Classified Ads
TD Extra News

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

 

Message Digest Volume 28 : Issue 274 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: "Report charge" long distance Western Union's satellite loss Re: Western Union's satellite loss Re: Western Union's satellite loss Re: Western Union's satellite loss Re: Western Union's satellite loss For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Apple's App Store Downloads Top Two Billion Boston "Franklin" BSTNMAFR--- and the Phone Murals ====== 28 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ====== Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest. Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 18:52:16 -0700 (PDT) From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: "Report charge" long distance Message-ID: <ce18cffc-3c24-430c-985c-ee3bcf575e77@j28g2000vbl.googlegroups.com> On Sep 30, 10:26 pm, Wesr...@aol.com wrote: > Person-to-person calls were favored by bill collectors (and others > searching for somebody) because the operator did all the work at no > charge (after report charges were discontinued) and there was no > billing if the search was not successful. One reason, probably, why > report charges have returned even after the P-to-P rate was much > increased. Previously on this newsgroup people described the common practice of making a person-to-person call to one's self so as to discretely send a message back home (eg "I arrived safely") without incurring a long distance charge. Apparently back in the 1950s or earlier AT&T imposed a "report charge". If a person to person or collect call could not be completed, there was still a charge imposed for the effort. I think they gave 24 hours to complete the call. This was back when toll operators did a lot more work to put a call through, indeed, almost acting as a secretary to search out the desired party. Part of this was necessary since back then calls might not have been completed right away due to limited capacity. It was common way back to place toll calls by name, "Get me John Jones in Los Angeles" and the toll operator would have to call DA first to get the number. The Bell System literature urged the public to call by number. People could also leave the long distance operator in advance a list of calls to be made at a certain time. (1949). Would anyone know when the "report charge" was discontinued? I also read of way back there was a messenger charge; where they'd send out a messenger. Anyone know of other discontinued long distance toll services? Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:11:34 -0500 From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <4AC955D6.3060403@annsgarden.com> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Did you ever utilize poles owned by street railroads or > electric railroads? Street railroad power is only 600 V, > but many electrified railroads were 11,000 V. No. The railroad poles I was involved with were owned by mainline railroads -- the Chicago and Northwestern and the former Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific. The only encounter I've had with street railroads was running into abandoned rails buried under pavement when trying to trench across a street. Jim Haynes <jhaynes@cavern.uark.edu> wrote: > I think most of W.U. pole lines ran along railroads, so they > might not have been where you would have encountered them. Were those polelines actually owned and maintained by WU? Or were they owned by the railroad? In my encounters with poles located on railroad ROW, the poles were owned and maintained by the railroad companies. I used a few of them for CATV cable crossings under permits issued by the railroad companies, but I did my best to avoid them because of the exorbitant rental fees (FCC pole-attachment regulations do not apply to railroad poles) and the bureaucratic hassle of dealing with railroad companies. In situations where I had to cross a railroad, I'd try to locate it at a road crossing where I could support it from existing power poles. Some of the railroad poles I've seen have numerous conductors on several crossarms, so I suppose it's possible that some of those conductors might have been WU's in rented space. Example: http://www.annsgarden.com/telecom/Fig04.jpg While we're on the subject of telegraph lines along railroads, here's a link to some photos of a replica telegraph poleline located at Golden Spike National Historic Site. http://www.annsgarden.com/poles/GoldenSpike.html Neal McLain ***** Moderator's Note ***** I'm curious about the technical part of telegraph wiring: please tell us if you know more about how the circuits worked, how far apart the repeaters stations were, etc. Bill Horne Moderator Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT) From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <69bcccc9-5cf9-4507-9b66-95f7407d2fca@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com> On Oct 5, 11:37 am, Neal McLain <nmcl...