1999, 12:05 p.m. PT 

Federal legislation is gaining ground to give those who compile public 
or proprietary facts landmark copyright protections for their databases. 

The House Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property yesterday 
passed a heavily amended Collections of Information Antipiracy Act by 
Rep. Howard Coble (R-North Carolina).

The Coble bill aims to protect the "brow sweat," deep pockets, and 
future ventures of database creators, such as WestLaw, the American 
Medical Association, members of the National Association of Realtors, 
and Reed Elsevier, which owns Lexis-Nexis.

http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,36911,00.html   

------------------------------

From: Charlie C. <forspam@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 22:52:08 -0500
Organization: Noddy Blighters


Scott Prugh wrote:

> I found the following in TELECOM Digest:

> Within North America, rate distance is calculated using the "V&H" system.
> V stands for "vertical" (north-south position) and H for "horizontal"
> (east-west position). Each exchange is represented by a location expressed
> as a V&H co-ordinate. A rate distance can be calculated from two V&H
> co-ordinate sets based on Pythagorean Theorem, i.e. rate distance =
> sqrt((V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2)/10 where (V1,H1) is the V&H for one end of a
> call, and (V2,H2) represents the other end of a call.

> Seems pretty easy.  So I pulled out my LERG and took the switch coordinates
> for two switches:

> SW1 = 'PSWYNJPIDS5'          (v1,h1) = (5080,1444)  -- PISCATAWAY
> SW2 = 'ACMEWAXARS1'       (v2,h2) = (6102,8901) -- SEATTLE
> 
> And plugged away:
> 
> rd = sqrt( (5080-6102)^2 + (1444-8901)^2 )/10
> rd = sqrt( -1022^2 + -7457^2)/10
> rd = sqrt( 1044484 + 55606849)/10
> rd = sqrt( 56651333)/10
> rd = 7526/10
> rd = 752
> 
> This is obviously wrong, since Seattle is more that 752 miles from
> Piscataway.

> What's wrong here?  Is the formula I have dated?

Math looks good to me. I notice that the result is off by a factor
of about 3.1416 -- hmmmmm... Could the original presentation of the
formula have an omitted term?


My email reply address is never read. Spam away!

------------------------------

From: steve_pinkston@adc.com (Steve Pinkston)
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 15:54:43 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications
Reply-To: steve_pinkston@adc.com


On Sat, 22 May 1999 22:22:38 GMT, Kevin Lundy <klundy@home.comnospam>
wrote:

> Is there any recommended maximum distance from the smartjack to the
> CSU? 

Not really. Everything has to do, ultimately, with signal levels. Most
CSUs can sync up properly on a signal as low as -22.5 dBdsx0.  The
telco can provide a signal that comes OUT of the smartjack at a level
anywhere from 0 dBdsx0 down to -16 dBdsx0. Any CPE wiring ("extended
demarc") will attenuate the signal more.

> I have a new T1 voice service that is giving me hell.  It's an
> intermittent problem - slips, dropped calles, static, etc.

That you mention "slips" is significant. Slips (or "controlled slips")
generally indicate a timing conflict between your CPE and the line.
Check to see if your PBX (or channel bank, or whatever) is set to
derive its timing (clock) from the T1 line. If it set for internal
timing, or "free-run," it could cause the problems you are reporting.

A line that is heavily errored due to near-end crosstalk (NEXT)
could also cause the problems you report. A telltale symptom
would be that the CSU was reporting large numbers of BPVs
(Bipolar Violations).

> Every time we have a problem, the techs can loop up the smart jack and
> stress test error free.  They loop the CSU, and they see errors.  So
> we replace the CSU, and problem is still there.  This much is
> repeatable.  Which to me indicates a problem of some sort with the
> cable between the CSU and smartjack.  A grounding problem, a distance
> problem, a flakey termination, etc.  But then the techs come on site
> and put a test pack on the cable at my CSU and it tests fine.

Everything you mention in the preceding paragraph is consistent with
controlled slips, and might be consistent with a NEXT problem.

> Any thoughts of wisdom out there?

I don't know if it counts as wisdom or not, but I will say that a 
big part of troubleshooting is paying close attention to the TYPE
of errors one is receiving. Slips, BPVs, and CRC-6 errors can
indicate various error mechanisms. In combinations, they point
to still further syndromes.

A lot of the devices we hook up are very smart, but it sometimes
takes a little research to be able to use all the data they give you!


 - steve

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 09:37:22 -0700
From: Cortland Richmond <crichmon@telecom-digest.org>
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Subject: Re: Strange Problem


> IT DOESN'T MATTER (AND THE SWITCH CAN'T TELL) WHETHER YOU OR YOUR
> COMPUTER DIALS, A LOCAL CALL IS A LOCAL CALL IS A LOCAL CALL. PERIOD.

My ISP tells me PacBell wants this changed. PacBell wants to get out
from under reciprocal compensation to ILEC's serving ISP's, and is
asking that calls to ISP's be treated as long distance. Here's the
bulletin they sent me:

   > The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
   > is considering a change in the way that calls to
   > Internet Service providers are classified and how
   > the billing is handled between the various
   > telephone companies involved in handling the calls.
   >
   > Pacific Bell has asked the Commission to overturn
   > previous rulings, appeals and arbitrations and rule
   > that all calls to Internet companies are long-
   > distance calls instead of local calls.

   > THIS WOULD CAUSE HIGHER RATES FOR CALIFORNIA
   > INTERNET USERS AND, IN MANY RURAL AREAS, COMPLETE
   > LOSS OF LOCAL INTERNET ACCESS.

   > The CPUC will meet on May 27th to make a decision.

   > What can you do?

   > 1. Look at the CPUC link on SaberNet's home page
   > at http://www.saber.net/sabernet/cpucdocs.html
   > for more information.

   > 2. Take action! Time is of the essence.
   > Protect your right to local Internet access!

------------------------------

From: black@csulb.edu (Matthew Black)
Subject: Re: AT&T Now CHARGES For BASIC Numbering/Dialing/Geographic Info!
Date: 24 May 1999 14:20:02 GMT


In article <telecom19.92.2@telecom-digest.org>, mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.
tulane.edu says ...

[original message edited for brevity --matt 990524]

> ... They DON'T tell you that anytime
> you are connected to their 'double-oh' info pseudo-directory that you are
> charged NINETY-NINE-CENTS, whether or not their pseudo-directory is able
> to find the directory listing or other such info that you are inquiring
> about - and I assume you are charged ONCE the AT&T 'double-oh' operator
> 'supes' back to the initial operator.

Most of us have seen those commercials for AT&T double-oh-my-god you
call this service.  They say they provide listings for "any number."
Has anyone tried asking for President Clinton's private phone in the
Oval Office?  Wouldn't it be great to get the phone number of your
favorite movie or rock star?  AT&T promises to have any number for
just $0.95.  I'm surprised some lawyer hasn't sued AT&T for false
advertising.

 --matt
[to send me e-mail, remove obvious item from my address]

 ------------------------------(c) 1999 Matthew Black, all rights reserved--
matthew black                   | Opinions expressed herein belong to me and
network & systems specialist    | may not reflect those of my employer
california state university     | 
network services SSA-180E       |             e-mail: black at csulb dot edu
1250 bellflower boulevard       |   PGP fingerprint: 6D 14 36 ED 5F 34 C4 B3
long beach, ca 90840            |                    E9 1E F3 CB E7 65 EE BC

------------------------------

From: webnerd <webnerd@home.com>
Subject: More Spam With 800 Numbers
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 22:26:21 -0400


Hello Patrick,

I have been enjoying the newsletter. I suspect that you have been
rather busy lately and slightly rushed to get it out. Slow down and
watch the typos! Otherwise, keep up the good work!

I am waiting for you to drift into VON/IP/ATM alphebetics
discussions. My theory is that the major phone companies are buying in
to KILL this innovative method before they are overrun.

Best,

PS: Attached SPAM for speed dial abuse ONLY for "SERIOUS" Demon
dialers (I have one here somewhere but never fond a manual for it ;-( )

 -----Original Message-----
 From:	abba47614@turbomail.net [SMTP:abba47614@turbomail.net]
 Sent:	Monday, May 24, 1999 6:05 PM
 Subject:	This is a proven system for wealth building. (62842)

Innovative publically traded company offers full or part-time home-base
business opportunity, with the potential to earn thousands from the
comfort of your own home.