@annsgarden.com> wrote: > Were those polelines actually owned and maintained by WU?  Or were > they owned by the railroad? Interesting question. If memory serves, ownership switched over time. Perhaps someone could elaborate. Note that there was another company, Postal Telegraph, that had its own network. It wasn't as large as WU and was eventually merged into WU. (FWIW, when my father was a boy he worked as a messenger for Postal. I wish I had asked him more about it.) > Some of the railroad poles I've seen have numerous conductors on > several crossarms, so I suppose it's possible that some of those > conductors might have been WU's in rented space.  Example:http://www.annsgarden.com/telecom/Fig04.jpg I've seen many railroad poles carrying a forest of wires, but the poles and wires look old and disconnected, such as a wire terminating around an insulator. I think many active railroads replaced pole wires with fibre optics buried along the ROW. When the RR crosses a road over a bridge, you can see the pipes hung on the bridge. In the NE US some railroads are electrified which adds to the complexity. In some cases power companies use the RR poles as distribution lines, so it's not unusual to see the poles with wires but no track on an abandoned section. As aside, Amtrak between NYC and DC as well as SEPTA in Phila use the old 25 Hz power and many of the substations are from the 1930s. > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > I'm curious about the technical part of telegraph wiring: please > tell us if you know more about how the circuits worked, how far > apart the repeaters stations were, etc. The first two volumes of the Bell Labs Bell System History go into quite a bit of detail on that. While it's mostly focused on voice communications, telegraph is mentioned, too. Much of the early telephone loop plant was based on telegraph designs. Large libraries may have ancient technical books (circa 1900) that go into this. While the Western Union Technical Journal, in this newsgroup's archives, focuses on more modern postwar technology, some of the early issues might describe the original method and what they're replacing it with. I believe a plain telegraph circuit needs only one wire and uses the ground as a return. The early telephone circuits did likewise but found it gave noisy connections and soon was replaced with 'metallic circuits' of two wires. Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:27:19 -0400 From: James Wades <jameswades@remove-this.gmail.com To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <4ACAB917.4090205@speakeasy.net> ***************************************************************** * Moderator's Note * * * * I asked Jim Wades, the President of the Morse Telegraph Club, * * to provide some insight into telegraph lines on railroad * * rights-of-way, Postal Telegraph, and the technical part of * * telegraph as well. * * * * Jim's answer is a bit more involved than the usual post we * * see, but please bear with me - Jim is an expert in railroad * * signals and telegraphy, and it's a good introduciton to the * * subject for non-technical readers. * * * ***************************************************************** Bill, The [previous posts are] a bit disjointed, but I will do my best to provide some insights. In the interest of linearity, I will break it down in to several subjects: First, with respect to the nature of telegraph circuits: I am leaving out significant technical detail here in the interest of space/time, however, telegraph circuits in commercial service can generally be subdivided as follows: 1. The simplex ground return circuit: This is the classic telegraph circuit, with a single current loop in the range of 100 to 300-VDC at 60 to 100-mA operating over typically an iron wire with ground return. 2. The duplex circuit, using the bridge principle, thereby allowing two telegraph circuits to operate on a single wire. 3. The quadraplex circuit, based on a similar principle to the above, allowing four circuits to operate on a single wire. 4. The carrier system, which began to emerge with stable vacuum tube oscillators and audio filters in the mid 1920s, which allowed multiple telegraph carriers to be carried on a single wire. 5. The composite telegraph circuit. The later circuit was most typically utilized by the Bell System, because it allowed a telegraph circuit to be composited over voice circuits. This allowed telegraphy to be utilized for internal communications as well as leased telegraph/teleprinter circuits on the same circuit carrying long-distance voice calls and the like. As the wire/cable infrastructure was (and is) one of the most expensive parts of a carrier's infrastructure, this allowed long-distance telephone circuits to remain in valuable revenue service while being used as order wires and the like or providing a dedicated telegraph circuit for various business, press, or similar applications, thereby minimizing overhead and maximizing toll revenue. These