I'm looking for serious minded entrepreneurs with a burning desire to
improve their present financial situation and who are commmitted to
earning several thousand dollars per month.

*  This business is not multi-level marketing or a get rich quick scheme.
*  Your customers will pay you directly.
*  This is a proven turn-key system.
*  An excellent training and support tools are included.

Call only if you are SERIOUS and leave your name and telephone number.


                           1-888-248-1137


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: By now, everyone should know the
routine. Enjoy!  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #97
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Tue May 25 15:31:10 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA24456;
	Tue, 25 May 1999 15:31:10 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 15:31:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905251931.PAA24456@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #98

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 25 May 99 15:31:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 98

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Long Distance Junk Faxes Advertising www.copierdirect.net (Mark G. Thomas)
    Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport (J.F. Mezei)
    Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Fred Hapgood)
    Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (John R. Levine)
    Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (James Wyatt)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (Kevin Lundy)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (hal@nospam.com)
    WW-XX-YYY-ZZZ (was Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503) (Eric Morson)
    A Few Good People Wanted: On-Line Technography (bdk@cyberverse.com)
    Targeted Marketing Confronts Privacy Concerns (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (Eric Bohlman)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any
organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages
should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mark@Misty.com (Mark G. Thomas)
Subject: Long Distance Junk Faxes Advertising www.copierdirect.net
Date: 25 May 1999 15:33:00 GMT
Organization: MGT Consulting


Hi,

I just received a junk fax advertising www.copierdirect.net, listing
800-300-6693, and also suggesting I fax (long distance!) 818-576-0898
to be removed from their database.

I strongly suspect my fax number was harvested from the Internic or
"war-dialed", since the Internic is the only place I've really listed it,
other then to business contacts.

I know technically I can sue the sender for $500, but I'm not sure
it's worth the trouble.  The only other junkfaxes I've had trouble
with were over a dozen I received a year or so ago, apparently from
Sanford Wallace.

This time I called the Bell Atlantic Annoyance Call Center, and the
person I spoke with insisted that junk faxes were perfectly acceptable
 -- "just another telemarketing technique", and that my only recourse I
had was to fax back the sender asking they remove me from their
database.

Any suggestions or comments?


Mark G. Thomas (Mark@Misty.com -- http://www.misty.com/)

------------------------------

From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>
Subject: Payphone Quality - Honolulu Airport
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 04:04:53 -0400


I have a pocket organizer with modem and an accoustic coupler. I limit
the modem to 2400 baud (with compression).

I have very few problems connecting from Australian pay phones back to
my server in Canada via long distance.

And in the past, I had no problems connecting at Honolulu airport.

But this year, on the outbound journey to Australia, I was only able
to connect at one phone near Gate 27. None of the phones at the nearby
gates resulted in a CONNECT signal.

And upon my return journey, I was not able to connect at all, not even
on the same phone I succesfully used a month before.

These phones use SPRINT as default long distance carrier.

How can I explain this? What could result in a whole bunch of payphones
dropping quality like that?

------------------------------

From: hapgood@pobox.com (Fred Hapgood)
Subject: Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 19:31:00 GMT
Reply-To: hapgood@pobox.com
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die


> Those "carts" should time out after a while, unless the programmer was
> really stupid. Unlike a physical store, there are no actual "goodies
> sitting there" until the user completes the order. It's like filling
> out an order form from a mail-order catalog, and then not mailing it.

I disagree.  These carts serve as custom catalogs and I love them.
The sole reason I don't buy at amazon.com is that their shopping cart
times out and I have found two other bookstores (altbookstore.com and
books.com) who do not impose that inconvenience on me.  I love having
a choice between ordering a book that minute and forgetting about it
(which, given my memory, is the choice).  Don't tell me to 'write it
down'.  Write it down where?  I'd lose the paper; I'd forget the
filename.  The right place for a list of the books I think I might
order sometime is the website of my online bookstore.  I keep dozens
of books in the one at books.com.  If a bookstore gave me some real
management tools for my 'cart' I'd take my business there in an
instant.


Fred
http://www.pobox.com/~hapgood

------------------------------

Date: 25 May 1999 10:27:44 -0400
From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed
Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll tell you another hassle that
> merchants on the net have that they are not very anxious to talk about
> and that is the 'abandoned shopping cart' situation.

It's really not a problem.  I wrote a shopping cart system
 for my sister's web site that sells children's video tapes at
http://www.greattapes.com.  Each cart is a small file on the disk.
Every week or two I delete the old carts.  It's no big deal.


John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, 
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail

------------------------------

From: James Wyatt <jwyatt@RWSystems.net>
Subject: Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 13:14:53 -0500
Organization: Fastlane Communications (using Airnews.net!)


On Sat, 22 May 1999, Monty Solomon wrote:

> http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/19777.html 

> The wife then calls the bank that issued the card, reports the charge as 
> bogus, and the bank cancels it. The adult-entertainment site is out the 
> price of the subscription. Beyond that, it has to pay the bank a penalty 
> fee for the so-called charge-back. 

Privacy rules prevent some of the trace-back. Even if the business has a
detailed (time and IP address of connection) record of the user's request,
it can be difficult. ISPs are getting wary of requests for user info or
identification. (Except maybe AOL 8{) Some will not verify without either
a subpoena, or worse, a court order. Many of the smaller web commerce and
dialup ISPs don't keep detail logs long enough to trace users 60-120 days
later anyway. How do you balance the needs of everyone here?

There also technical problems in synchronizing the clocks so the ISP looks
at the right 'local' time in their logs. These problems (and other tracing
problems) get worse with proxies used by some xDSL and CableModem ISPs. I
amazed at how short proxy logs are kept at some locations.

> "It's a very significant issue for the card association, and a very 
> significant issue for the Net," said Tom Arnold, chief technical officer 
> for CyberSource, a company that makes fraud-detection software for 
> online merchants. 

> Over time, a sizeable population of savvy Web surfers have figured out 
> how to go on a spending spree on the Web scot-free. 

> "It's getting us a little nervous -- you can see the wave coming," said 
> the owner of the job listings site. 

> Phony disputes are a bigger problem for sites that sell digital goods -- 
> like subscriptions or downloadable software -- than they are for sites 
> that ship products by mail. 

Numerous companies are betting their profits on digital delivery and the
economies it provides. (Though it looks like some customers are seeing
some great savings already 8{( ) Their investors are betting on those
profits and I expect some to be *very* suprised when this wave of
uncollectables hits. Whatever was left of the profits could go to
shareholder lawsuits when earnings 'unexpectedly' dip.

> "For shipped goods, if you've got proof of delivery, that's a way [for 
> the merchant] to resolve a disputed charge," said CyberSource's Arnold. 

Digital 'proof of delivery' is being worked on by several folks for
this reason. US cryptography laws have hampered efforts as have a lack of
open technical standards. Use of PINs would help in proof as well, but I
am loathe to send it in a form as it's disclosure leaks untracable cash.

> Other merchants agree. "The credit-card companies aren't addressing a 
> blatant situation," said the owner of the jobs listing site. "And it's a 
> blatant situation that could affect all e-commerce." 

The credit-card companies have a much better database for doing the type
of analysis that catches this problem. They also have some very good folks
doing anti-fraud work. In the past they have been reactive, rather than
proactive, in handling fraud. They quietly leak a few million, fix the
leak (or it moves), and make it back in profits. After being amazed at how
long many merchants took to give up the monthly/weekly 'hot books' and go
online, I expect them to display the same behavior with the web. With the
thinner margins that many web businesses operate live on, they will have
to be better at fraud anticipation.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll tell you another hassle that
> merchants on the net have that they are not very anxious to talk about
> and that is the 'abandoned shopping cart' situation. For whatever
> reason, people will go to a commercial site on the web, start pushing
> around their 'shopping cart' picking out nice items, then just walk
> out, and go to a different web site leaving their cart full of
> goodies sitting there. 

Most shopping-carts setups I've seen, the systems are per business and
don't post inventory updates until you are 'paying'. They collect as
some entries in DB tables for a while until they time-out and expire
later. I know that CMPExpress, for example, times-out on folks pretty
quickly. If I get distracted taking care of the kids, I have to shop
around again for the stuff I had collected.

> Then you have cases like Bank One, which recently merged with First
> Chicago Bank, and in the process also merged their web pages, making
> a TOTAL disaster out of it in the process. http://www.bankone.com
> has been inaccessible for several days now, at least to First Chicago
> customers as a result of the way the designers of the new site (for
> both banks) got things screwed up. What's not a bit funny is the
> total lack of security they now have. They seem to think they can 
> keep customer's money and accounts hidden away on real deep pages at
> the site, so they use these URLs that have about two hundred
> characters in them. I guess no one explained to them how 'cut and
> paste' works, and how if you study the arrangement of the URL (as to
> where the social security number is placed in it, etc) that you can
> get into any account you want. For several days now at Bank One's

I'm just waiting for one to think 'we are secure' and put my Credit
Card number in a GET form, transmitting it to the company placing a
banner ad in the result form to catch exit customers. Ulgh! When
designing CGI (order forms and such), it is very tempting to put vital
info for your form into variables or URLs. It lessens the realtime
database requirements of the application which can prevent
site-collapse if you get a lot more traffic than you expected. Making
industrial strength ecommerce sites is nontrivial and there is a lot
of rope for sale out there... 8{(

------------------------------

From: Kevin Lundy <klundy@home.comnospam>
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:27:09 GMT
Organization: @Home Network


To all,

The smartjack to CSU is probably 350' of cable.  It is shielded CAT5
run in conduit.  According to Bell Atlantic, Maryland tarrifs prevent
smartjack location anywhere other than in the room with the DS3
multiplexer.  Three different Bell employees have told me this.  Can
anyone confirm?

I've replaced all cable.  Bell replaced the smart jack.  Solved a
ground problem at the CSU (was within spec, but we made it better
anyway).  Replace the CSU a second time.  The smart jack is in a rack
of 20 other smart jacks, so I assume that if the rack had a bad ground
I wouldn't be the only one with a problem?

Problem still occurs.

At the CSU, we are seeing -6db signal level.  The LBO was 0 (-6db is
an acceptable level?), but we adjusted it to 7.5.

Today, we did adjust the LBO, time will tell on that.  Another
suggestion made by Gil was to check the ground resistance between
smart jack and CSU - they are actually in two different (connected)
buildings - how would I do that?

Any other thoughts or words of wisdom?

------------------------------

From: hal@nospam.com (Hal)
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 18:17:00 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com


On Sat, 22 May 1999 22:22:38 GMT, Kevin Lundy <klundy@home.comnospam>
wrote:

> Is there any recommended maximum distance from the smartjack to the
> CSU?  I have a new T1 voice service that is giving me hell.  It's an
> intermittent problem - slips, dropped calles, static, etc.

> Every time we have a problem, the techs can loop up the smart jack and
> stress test error free.  They loop the CSU, and they see errors.  So
> we replace the CSU, and problem is still there.  This much is
> repeatable.  Which to me indicates a problem of some sort with the
> cable between the CSU and smartjack.  A grounding problem, a distance
> problem, a flakey termination, etc.  But then the techs come on site
> and put a test pack on the cable at my CSU and it tests fine.

> Any thoughts of wisdom out there?

Not really much wisdom, but a bit of experience has shown me to stick
with the shielded manufacturers network cable.  You didn't say what
kind of CSU, but I always use Kentrox.  Kentrox recommends, and I
think it is worth the few extra bucks to get the shielded cable.  Not
sure about maximum length but I think Kentrox sells network cables
that go up to 50 feet.


Hal

------------------------------

From: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com (Eric B. Morson)
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:29:45 -0400
Subject: WW-XX-YYY-ZZZ (was Re: Oregon's 971 Partial Overlay of 503)


How can a local number format YYY-ZZZ work when there are already
dozens if not hundreds of NXXs in a local area? If you reformatted the
10 digit format from

NPA-NXX-XXXX to
WWX-XYY-YZZZ
  ^ ^
  | |

1) Consider these two digits in the sequence (I reformatted your
dialing pattern into the current 3-3-4 for the sake of comparison).
How do you propose converting NPA-NXX to WW-XX when the second "X" is
the first digit of the current NXX? the VAST majority (80-90%??) of
phone numbers in the NANP would have to change it's first digit at the
very least.  MASSIVE disruption of communications would be inevitable
and the cost?  Unbelievable today.

2) If you propose 2 digit sub regional codes: "XX is an optional sub
region. Larger metro areas would just use this as part of the number",
how do you suggest those Larger metro areas actually use the XX codes
WITHOUT changing every local 7 digit number's leading digit? (see #1)

3) I won't even go into the politics and public outcry that would result
from people and businesses losing their NPA "identity" and eliminating
people's ability to know inherently that 213 is Downtown LA, 212 is NYC,
etc ... and again, the cost to every consumer ...

People are complaining that their area code has to change, or they now
have to dial 10 or 11 digits to order a pizza ... imagine changing
every single local phone number en masse? A mess, don't you think? and
no matter how you slice it, your 2 digit WW region code itself still
has a limited number of combinations within it, and there are fewer
WWs to go around than there are NPAs. How could Chicago, LA, or NYC go
to a single WW region code, since the XX sub region codes would force
the changing of all local numbers at once in addition to the loss of
their current code, and forcing 8 or 6 digit local dialing? How many
different fundamental changes in the way people dial and think of the
dialing sequences can we affect at once?

It's Sunday morning, so please forgive the babbling nature of my reply!

Your thoughts all?


Eric B. Morson
Co-Webmaster
AreaCode-Info.com

EMail: Eric@AreaCode-Info.com

------------------------------

From: bdk <bdk@cyberverse.com>
Subject: A Few Good People Wanted: On-Line Technography
Organization: Cyberverse, Inc.
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 19:02:51 GMT


I am the developer of the "technography" method for supporting
collaborative work on-line. I am looking for a few people (currently,
I can only work with people in the US) who have access to two phone
lines (one for voice, one for data), a high speed modem (56K or
above), are fast typists, have good phone skills, and are familiar
with Microsoft Word (especially the Outline View).

We are still in our experimental phase. There would be no fees for the
training, which would involve at least 3 hours of on-line time, plus
whatever practicing needed to develop proficiencies.

If you're interested, please e-mail me. For more information, take a
look at our website: http://www.technography.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 22:10:57 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
Subject: Targeted Marketing Confronts Privacy Concerns


By BOB TEDESCHI

Offline, few merchants these days offer a personalized shopping 
experience, where the sales staff knows a customer's name, size and 
tastes from years of patronage. 

Internet merchants hope to provide that kind of personalization, but 
ironically, it is not clear that customers are willing to let them. 

http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/05/cyber/commerce/10commerce.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Most customers are not going to allow
that to happen, as well they should not. The Internet was not designed
for commercial things anyway; personally I wish most of them would go
away. I have to deal with some of them myself, and it is not a very
pleasant experience most of the time. In order to keep the Telecom
Archives web site http://telecom-digest.org somewhere in line with the
last year of the twentieth century, I've succombed a little to what I
see as the massive, and frequently offensive commercialization of the
net. If it were not for *advertisers* the new search engine would not
be available at http://telecom-digest.org/search nor would the free
email be available for users at http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice .

But I selected a fellow for both of these (Neil Mansilla) whose firm
works with web sites in an inoffensive and low-key way. Meanwhile, at
http://telecom-digest.org/chat I completely dumped xoom.com as the
supplier because of their insistence on spamming everyone they can
find on an almost daily basis plus their practice of not only placing
advertisements on the chat window but causing people who exit chat to
drop into one of their windows on the way out. As of a few days ago,
http://telecom-digest.org/chat is linked into a genuine, commercial-
free IRC network. 

If you do not want to (or cannot) run the java applet for chat, then
any IRC client connected to irc.ram-page.com 6667 will work just as
well. When connected, join #telecom-topics, a channel which is
permanently maintained by a bot serving as channel operator.  On
joining #telecom-topics you'll be right in the same room as if you had
come in using the java applet on the telecom web site. The first thing
you will notice is there is not an advertisement in sight anywhere.
Even using my java applet at http://telecom-digest.org/chat you are
still free to go to any channel you wish on irc.ram-page.com using the
usual IRC commands to do so. 