methods were in widespread use through the 1950s in the Bell System. Many of those employed in telecommunications today recall carrier systems and the like, so they need not be discussed in detail here. Railroads and telecom providers were still using such systems well into the 1970s and '80s, and there is likely significant Information available on the web. Carrier systems were even deployed during World War Two for telecommunications, railroad operating battalions (telegraph, etc.), and the like. As to the simplex and duplex systems, these are relatively self-explanatory and probably require little elaboration. Now....as to pole line along railroad right-of-way: The pole line one encounters along railroad right-of-way typically carried three types of "communications:" 1. Telegraph 2. Telephone 3. Signal control ("Code Line") In many cases, the order of precedence on the poles was: Leased lines / WU, and the like at the top. RR Phone and Telegraph middle Code Line (RR signals) on the bottom Not always.....but this was the norm on the railroads I was associated with. The last telegraph lines used in railroad service were decommissioned in the mid 1980s. However, the telegraph was in slow decline in rail service beginning in the late 1950s, typically replaced with teletype and VHF two-way radio, then, of course, computers. However, manual Morse circuits were simple, reliable, and in many ways more accurate and faster than voice for certain types of specialized traffic; particularly message traffic that had to be transcribed. The telephone has been a part of rail operations since the early 1900s as well. Both were used to varying extent for varying applications on major railroads. In later years, the telephone circuits were primarily used for wayside communications between train crews and dispatcher at switches, control points, and the like. This, of course, was later supplemented, then eventually replaced with VHF-FM radio in the 160-MHz range. In later years, the phone and radio were used for dispatching, whereas telegraph and TTY were used for car reports, internal business coordination, and occasionally dispatching on branch lines and the like Code line was, and still is in some cases, essentially current loops similar to telegraph loops. One can find 20 to 60-mA loops running between control points to actuate vital relay logic and the like as part of CTC systems. These methods are likewise disappearing as they are replaced with "coded track," which uses the rail as a conductor for a form of data communications between control points, as well "radio code line" applications, which utilize a type of packet switched radio network for communications between control points and the like. One will see much abandoned pole line in the field. However, some pole line is also in use in many areas as of yet. Also...beware, it was common practice to send 220 or 440-VAC on opposite outer conductors to power the various signal apparatus along the right-of-way. Some of this remains in service, and coming in contact with it can be a "shocking" experience for those who might want to climb a pole to liberate a few antique insulators. Now....as to ownership of poles. Years ago (through 1950s or so), it was common for Western Union to provide the poles and similar components, and the railroad to provide the maintenance and right-of-way. It was a winner for the railroads. When I worked for CSX some years ago, we still had WU telegraph poles supporting active code line. LOL: it had long ago surpassed the initial return on investment. As WU moved away from traditional pole line, the RR took ownership and eventually had to replace many of the poles, cross-arms, and the like at their own expense. Please note that Postal Telegraph typically did not run along railroad right-of-way. Rather, Postal ran their pole line along highways, such as the famous "Lincoln Highway," "Telegraph Avenue" in the Detroit area, and the like. OK....on to Postal Telegraph: Postal was established with the encouragement of certain forces within the government, but as a private entity and part of the MacKay system out of a degree of fear of the WU monopoly. This fear was especially problematic in the early part of the 20th century when WU merged with the Bell System (to be ultimately broken up under anti-trust laws during the Wilson Administration, if I recall correctly). There is much history here, and it is too in depth to go into. Again, I suspect one can find considerable information on-line or in a good quality text book on the subject (contact me for a recommendation). Simply put, WU was the "Microsoft" of its day. It did many good things by standardizing the telegraph industry. It also suffered from some similar problems associated with excessive market place dominance. I suppose the same could be said of the Bell System. Postal was always the poorer cousin of WU. It tended to serve metropolitan areas and medium sized cities. Through the McKay system, it did offer access