I notice about fifty of you already signed up for your free email
address (username@telecom-digest.zzn.com) and I hope you find anonymous
email addresses to be useful. But accept the counsel of Postmaster Pat
at http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice -- no spam, no scam, or you
are out of here ... administrators at zzn.com are deadly serious about
it; I will have no choice in the matter. They will not ask me what I
want to do about a spammer. They do have algorithyms in place to catch
people in the act, both on inbound and outbound mail. To avoid having
to check your box each day, if you request 'notify me by ICQ or email
when something arrives' you will get notice at some other place to
come and see what is waiting for you here.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:21:17 -0400
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam


Eli Mantel <mantel@hotmail.com> wrote:

> The creation of multiple area codes for the Caribbean has made it
> difficult to distinguish them from U.S. and Canadian area codes, yet
> the pricing is vastly different.

In my view the opposite was true, since under the old situation (one
big NPA 809 which served multiple countries *including* the US) it was
even harder to distinguish between US and non-US numbers, unless you
happened to have memorized the list of 809-NXX exchanges which served
Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. Remember, PR and the USVI are
*both* "Caribbean" and "U.S.", so the dichotomy between those two
categories you implied above has never been true.

> Rather than have the FTC pursue
> individual perpetrators taking advantage of this confusion, it seems
> like it would be highly preferable for the FCC to dictate the use of
> the international dialing prefix and country code for calls to the
> Caribbean.

But under what criteria?  If you're going to disqualify the non-US
NANP countries from being dialed from the US via 1+NPA dialing, then
why not Canada as well?  What distinguishes Canada from, say, Jamaica
in this respect?  Pricing, perhaps (the fact that lots of US long
distance carriers offer fairly decent rates to Canada, while most or
all of the non-US Caribbean NANP countries still have old-fashioned
expensive bilaterally-negotiated settlement rates for calls to/from
the US)?  So then what happens if Jamaica subsequently liberalizes its
telecom market enough so that Canada-type rates become available for
calls to Jamaica?  Will 1-876-NXX-XXXX calls then become dialable from
the US again?  

What if those rates are only available from, say, Sprint and Qwest,
but not from AT&T and MCI?  And what exactly is the pricing dividing
line anyway?  If you're going to exclude just some (but not all) of
the non-US NANP countries from 1+NPA dialing, you're going to have to
come up with a clear and consistent policy that answers all these
questions.  Otherwise, you could go for the much simpler policy of
requiring the international prefix for *all* non-US calls (including
those to Canada), or else retain the status quo.
 
> Although the use of "01" and "011" as international dialing prefixes
> in the U.S. makes this somewhat problematic, it would solve the
> problem for good rather than requiring that everybody be paranoid
> whenever they dial into an area code they don't immediately recognize.

Possible ways to change NANP international dialing prefixes to add
the capability of dialing intra-NANP numbers:

1)  Direct-dial prefix changes from 011 to 00;
    operator-assisted prefix remains 01.

2)  Direct-dial prefix remains 011;
    operator-assisted prefix changes from 01 to 010.

Of course, these prefixes are an NANP-wide convention, not just a
US thing, so involvement of the North American Numbering Council
would be desirable.  And I'm not sure how happy the NANC at large
would be at the entire concept of making intra-NANP dialing more
difficult instead of less ...

    
Bob Goudreau			Data General Corporation
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com		62 Alexander Drive	
+1 919 248 6231			Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

------------------------------

From: Eric Bohlman <ebohlman@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan
Organization: Netcom
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 07:18:03 GMT


Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org> wrote:

> This seems to be a phenomenon that recurs with a cycle time of about one
> generation -- takes that long for the old generation of enthusiastic
> engineers and marketing folks to forget about the last attempt, and to try
> to sell the picturephone again. It's similar to the marvelously periodic

 snip ...

> Seems like it must be the Japanese' turn to find this out. I was shown a
> mockup of a similar product a few months ago by some of the 3G wireless
> crowd. Same general idea. Gets a lot of points for good technical design.
> But, just like all those other attempts, it won't sell, IMHO. I doubt that
> human behavior has changed all that much - I think people still don't want
> picturephones!

Yep.  People don't want to have to worry about how they look when they're 
talking on the phone.  It's easy to fall into the trap of believing that 
the best technical solution to a problem is also the best social 
solution.  There's a semi-apocryphal story about Thomas Edison inventing 
a system that would allow the members of a state legislature to vote 
instantly rather than going through a lengthy roll-call.  He demonstrated 
it to a state legislature and it was flatly rejected, because the 
legislators really wanted to see how a vote was going with their 
colleagues before casting their own votes.

> I'm awfully skeptical about all this "wireless data" hype. I can't find
> ANYONE with a credible notion of what all those "killer apps" are that are
> going to consume these high data rate wireless services. If its only
> e-mail, they should forget the exotic services. An awful lot of e-mail
> equals not-very-much speech. A friend, who shall remain nameless because he
> works for a Fortune 500 company, that probably would not be thrilled by his
> sarcasm, suggested that the killer app is a guy driving down an LA freeway,
> downloading porno movies, and talking on the sex line. This is about the
> most credible thing I've heard of. Sad.

Another such solution looking for a problem is interactive cable TV.
The technology for it has been around for 25 years.  During that
period it's been repeatedly tried, with lots of hoohah each time, and
each time it's turned out that the demand didn't justify the cost.
Here again, there's a hidden killer app that the industry won't talk
about publicly, namely home gambling.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #98
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Wed May 26 03:07:03 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id DAA22472;
	Wed, 26 May 1999 03:07:03 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 03:07:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905260707.DAA22472@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #99

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 26 May 99 03:07:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 99

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    E-Biz Bucks Lost Under SSL Strain (Jody Kravitz)
    Data Cabling Book (Fred Atkinson)
    Reciprocal Compensation (was Re: Strange Problems) (Eli Mantel)
    Re: DNA Dragnet (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Do You Feel Like a Number? (Hillary Gorman)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (Mel Beckman)
    Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan (John A Beckett)
    Re: Ma Bell Doesn't Live There Any Longer (Arthur Ross)
    Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Ron Bean)
    Re: WW-XX-YYY-ZZZ (David Jensen)
    Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List? (Richard Shima)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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, 26 May 1999 00:08:02 -0700
From: Jody Kravitz <jkravitz@ipivot.com>
Subject: E-Biz Bucks Lost Under SSL Strain


Thought you might be interested in what I'm up to lately...  The
product(s) that I've been working on have kind of eaten my life for about
the last 18 months and this seemed like a good excuse to get out a short
piece of mail to you.  The article pointed to by the URL below was such
good news that I wanted to share it.   My "home" correspondence address
continues to be:  kravitz@foxtail.com

Jody


By  TIM WILSON

A customer stuffs his shopping cart with goodies from your Web
site. Credit card in hand, he waits for a secure connection to
consummate the deal. And waits. Finally, short of patience, he dumps
the contents and logs off.

It may sound like an e-commerce manager's nightmare, but according to
the latest Web server performance statistics, it's an increasingly
common phenomenon.

The ghost in the machine is Secure Sockets Layer, the commonly used
method of securing communications between users and Web sites.

Recent tests conducted by researcher Networkshop Inc. indicate that
powerful Web servers capable of handling hundreds of transactions per
second may be brought to a near standstill by heavy SSL traffic. Some
server configurations suffered as much as a fiftyfold degradation in
performance from SSL, down to just a few transactions per second,
according to analyst Alistair Croll at Networkshop.

The growing problem of SSL performance has driven vendors to develop
devices that can help share the Web server's processing load. IPivot
Inc. next month will ship two new processors that can offload
authentication and encryption on e-commerce sites.

IT managers and other experts have known for years that SSL, which
requires the authentication and encryption of Web server connections,
can significantly slow site performance. But the problem is rapidly
becoming more chronic as companies increase secured Web transactions,
they said.

"Our business is very seasonal, and a lot of it is concentrated in the
fourth quarter. This past December, we found ourselves shuffling
servers around to handle the load," said Stephen McCollum, network
architect at Hewitt Associates. The $858 million company manages
benefits plans for large organizations, and because Hewitt's Web
traffic is personal and confidential, virtually all of it is conducted
via SSL.

Hewitt is far from alone in its reliance on SSL. According to a study
conducted by research company Netcraft Ltd., SSL implementations
doubled from 15,000 sites to more than 35,000 sites between 1998 and
1999. And many of those server sites are struggling under the load.

"I'd guess that somewhere between 10 and 25 percent of [e-commerce]
transactions are aborted because of slow response times," said Rodney
Loges, vice president of business development at Digital Nation, a Web
hosting company. 

That translates to as much as $1.9 billion in lost revenue, using
Forrester Research numbers for 1998 of $7.8 billion in e-retail
sales.

According to Networkshop, even the most powerful, general-purpose Web
server hardware can be dragged down by large volumes of SSL
traffic. In its most recent tests, the research company found that a
typical Pentium server configuration running Linux and Apache, which
at full capacity can handle about 322 connections per second of
standard HTTP traffic, fell to about 24 connections per second when
handling a full load of SSL traffic.

A similar test conducted on a Sun 450 server running Solaris and
Apache experienced even more trouble. The server handled about 500
connections per second of HTTP traffic at full capacity, but only
about 3 connections per second when the traffic was secured via
SSL. Networkshop tests of quad-processor configurations showed that
those performance ratios scale to multiserver environments as well,
Croll said.

A few vendors, such as Rainbow Technologies Inc., have solved the
problem by offloading security processing onto a dedicated
co-processor card that slips into a server. But as SSL traffic
increases, adding and managing co-processor boards becomes unwieldy,
IT managers said. "We found that the [co-processor] cards were kind of
a kludge, because they have to be added to every server," said Digital
Nation's Loges.

IPivot will begin shipping two external SSL processors -- the Commerce
Accelerator 1000 and the Commerce Director 8000, which includes
IPivot's load-balancing system -- to help eliminate SSL bottlenecks.

The Commerce Accelerator 1000 is priced at $9,995; the Commerce
Director 8000 costs $39,950. 

Research Data:

http://www.internetwk.com/numbers/numbers052099.htm
What's The Price Of Security? Research shows that SSL encryption can
devastate Web server performance.

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@loralorion.com>
Subject: Data Cabling Book
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:50:42 -0400


Hello, Pat, 

	I was wondering if any of the T. D. readers would know of a
good reference manual to document the data about various types of
cables/interfaces?  Example, look up RS232 to find the pin outs, the
electrical and mechanical (type of connector, etc.) specifications,
and the maximum length an RS-232 cable can reliable be and still work.
This is the type of information I'm looking for, preferably a small
'quick reference' guide.  Then, look up the same type of info for
V.35, RS449/422, etc.

	If anyone has any suggestions, please email me at:
'fatkinson@loralorion.com'.

	Thanks, 


	Fred

------------------------------

From: Eli Mantel <mantel@hotmail.com>
Subject: Reciprocal Compensation (was "Re: Strange Problems")
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 18:31:45 GMT


Cortland Richmond (crichmon@telecom-digest.org) wrote:

> My ISP tells me PacBell wants this changed. PacBell wants to get out
> from under reciprocal compensation to ILEC's serving ISP's, and is
> asking that calls to ISP's be treated as long distance.
> ...
>> THIS WOULD CAUSE HIGHER RATES FOR CALIFORNIA
>> INTERNET USERS AND, IN MANY RURAL AREAS, COMPLETE
>> LOSS OF LOCAL INTERNET ACCESS.

Let's remember that the issue of reciprocal compensation doesn't
directly affect what consumers pay for service.  By the somewhat
arcane rules in effect, reciprocal compensation is paid only on local
calls, but classifying certain calls as long distance doesn't mean
that consumers will be charged for those calls.  It only affects what
the phone companies involved pay each other.

It's probably the case that the incumbent local phone companies, such
as PacBell, made a tactical error in lobbying for reciprocal
compensation, with the result that the competing local phone companies
took advantage of the opportunity this created by signing up
businesses to use their service for phone lines that made few or no
outgoing calls, hence making them eligible to receive reciprocal
compensation.

That mistake aside, payment of reciprocal compensation on calls
included in flat-rate service is extremely arbitrary, since both phone
companies involved carry the call part of the way, and neither one
receives any usage-sensitive charges from the consumer.

Whether or not charges for local phone service will go up if
reciprocal compensation continues to be paid or ISP charges go up if
reciprocal compensation is dropped is somewhat speculative, but it
seems to me that reciprocal compensation is primarily a subsidy from
one phone company to another, and it's difficult for me to understand
how such a subsidy can be justified.

------------------------------

From: wb5agz@dc.cis.okstate.edu (Martin McCormick)
Subject: Re: DNA Dragnet
Date: 24 May 1999 19:06:43 GMT
Organization: Oklahoma State University in Stillwater, Oklahoma


In article <telecom19.94.8@telecom-digest.org>, Mike Riddle
<mriddle@oasis.novia.net> wrote:

> Perhaps someone with a longer (and better) memory than I have
> can recount whether fingerprints went through a similar "growing
> phase."

	I have read that there must be at least 10 points of positive
identification between a known finger print and the one which was
lifted from a crime scene.

	There have also been cases of police misconduct in which
finger prints were simply lifted from finger print cards and then made
to look like crime scene prints in order to frame a suspect.  Of
course, they always matched perfectly.  I remember reading a magazine
article many years ago in which the FBI Crime Lab was sent a finger
print record of a suspect plus some crime scene prints which matched.
The technician smelled a rat when a look at the crime scene prints
under a microscope showed an odd thing.  The finger print powder had a
much different grain size than it usually does.  It turned out to be
Xerox toner.  Somebody had just photocopied that card and then used
finger print tape to lift the toner off and try to pass it off as a
lifted print.  It was lifted, all right.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Talking about Officer Friendly, and how
he and his fellow officers Serve and Protect each other with a 'code
of blue silence', wasn't it simply grand to read in the papers on Tues-
day that the New York City officer who liked sodomizing his prisoners
was found guilty of the attack on Mr. Louima ... he is eligible for
thirty years in prison without parole because of the violent nature of
his crime; a punishment police officers are more than happy to recommend 
for everyone else of course. The other four or five officers involved 
are still stonewalling; refusing to testify. I think it would be a good
idea to torture them until they confess; what is good enough for the
people they arrest should be good enough for them as well. With a 
little luck, they will all get thirty year prison terms, in a place 
where the other inmates know what their former occupations used to be.
I know, that is a terrible thing to say; sorry, it is how I feel. PAT

------------------------------

From: hillary@hillary.net (Hillary Gorman)
Subject: Re: Do You Feel Like a Number?
Date: 25 May 1999 13:10:21 GMT
Organization: Debugging our net or deworming your pet...


On Sun, 23 May 1999 05:12:34 +0100,<tom@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>> TELECOM Digest Editor <ptownson@telecom-digest.org> wrote...


>> It used to just be a grim joke: one day all Americans would be 
>> issued numbers to use instead of names. Well, we are about half-
>> way there. So far, we are still permitted to have individual 
>> names, but our social security numbers are rapidly becoming our
>> national ID numbers.

> How do (or will) these various organisations across the US (banks, 
> educational institutions, state governments, and airlines) cope with people 
> who (like myself) don't have a Social Security Number?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Then you will have to get a number or
> the bank won't be able to work with you.  PAT]

I found this at the ssa.gov website:

I do not have work permission from the INS. I need a Social
   Security number. Can I get one?

   ANSWER: Yes.

   The operative word is need.
   You can get a non-working Social Security Card when you are required
   to have one by law.

   This means that if you are in the U.S. legally and someone says you
   "must" have a social security number, ask for proof that you are
   legally required to have one. You should submit this proof along with
   your SS-5 Social Security Card Application.

   This number is not valid for employment. If you ever use this number
   for employment, the Social Security Administration can advise the
   Immigration Service. You must show Social Security a valid reason for
   this number. Reasons include identification for school or to open bank
   accounts. You can change the number to a working number when you get
   work permission from the INS.

   In practice, the Social Security Admnistration will seldom, if ever,
   give out non-working numbers. The SSA's position is that an Individual
   Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) takes care of the needs of any
   non-working Canadians.

   The ITIN is a nine digit number issued by the IRS to people who need a
   number, but who cannot get a social security number.

   Apply for an ITIN using form W-7, Application for IRS Individal
   Taxpayer Identification Number.


hillary gorman...........Official Token Female..........hillary@netaxs.com
 "So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?"
  hillary@hillary.net: for debugging your net or deworming your pet
 Net Access...The NSP for ISPs....The NOC that rocks around the clock.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 23:51:15 -0700
From: Mel Beckman <mel@becknet.com>
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU


At 10:37 PM -0400 5/22/99, Kevin Lundy <klundy@home.comnospam> wrote:

> Is there any recommended maximum distance from the smartjack to the
> CSU?  I have a new T1 voice service that is giving me hell.  It's an
> intermittent problem - slips, dropped calles, static, etc.