to submarine cable circuits, marine radiogram facilities, and the like, which were advantageous. However, even in private, leased services, WU and the Bell System were far ahead, particularly as technical advancements brought forth Varioplex (concentrator) circuits, reperforator centers, and the like. WU also pioneered a high degree of automation and even microwave carrier. Information on their transition to teleprinter operation and reperforator centers is readily available. Postal tried to match them in this area. However, when Postal was merged into WU in the 1943 time period, much of the Postal TTY and reperforator equipment was sent to the former Soviet Union under lend-lease. Rumor has it that when one sends a telegram to the former Soviet Union today, it occasionally passes over this network! LOL. Finally...as to repeaters, etc. Yes, repeaters were necessary. In North American Signal practice, the telegraph is a closed-loop system. For example, one must close his/her key to receive. This is why one sees a "circuit closer" on telegraph keys. Contrary to the popular belief of ham radio operators, it's primary purpose is not for "tuning up" a radio transmitter. LOL. When one wants to send, he must open his key. He then opens and closes the circuit with dots and dashes (or later..in the TTY era, the baudot code!). When one "breaks" a communications circuit, he opened the series loop, the transmitting office's sounder went quiet, and the transmitting operator knew the receiving operator had missed something. Good operators didn't break very often! There were exceptions. For example, one couldn't "break" some types of circuits (duplex, etc), so the receiving operator had to be on his game. The spacing and distance between repeaters was based on number of instruments in the series circuit (main line relays/sounders, etc.), nature of the infrastructure (leakage, resistive losses in the lines (iron or copper wire, wire diameter), etc.), but a couple hundred miles is a good rule of thumb, I suppose. Typically, a "wire chief" was assigned at COs and divisional points. He was equipped with a test board and a good bridge (like a Leeds and Northrup ZM-3). By knowing the type and nature of the pole line, he could pin-point opens, shorts, and similar faults to a fairly narrow area, speeding the inspection and repair of damaged pole line. Speaking of repeaters....If one would like to see a Bell System Athearn Repeater, which is currently in service linking the Morse Telegraph Club's Internet based "KOB" network with an older telegraph "hub" system constructed by former ATT engineer Ace Holman, just go to "you tube" at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_l8FpKK37cw ... [and] you can see a brief overview provided by yours truly. Repeaters in and of themselves are an entire discussion. It seems that in the late 19th and early 20th century, every erstwhile telegraph/telephone engineer was looking for a way to invent a better repeater! LOL There are many ways of accomplishing the task. In summary...I have provided only a brief summary of information on a complex subject. The telegraph is often represented in a highly simplistic manner. However, the technology of the telegraph served as the foundation for every aspect of our modern life. Today, people are impressed that they can buy and sell stocks on-line, but they overlook the fact that the New York Stock Exchange is an International exchange because of the telegraph. Folks are impressed that they can get the latest news on their "I-Pod," but the telegraph made news syndication, wire services, and the like possible! The infrastructure that supported the telegraph industry was vast and complex. One could establish a circuit from Alaska to NYC in a few minutes for a press application, brokerages could transmit a buy or sell order to the NYSE or Board of Trade and get a response in minutes, and telegrams moved with incredible speed and efficiency considering the state of the art. There are still quite a few telegraph operators around. Many of these men and women are members of the "Morse Telegraph Club, Inc." Interested parties are invited to visit our web page at: http://www.morsetelegraphclub.org/ Membership is open to anyone with an interest in the history or telegraphy and telecommunications, and the group publishes an excellent quarterly periodical. They may also find the "Morse KOB" program interesting. This system allows one to connect authentic telegraph instruments operating in a local current loop into an Internet based system. The instruments function just as they would on a "real" telegraph circuit, and 24-hour news and weather broadcasts are available to drive a telegraph sounder. Check: http://www.morsekob.org/ Folks with questions about telegraphy or MTC may also contact me directly, if they wish. Thanks for the inquiry, Bill. 73, Jim James Wades International President, Morse Telegraph Club, Inc. jameswades@remove-this.gmail.com Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 