The line from the telco-provided smartjack to your CSU must be
adequate for T1 signaling. I've installed hundreds of T1 circuits, and
have learned that you can't fudge the requirements here. If you're
only going a few feet, an ordinary unshielded twisted pair (UTP) Cat5
Ethernet patch cable works fine. Beyond that distance, however, you
need to use shielded cable, such as D-Screen or T-Screen. The cable
needs to have two pairs, each pair separately shielded. This cable can
be hard to get, however, and is quite bulky, making it difficult to
install. An alternative is to use shielded Cat-3. Because there is
only one shield for the whole four-pair cable, you have to use two STP
Cat3s to do the job. Run the send pair (pins 1 & 2 on the RJ45) on one
cable, and the receive pair (pins 4 and 5 on the RJ45) on the other
cable.

Finally, you must ground the shielding at one and (AND ONLY AT ONE 
END!). Use a good-quality earth ground, such as a cold water pipe or, 
if you're really lucky, an established telecommunications ground 
strap.

If you don't follow these rules, you end up with the sorts of 
intermittent problems you describe.

Note that it's possible, with the STP Cat3 approach, to carry four 
T1s over one pair of cables. All the Send pairs go in one cable, and 
all the Receive pairs go in the other.


 - Mel Beckman

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 05:39:50 GMT
From: John A Beckett <jbeckett@southern.edu>
Subject: Re: World's First Video Cell Phone Debuts in Japan


> TOKYO -- The world got its first glimpse at what could be the future
> of mobile telephony this week when Japanese component vendor Kyocera
> Corp.  unveiled the first cellular phone able to transmit a caller's
> picture and voice simultaneously.

Would somebody kindly tell me an application for this technology?  Its
best use seems to be material for Jay Leno's jokewriters or "Saturday
Night Live."  The punch line of course would be a freeze-frame of the
front of a Mack truck reflected in the caller's eyeglasses, the sound
track being part of a crash followed by whatever noise is made when a cell
connection is broken.


        /\--.     John A. Beckett             "Never tire of doing
       /  \  )    Southern Adventist Univ.     right."  2 Thess. 3:13
      /----\---.  voice: (423) 238-2701
 \   /      \   \ FAX:   (423) 238-2431
  `-'        `--' home:  (423) 396-2453        jbeckett@southern.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:39:13 -0700
From: Arthur Ross <a.ross@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: Ma Bell Doesn't Live There Any Longer


> Yes, Pat, it has been some time since I've posted to the Digest. I've
> just become burned-out and dis-illusioned by what I've been seeing
> going on in the telephone industry over the past year or so! :-(

> mjc

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Burned out and dis-illusioned? No kidding!
> Nothing is the same any longer is it? I will quote the title of a book
> by Thomas Wolfe: "You Can't Go Home Again" ... Ma Bell doesn't live
> there any longer.  PAT]

Pat -

This is a MARVELOUS title, a la: "Basic Basic" (book on programming), "The
Umpire Strikes Back" (book by baseball umpire), etc, etc. Somebody (you?)
should write the book to go with it!

   -- Best
   -- Arthur
   -- Dr. Arthur Ross
      2325 East Orangewood Avenue
      Phoenix, AZ 85020-4730
      Phone: 602-371-9708
      Fax  : 602-336-7074

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Ma Bell Doesn't Live Here Any Longer:
The Decay of the USA Telephone Network Since 1984."  Subtitled,
"One Hundred of the Best Horror Stories About Telephone Service Which
Appeared in TELECOM Digest" ... I dunno, does someone want to help me 
write it?   PAT] 

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:35:51 CDT
From: Ron Bean <rbean@execpc.com>


hapgood@pobox.com (Fred Hapgood) writes:

> I disagree.  These carts serve as custom catalogs and I love them.
> The sole reason I don't buy at amazon.com is that their shopping cart
> times out and I have found two other bookstores (altbookstore.com and
> books.com) who do not impose that inconvenience on me.

I take the opposite view-- when I buy books, I know what I want, and I
don't need any leftover cruft getting into my current order.

> The right place for a list of the books I think I might
> order sometime is the website of my online bookstore.

"On their website" is not necessarily the same as "in a cart".  There
are other ways to accomplish this. At the very least, they should give
you a way to tell them "save this order for later", so they can get
rid of the ones that nobody is going to come back to.

I was mildly dismayed to discover that none of the "major" online
booksellers (Amazon, B&N, Borders) will allow me to place an order
without creating an "account", so that I have to type in the same
password every time I place an order with them. I have enough
passwords to remember already; I just want to order some books, should
be no big deal. I don't need a password to order from a paper catalog.

It doesn't bother me that they *offer* accounts to people who want
them, but it seems odd to *require* something that is a convenience to
some people but an inconvenience to others, and which doesn't really
add anything to their ability to fill the order. If this trend
continues, I'll need to remember a separate password for every vendor
I do business with on the net, even though my individual orders are
separate transactions that have nothing to do with each other. They
can already collect marketing data about my ordering habits; they
don't need a password for that.

[Note to anyone who missed the word "mildly" in the above -- I'm not
losing any sleep over it, but it seems totally unnecessary.  I know
there are lots of other online booksellers, but I haven't had time to
investigate *all* of them, and so far I haven't run across any others
that have a complete database of all books in print.]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One of the reasons for the creation of
username@telecom-digest.znn.com anonymous email accounts was to assist
partly in giving people a way to transact business on the net; stick
around long enough to make sure the order was handled correctly and
then ditch the email address. Let it be the focal point for all the
cookie collectors/processors instead of your real email address. If
you want one, obtain it at http://telecom-digest.org/postoffice  PAT]

------------------------------

From: djensen@madison.tds.net (David Jensen)
Subject: Re: WW-XX-YYY-ZZZ
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:06:38 GMT
Organization: At My House
Reply-To: djensen@madison.tds.net


On Tue, 25 May 1999 10:29:45 -0400, in comp.dcom.telecom Eric@AreaCode-
Info.com (Eric B. Morson) wrote in msg <telecom19.98.8@telecom-digest.org>:

> How can a local number format YYY-ZZZ work when there are already
> dozens if not hundreds of NXXs in a local area? If you reformatted the
> 10 digit format from

> NPA-NXX-XXXX to
> WWX-XYY-YZZZ
>   ^ ^
>   | |

> 1) Consider these two digits in the sequence (I reformatted your
> dialing pattern into the current 3-3-4 for the sake of comparison).
> How do you propose converting NPA-NXX to WW-XX when the second "X" is
> the first digit of the current NXX? the VAST majority (80-90%??) of
> phone numbers in the NANP would have to change it's first digit at the
> very least.  MASSIVE disruption of communications would be inevitable
> and the cost?  Unbelievable today.

Yes, there would be a one-time change from NPA to WW-XX. Aside from
changes in NPA, fewer than 5% (more likely 2%) of all N's in NXX'x would
have conflicts that would necessitate change in the NXX. The last six
digits would remain unchanged.

> 2) If you propose 2 digit sub regional codes: "XX is an optional sub
> region. Larger metro areas would just use this as part of the number",
> how do you suggest those Larger metro areas actually use the XX codes
> WITHOUT changing every local 7 digit number's leading digit? (see #1)

Metro regions would use 8 digits in their local calling area. The
leading eighth digit would most commonly be the last digit of today's
NPA.

> 3) I won't even go into the politics and public outcry that would result
> from people and businesses losing their NPA "identity" and eliminating
> people's ability to know inherently that 213 is Downtown LA, 212 is NYC,
> etc ... and again, the cost to every consumer ...

Some will have identities, doesn't NY as the region code work? Why not
LA? It costs less to make one change that will survive for decades than
suffer the constant drip drip drip of splits, overlays and fights at the
PUC.

> People are complaining that their area code has to change, or they now
> have to dial 10 or 11 digits to order a pizza ... imagine changing
> every single local phone number en masse? A mess, don't you think? and

People will dial no more than eight digits, not ten or eleven to get
their pizza. They will keep at least the final six digits of "their"
number.

> no matter how you slice it, your 2 digit WW region code itself still
> has a limited number of combinations within it, and there are fewer
> WWs to go around than there are NPAs. How could Chicago, LA, or NYC go
> to a single WW region code, since the XX sub region codes would force
> the changing of all local numbers at once in addition to the loss of
> their current code, and forcing 8 or 6 digit local dialing? How many
> different fundamental changes in the way people dial and think of the
> dialing sequences can we affect at once?

Let's use Chicagoland as an example. Instead of six, seven or eight area
codes, Chicagoland gets one region code. The folks in 312 will have a
number that starts, say, 24 2X YYY ZZZ, the folks in 708 get 24 8X YYY
ZZZ with no change in their base number except that they again have a
common region code and have to dial eight digits instead of seven or
ten. 

The shortage is not of numbers. The impending NANP shortage and the
current local shortages represent a flaw in the assignment method.
Grandfather current assignments, but hand out 1000 numbers at a time in
the future. Reserve regional codes for wireless overlays for the five or
six largest metro areas. With assignment control and overlay control, we
will not require region code changes or an eleventh digit in NANP until
the middle of next century.

Right now, every area code split already represents a possible effect on
everyone else in the phone network. Splits should not be treated as
cavalierly as they are today by NANPA, the PUCs and telcos. We cannot
even rely on our telco's phone books to show accurate information. Not
only would a major reform stabilize the numbering system, but it would
force local telcos to update their obsolete information.

------------------------------

From: Richard Shima <RShima@att.net>
Subject: Re: 10-10- Dial-Around Company List?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 00:14:26 -0400
Organization: The Shima Company


Barry Margolin wrote:

>> This page has the definitive list:
>> http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/carrier_id_codes.html

> What I've been wondering is if anyone has compiled pricing details for the
> 10-10 codes, so that consumers can compare them easily to find the ones
> that best match their calling patterns.

Barry,

Try looking at this interesting new site for 10-10 comparisons:

     http://www.10-10Phonerates.com/


Richard Shima    | Internet:  RShima@att.net
The Shima Co.    | CompuServe:  74037,2425
Mayfield Heights | FidoNet (Point on Nerd's Nook):  1:157/2.10
Ohio  44124  USA | Voice & fax:  440 461-4357 | Radio:  WB8MTE

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #99
*****************************
    
    
From editor@telecom-digest.org  Wed May 26 03:53:06 1999
Received: (from ptownson@localhost)
	by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id DAA24372;
	Wed, 26 May 1999 03:53:06 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 03:53:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: editor@telecom-digest.org
Message-Id: <199905260753.DAA24372@massis.lcs.mit.edu>
To: ptownson
Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #100

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 26 May 99 03:53:00 EDT    Volume 19 : Issue 100

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Consulenza per aziende (Barbara Giussani)
    Re: Seeking Telephone Answering Software and Hardware (Anthony Naggs)
    Re: Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry (Bill Feidt)
    Re: Long Distance Junk Faxes Advertising www.copierdirect (Hillary Gorman)
    Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Smartjack and CSU (Mel Beckman)
    Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed (Joel B. Levin)
    Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance (Andy McFadden)

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
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums.
It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated 
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 765
                        Junction City, KS 66441-0765
                        Phone: 415-520-9905 
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having
been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then.     
Our archives are available for your review/research. 

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the              *
* International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland    * 
* under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)   * 
* project.  Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-*
* ing views of the ITU.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

   In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------
    
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.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.

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: Barbara Giussani <bgiussani@sepi.it>
Subject: Consulenza per aziende
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:21:27 +0200
Organization: Centro Servizi Interbusiness


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This came in the mail to the Digest.
Would someone please read it to me and tell me what it says. I hope
it is not spam of some kind :(  Where you see numbers in parentheses
below, there was originally a backslash followed by the number. 
This tells me there were some eight-bit characters in the message
that would have wreaked havoc getting this out in the mail. In the
past, sendmail has told me 'you cannot send 8-bit messages to 7-bit
sites ...' nor, I suppose should you have 8-bit messages in 2-bit
mailing lists.  :(  I wanted you to see the (apparently) octal
representation of the characters inserted as it may have to do
with the translation. Anyway, someone tell me what it says, and
deal with it please.   PAT]

                 ---------------------------

SEPI srl (350) una societ(340) specializzata da oltre un ventennio nel
settore dell informatica.

Stimolata dal legame sempre pi(371) stretto tra telecomunicazioni e
computer, ha ora deciso di offrire un nuovo sevizio nel campo della
telefonia per aziende.

La liberalizzazione delle tariffe telefoniche ha prodotto nuove e
sostanziali possibilit(340) di risparmio, tuttavia la scelta del miglior
contratto diviene di giorno in giorno sempre pi(371) complessa.

La neonata attivit(340) di consulenza consiste nell(222)individuare,
grazie ad un sofisticato software, il miglior contratto di telefonia
fissa e mobile sulla base delle caratteristiche del cliente, fornendo
la soluzione pi(371) conveniente e pi(371) adatta alle qualit(340)
specifiche del suo traffico telefonico.

A garanzia di seriet(340), SEPI sottolinea la propria totale indipendenza da
tutti i fornitori di telefonia mobile e fissa.

Per informazioni

Barbara Giussani
SEPI Srl
via della Betulla 11/13
20035 Lissone (MI)
bgiussani@sepi.it
http://www.sepi.it/
tel. 039 2456390
fax  039 460611

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 18:38:55 +0100
From: Anthony Naggs <amn@ubik.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Seeking Telephone Answering software and hardware
Organization: Ubikuity


After much consideration a reader decided to share these wise words:

> I am seeking to design and build a telephone answering systems.

> Hardware:

> Can you recommend any PC telephone answering cards?  How does
> telephone cards integrated with sound card to play greetings and
> record incoming messages and recognize DTMF key in reply from caller?

Dialogic hardware is pretty good (www.dialogic.com) and there are other
manufacturers of similar equipment which a web search should help you
find.

You may be able to what you want with a 'voice modem'.  Which is a modem
that can send/decode DTMF tones and WAVE (.wav) sound files.  The
quality is reputed to be quite variable, particularly on cheaper models.
Top end models are probably the PhoneBlaster and IBM MWave.

> Software:

> Can you recommend how to write our own Microsoft Windows based
> telephone answering software with caller ID and DTMF key in reply from
> callers?

Find out about TAPI, Microsoft's Telephony API, which should allow you
to program many types of telephone hardware under Windows.  However the
TAPI drivers for some hardware, (e.g. Dialogic) are buggy and you may do
better to use Dialogic's own API with their hardware.

Visit the microsoft.public.win32.programmer.tapi newsgroup for more
information, and check Bruce Pennypacker's TAPI FAQ for lots of info and
book suggestions:
  http://members.tripod.com/~tapifaq


Cheers,

Anthony

------------------------------

From: wfeidt@cpcug.org (Bill Feidt)
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Service Problem Inquiry
Organization: Capital PC User Group, Rockville, MD USA
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 23:12:08 GMT


Bill Feidt (wfeidt@cpcug.org) wrote:

> Periodically, I lose dial tone on the line and hear a loud hum in its
> place.  The condition comes and goes, apparently without BA
> intervention.  It happens frequently enough (4 times so far this week)
> and for suffiently extended periods (up to 12 hours continuous) to be
> very disruptive.

> I've reported the problem to BA three times so far.  They send a
> service tech out and by the time he arrives the problem has gone away.
> BA has installed a demarc box and I've used that to verify that the
> problem is "outside the house".

A quick update on the situation.  First, a big thank you to Pat and
the others who responded.  Brad Snow asked about my location, noting
that BA covers a large area and procedures might well vary from on
area to the next.  I am in Montgomery County, Maryland.

The problem continues, mainly in the mornings.  As I noted, calling
the main problem reporting 800 number does little good, since by the
time the technician was dispatched, the problem had disappeared.  The
BA "customer advocate" group did follow up with me, however.  They put
me in touch with the area Supervisor, who seems to be very customer
oriented and serious about trying to solve the problem.  She gave me
her direct office phone and told me to report outages there.  This
morning when the problem occurred again, I called and left a message.
She returned my call early this afternoon with the news that they had
been able to monitor the line while it was out of order and had
localized the difficulty. She promised send a tech out to deal with it
tomorrow at the latest (today they're busy catching up on thunderstorm
related outages).  If this woman is typical of BA's field supervision
staff, they're hiring the right people.  At this point, I'm most
encouraged that the problem will finally be resolved.