01:45:05 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <R72dnfIL18D9RFfXnZ2dnUVZ_uSdnZ2d@speakeasy.net> James Wades wrote: > > First, with respect to the nature of telegraph circuits: > > I am leaving out significant technical detail here in the interest of > space/time, however, telegraph circuits in commercial service can > generally be subdivided as follows: > > 1. The simplex ground return circuit: This is the classic telegraph > circuit, with a single current loop in the range of 100 to 300-VDC > at 60 to 100-mA operating over typically an iron wire with ground > return. > > 2. The duplex circuit, using the bridge principle, thereby allowing > two telegraph circuits to operate on a single wire. > > 3. The quadraplex circuit, based on a similar principle to the above, > allowing four circuits to operate on a single wire. > > 4. The carrier system, which began to emerge with stable vacuum tube > oscillators and audio filters in the mid 1920s, which allowed > multiple telegraph carriers to be carried on a single wire. > > 5. The composite telegraph circuit. > > The later circuit was most typically utilized by the Bell System, > because it allowed a telegraph circuit to be composited over voice > circuits. This allowed telegraphy to be utilized for internal > communications as well as leased telegraph/teleprinter circuits on the > same circuit carrying long-distance voice calls and the like. As the > wire/cable infrastructure was (and is) one of the most expensive parts > of a carrier's infrastructure, this allowed long-distance telephone > circuits to remain in valuable revenue service while being used as > order wires and the like or providing a dedicated telegraph circuit > for various business, press, or similar applications, thereby > minimizing overhead and maximizing toll revenue. These methods were > in widespread use through the 1950s in the Bell System. By 1972, when I was hired into toll, composite signalling was used only for supervision on tie lines between PBX's, at least in the Boston area, on tie lines run by N.E.T. I didn't even know that toll technicians were expected to know Morse code (I assume it was American Morse) for communicating between toll offices in earlier times. I never saw any Morse sounders or other instruments, so they'd been gone for a while by then. > Many of those employed in telecommunications today recall carrier > systems and the like, so they need not be discussed in detail here. > Railroads and telecom providers were still using such systems well > into the 1970s and '80s, and there is likely significant Information > available on the web. Carrier systems were even deployed during World > War Two for telecommunications, railroad operating battalions > (telegraph, etc.), and the like. I assume you mean analog frequency-division-multiplexing systems designed for use on cable, such as N carrier. I never worked on N carrier, as it was almost entirely gone before I hired on. We had a _LOT_ of T carrier, and the systems were almost all terminated on D-1 banks, which required frequent alignment and testing. By the time I left the craft, almost all banks had been converted to D-4. Come to think about it, it was probably T carrier that obviated the Morse circuits: the 24-to-2 physical pair compression (which was the same as N carrier, since D-1 banks used the same bays as N) must have freed enough circuits for toll offices to communicate using ordinary phone calls. In fact, the order wires that ran through the manholes were almost never used for talking to the field techs during repeater outages: the order wires would "cut through" to dial tone if the field tech put a handset on it, and they just called us on the phone instead of tripping the aisle alarm for an OW connection. > As to the simplex and duplex systems, these are relatively > self-explanatory and probably require little elaboration. Something puzzles me about single-wire telegraph circuits, including duplex and quadraplex: if they had to have so many repeaters, why didn't they switch to metallic circuits? Someone must have thought of it at some point, and it would have meant a lot less repeaters. What am I missing? > Now....as to pole line along railroad right-of-way: [snip] > Code line was, and still is in some cases, essentially current loops > similar to telegraph loops. One can find 20 to 60-mA loops running > between control points to actuate vital relay logic and the like as > part of CTC systems. These methods are likewise disappearing as they > are replaced with "coded track," which uses the rail as a conductor > for a form of data communications between control points, as well > "radio code line" applications, which utilize a type of packet > switched radio network for communications between control points and > the like. That's another thing that puzzles me: how could a railroad save money by replacing simple, reliable metallic control circuits with new equipment that's more complicated, more