Again, thanks to all who responded.


Bill
wfeidt@cpcug.org


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do let us know if she is for real, or
was just put on the line as a buffer for your calls.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: hillary@hillary.net (hillary gorman)
Subject: Re: Long Distance Junk Faxes Advertising www.copierdirect.net
Date: 26 May 1999 00:49:16 GMT
Organization: Debugging our net or deworming your pet...


On 25 May 1999 15:33:00 GMT,<Mark@Misty.com> wrote:

[snipped story of being junkfaxed]

> This time I called the Bell Atlantic Annoyance Call Center, and the
> person I spoke with insisted that junk faxes were perfectly acceptable
> -- "just another telemarketing technique", and that my only recourse I
> had was to fax back the sender asking they remove me from their
> database.

> Any suggestions or comments?

Yes, Mark, I have a comment. Here it is: the Bell Atlantic tech with
whom you spoke was an ignoramus. Assuming you got its name, call back
and tell its supervisor what it told you! But leaving aside the issue
of the ignorant Bell tech, you still have the issue of the junk
faxing. I think you might find it worth your while to file a claim.


hillary gorman...........Official Token Female..........hillary@netaxs.com
 "So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?"
  hillary@hillary.net: for debugging your net or deworming your pet
 Net Access...The NSP for ISPs....The NOC that rocks around the clock.

------------------------------

From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Judge Freezes Funds In Internet Scam
Date: 26 May 1999 03:09:47 -0400
Organization: PANIX -- Public Access Networks Corp.
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com


In article <telecom19.98.11@telecom-digest.org>, Bob Goudreau
<goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com> wrote:

>> Rather than have the FTC pursue
>> individual perpetrators taking advantage of this confusion, it seems
>> like it would be highly preferable for the FCC to dictate the use of
>> the international dialing prefix and country code for calls to the
>> Caribbean.

> But under what criteria?  If you're going to disqualify the non-US
> NANP countries from being dialed from the US via 1+NPA dialing, then
> why not Canada as well?  What distinguishes Canada from, say, Jamaica
> in this respect?  Pricing, perhaps (the fact that lots of US long

Oh, to my mind that's *very* simple.  Canada is well-behaved, and the
Carribean countries which harbor these telephonic scams are not.

Certain nations, it seems to me, should be put on notice that their
free ride in country code 1 will soon be over -- shape up or they'll
be kicked out for bad behaviour.  The FCC could mandate that direct
dialing end, the NANPA administrator could deallocate the codes, and
that would, by and large, be that.  No more scam artists hiding behind
the illusion that they were in the United States.  No more sponging
off the country code 1 international gateways, either.

So the ITU would throw a fit.  So what?  The ITU is, by and large, a
bunch of bureaucrats in eternal servitude to the European
telecommunications equipment vendors.  It'd be well worth it just to
see them have to do something fast for once, instead of screwing up
others' hard work very, very, *very* slowly.


Thor Lancelot Simon                                tls@rek.tjls.com
	"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 17:10:18 -0700
From: Mel Beckman <mel@becknet.com>
Subject: Re: Smartjack and CSU


At 3:31 PM -0400 5/25/99, Kevin Lundy <klundy@home.comnospam> wrote:

> The smartjack to CSU is probably 350' of cable.  It is shielded CAT5
> run in conduit.  According to Bell Atlantic, Maryland tarrifs prevent
> smartjack location anywhere other than in the room with the DS3
> multiplexer.  Three different Bell employees have told me this.  Can
> anyone confirm?

> I've replaced all cable.  Bell replaced the smart jack.  Solved a
> ground problem at the CSU (was within spec, but we made it better
> anyway).  Replace the CSU a second time.  The smart jack is in a rack
> of 20 other smart jacks, so I assume that if the rack had a bad ground
> I wouldn't be the only one with a problem?

> Problem still occurs.

> At the CSU, we are seeing -6db signal level.  The LBO was 0 (-6db is
> an acceptable level?), but we adjusted it to 7.5.

> Today, we did adjust the LBO, time will tell on that.  Another
> suggestion made by Gil was to check the ground resistance between
> smart jack and CSU - they are actually in two different (connected)
> buildings - how would I do that?

> Any other thoughts or words of wisdom?

Since you're still having problems, I think it's well worth going to
the Kentrox-recommended shielded cable. This is not simply shielded
Cat5, however. Shielded Cat5 has one shield for all conductors;
Kentrox calls for the send and receive pairs having separate
shielding. An easy way to achieve this is to use two runs of shielded
Cat3 or Cat5 (both work equally well), running the send on one pair in
one cable and the receive on another pair in another cable. I've used
this technique to solve a many extended demarc problems -- it's never
failed to work when the problem was signal quality.

However, the best solution is to use the special D-screen or T-screen
cable, which is specifically designed for extended demarcs and has two
individually shielded pairs of 22-gauge copper. This cable is pretty
bulky, though (oblong-shaped, about .25" by .5"), so you may have
problems fitting it in existing conduit.

Running 350' over Cat 5 is almost certain to give you problems, even 
in conduit, even shielded, because you're still subject to near-end 
cross talk between the send and receive lines.


 - Mel Beckman

------------------------------

From: levinjb@gte.net (Joel B Levin)
Subject: Re: Sex Sites Getting Screwed
Organization: On the desert
Reply-To: levinjb@gte.net
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:53:31 GMT


In <telecom19.98.3@telecom-digest.org>, hapgood@pobox.com (Fred
Hapgood) wrote:

>> Those "carts" should time out after a while, unless the programmer was
>> really stupid. Unlike a physical store, there are no actual "goodies
>> sitting there" until the user completes the order. It's like filling
>> out an order form from a mail-order catalog, and then not mailing it.

> I disagree.  These carts serve as custom catalogs and I love them.

I disagree with your disagree.  I think they should time out, but not
for a week or so.  You need to be able to think about your purchases
sometimes.

I just had to register with a site and put something into the cart to
find out what it would cost me; my intention was to do some comparison
shopping. In their case the s/w broke when I tried to add a second
item, and the first is gone, which is OK, since I have decided not to
buy -- at least I will but I'll probably use snail-mail for
reliability (it's preprinted checks; I feel better sending them a
sample than inputting all the magic numbers over the net).

A week to think something over or comparison shop is reasonable;
discarding unpurchased items after a week is reasonable to keep the
merchandizers database in some order is OK too.  In any case, the
shopping cart should show the expiration date/time of items within it.
Does any show that?


JBL

------------------------------

From: fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden)
Subject: Re: Using V&H to Calculate Distance
Organization: Lipless Rattling Crankbait
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:58:19 GMT


In article <telecom19.97.5@telecom-digest.org>, Charlie C.
<forspam@earthlink.net> wrote:

>> Within North America, rate distance is calculated using the "V&H" system.
>> V stands for "vertical" (north-south position) and H for "horizontal"
>> (east-west position). Each exchange is represented by a location expressed
>> as a V&H co-ordinate. A rate distance can be calculated from two V&H
>> co-ordinate sets based on Pythagorean Theorem, i.e. rate distance =
>> sqrt((V1-V2)^2+(H1-H2)^2)/10 where (V1,H1) is the V&H for one end of a
>> call, and (V2,H2) represents the other end of a call.

[...]

>> rd = sqrt( (5080-6102)^2 + (1444-8901)^2 )/10
>> rd = sqrt( -1022^2 + -7457^2)/10
>> rd = sqrt( 1044484 + 55606849)/10
>> rd = sqrt( 56651333)/10
>> rd = 7526/10
>> rd = 752

>> This is obviously wrong, since Seattle is more that 752 miles from
>> Piscataway.

According to your formula, the distance is 7526 V&H units.  There are
1670 feet in a V&H unit and 5280 feet in a mile, so you want to be
dividing by (5280/1670 = 3.1617) rather than dividing by 10.

Doing this yields 2380 miles, which sounds a whole lot better.


Send mail to fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden)
CD-Recordable FAQ - http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/ (a/k/a www.spies.com/~fadden)
Fight Internet Spam - http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ & news.admin.net-abuse.email

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V19 #100
******************************