expensive, and which requires more expert installation and maintenance? How does that create savings? > One will see much abandoned pole line in the field. However, some > pole line is also in use in many areas as of yet. Also...beware, it > was common practice to send 220 or 440-VAC on opposite outer > conductors to power the various signal apparatus along the > right-of-way. Some of this remains in service, and coming in contact > with it can be a "shocking" experience for those who might want to > climb a pole to liberate a few antique insulators. The poles have been torn down and abandoned next to the tracks in my area, so there's no danger. How do you remove an insulator from a crossarm? > [snip] > Repeaters in and of themselves are an entire discussion. It seems > that in the late 19th and early 20th century, every erstwhile > telegraph/telephone engineer was looking for a way to invent a better > repeater! LOL There are many ways of accomplishing the task. Where did they go? Why are sounders and keys so easy to get (they're all over ebay), but repeaters so hard? What happened to them? > In summary...I have provided only a brief summary of information on a > complex subject. The telegraph is often represented in a highly > simplistic manner. However, the technology of the telegraph served as > the foundation for every aspect of our modern life. Today, people are > impressed that they can buy and sell stocks on-line, but they overlook > the fact that the New York Stock Exchange is an International exchange > because of the telegraph. Not only the stock exchange: the commercial paper industry, the credit reporting industry, and the Federal Reserve System were all made necessary and possible by the telegraph. By allowing orders and credit to flow faster than the old paper-based financial instruments, the telegraph caused a revolution in the industrial way of life: many of the "recent" inventions we now take for granted, such as "instant" hotel reservations, easy access to credit from any point on the globe, and just-in-time inventory, were impossible before the telegraph and became common very quickly after it was introduced. > [snip] > They may also find the "Morse KOB" program interesting. This system > allows one to connect authentic telegraph instruments operating in a > local current loop into an Internet based system. The instruments > function just as they would on a "real" telegraph circuit, and 24-hour > news and weather broadcasts are available to drive a telegraph > sounder. The Morse KOB setups are wonderful aids during "Living History" demonstrations: it's possible for a single reenactor to demonstrate sending, receiving, and delivering a telegram with just a KOB device and a phone line. Bill Horne (Filter QRM for direct replies) Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:55:39 -0500 From: Jim Haynes <jhaynes@cavern.uark.edu> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: Western Union's satellite loss Message-ID: <slrnhckg9b.52v.jhaynes@localhost.localdomain> On 2009-10-05, Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote: > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Jim Haynes <jhaynes@cavern.uark.edu> wrote: > > > I think most of W.U. pole lines ran along railroads, so they > > might not have been where you would have encountered them. > > Were those polelines actually owned and maintained by WU? Or were > they owned by the railroad? > In my (very limited) experience W.U. had its own pole line on one side of the railroad R.O.W. and the railroad had its own pole line on the other side. However there were arrangements to interconnect W.U. with the railroad's own telegraph system. I've seen situations where the W.U. office kept office hours, and after hours you could go to the railroad to send or receive a telegram. (Which means W.U. had to relay it to the railroad using Morse) I gather in smaller places it was common for the railroad office to also serve as the town's telegraph office. You know that telegraph lines ran along railroads before the railroads established their own telegraph systems. This came about for several reasons. (1) the railroad already had an all-weather right-of-way cleared through the wilderness, at a time when intercity roads were poorly developed where they existed at all. (2) The railroad could deliver your poles and wire where you needed them, along with your installation and repair crews. (3) You could negotiate a contract with a railroad for exclusive use of their R.O.W. for telegraphy (at a time when there were many competing telegraph companies) (4) The cities served by railroads were the places where business was being done and the economy was growing - just the places where you would expect a market for telegraph service. See article "Western Union and the Railroads", Western Union Technical Review, January 1956 p. 28. in the Telecom archives. See also "The End of an Era", Western Union Technical Review, October 1961. which is about the Western Union "camp car" rail units that were used for pole line maintenance until 1960. Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 23:58:12 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Message-ID: <p06240861c6ef1af620ec@[10.0.1.5]> Practical Traveler For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad By MICHELLE HIGGINS The New York Times October 4, 2009 BETTER pack some cash on your next trip abroad. Americans are finding that their credit and bank cards aren't as convenient as they once were while traveling overseas. The problem: American cards lack a special chip, now commonly used in many foreign countries, causing the cards to be rejected by some merchants and kiosks. That's what Nancy Elkind, a lawyer from Denver, discovered in Paris when she wanted to use the popular Vélib' bicycle rental system on a weeklong vacation with her husband last spring. They tried to swipe various cards at the rental kiosk, which doesn't take cash, and all the cards were rejected. Then, thinking the problem might be with the kiosk and not their cards, they tried other Vélib' locations around the city. But each time, their cards were not accepted. "We gave up, and kept walking around Paris, commenting occasionally on how much fun it would be to do some exploring by bike," Ms. Elkind said. The couple's cards, which rely on magnetic-stripe technology for transactions, lacked an embedded microprocessor chip, which stores and processes data and is now commonly used in Europe. Such chip-based cards - commonly referred to as chip-and-PIN cards because users punch in a personal identification number instead of signing for the purchase - offer an extra layer of protection against the theft of cardholder data and counterfeiting, and they are designed to replace magnetic stripe technology and signature payments. The chip-and-PIN technology usually isn't much of an issue when making purchases at a store, or paying for a meal in a restaurant, as most of those merchants still have credit card terminals that can read the magnetic stripes. Likewise, A.T.M.'s typically recognize and accept many cards whether they have a chip or a magnetic stripe. But American cardholders have had their cards rejected by automated ticket kiosks at train stations, gas pumps, parking garages and other places where there are no cashiers. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/travel/04pracchip.html ***** Moderator's Note ***** This is related to telecom in a way that might not be obvious: it's an indication that society has (or is about to) come full circle, and do the things necessary to prevent electronic commerce without authority of the person who owns the funds. The telegraph and (of course) the telephone, were the first technical advances to allow information to travel more quickly than the paperwork associated with it: before the telegraph, the postal system was the fastest way to get an order for goods from place to place(1), and also the only commonly available alternative to messengers - but the order would, by custom, be accompanied by some kind of financial instrument which could either be verified on sight at the destination, or used as evidence of good intent in banking transactions. Electronic commerce - it's nothing new, by the way - created entire industries dedicated to managing the risks associated with providing goods and services without paper-based financial instruments changing hands. Codes, ciphers, and passwords - also nothing new - had to be improved and made easier to use so that average men could use them effectively to assure the identity and good intent of those whom they were dealing with. When there's no way to verify the bona fides of a person who initiates a commercial transaction - such as when a credit card number and expiration date is traded on a pirate bulletin board - then the added risks of fraud must be covered by insurance, or the added costs must be born by all law-abiding users. The information superhighway carries crooks and crazies at the same speed as civilians, and now - at least in Europe - society is putting on the brakes. Bill Horne Moderator 1.) I leave aside Semaphore or similar systems, since they weren't commonly available and were too expensive for everyday use. The Pony Express is a special case of (very expensive) messenger service. Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:41:39 -0700 From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Message-ID: <siegman-A72CBF.18413905102009@news.stanford.edu> In article <p06240861c6ef1af620ec@[10.0.1.5]>, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote: > > The problem: American cards lack a special chip, now commonly used in > many foreign countries, causing the cards to be rejected by some > merchants and kiosks. > Tried to swipe an American credit card in a machine at Charles DeGaulle Airport to buy a ticket into Paris on the RER trains a year or so back (forget which brand of card, but it was one shown on the machine) and couldn't get it accepted. Maybe this was the problem. Had to go to a ticket booth and stand in line. Date: 6 Oct 2009 03:09:10 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Message-ID: <20091006030910.52099.qmail@simone.iecc.com> >Tried to swipe an American credit card in a machine at Charles DeGaulle >Airport to buy a ticket into Paris on the RER trains a year or so back >(forget which brand of card, but it was one shown on the machine) and >couldn't get it accepted. Maybe this was the problem. Yup. The ticket machines want a chip. R's, John Date: 5 Oct 2009 19:39:37 -0000 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Message-ID: <20091005193937.47625.qmail@simone.iecc.com> > That's what Nancy Elkind, a lawyer from Denver, discovered in Paris > when she wanted to use the popular Vélib' bicycle rental system on a > weeklong vacation with her husband last spring. They tried to swipe > various cards at the rental kiosk, which doesn't take cash, and all > the cards were rejected. Gee, I could have told her that. When I was in Paris and Lyon, which has a similar system, earlier this year, my US cards didn't work, but my UK cards did. [the article goes on to note that most places where there's a human cashier who can check your signature still takes swiped cards, and then quotes someone from Visa spouting nonsense that it's a "misunderstanding" rather than a feature to require a chip at unattended terminals.] > This is related to telecom in a way that might not be obvious: it's > an indication that society has (or is about to) come full circle, > ... It's more directly related than that. European banks developed cards with embedded chips so they could be used offline in a reasonably secure way, since for a long time it wasn't practical to expect merchants across Europe to have a phone line they could semi-dedicate to a terminal with a modem. A card could have its withdrawal limit loaded into the chip at the bank, then each transaction decreases the limit in the chip so it knows when it's overdrawn. These days the terminals are all online and they use a sophisticated protocol that cryptographically signs the transaction to send it to the bank, which only the chip can do. For a while American Express put a chip in their US Blue cards, but they don't any more. R's, John Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:13:49 -0400 From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Re: For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad Message-ID: <op.u1cy9bndo63xbg@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:11:03 -0400, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote: > > Practical Traveler > For Americans, Plastic Buys Less Abroad > > By MICHELLE HIGGINS > The New York Times > October 4, 2009 > > BETTER pack some cash on your next trip abroad. Americans are finding > that their credit and bank cards aren't as convenient as they once > were while traveling overseas. > > The problem: American cards lack a special chip, now commonly used in > many foreign countries, causing the cards to be rejected by some > merchants and kiosks. > > ... [human interest portion snipped] ... > > The chip-and-PIN technology usually isn't much of an issue when > making purchases at a store, or paying for a meal in a restaurant, as > most of those merchants still have credit card terminals that can > read the magnetic stripes. Likewise, A.T.M.'s typically recognize and > accept many cards whether they have a chip or a magnetic stripe. > > ... [still more snipped] ... Questions, if I may, please: Is the "chip" in question an RF chip like those embedded in some Chase ATM cards, or gasoline company "just wave it at the pump" credit cards? Or is it rather a little purpose-built computer-with-RAM-and-ROM, having six or eight metallic contacts like the contacts on a GSM SIM chip, such as were in use on certain older AmEx "Blue" cards? And: Any US banks with plans for reissuing their cards in mag-strip-plus-chip (plus PIN) form? TIA; and cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 08:48:32 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Apple's App Store Downloads Top Two Billion Message-ID: <p0624086cc6ef9b62f316@[10.0.1.5]> Apple's App Store Downloads Top Two Billion More Than 85,000 Apps Now Available for iPhone & iPod touch CUPERTINO, California-September 28, 2009 - Apple today announced that more than two billion apps have been downloaded from its revolutionary App Store, the largest applications store in the world. There are now more than 85,000 apps available to the more than 50 million iPhone and iPod touch customers worldwide and over 125,000 developers in Apple's iPhone Developer Program. ... http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2009/09/28appstore.html Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 09:56:14 -0700 (PDT) From: "Mark J. Cuccia" <markjcuccia.remove-this@yahoo.com> To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu Subject: Boston "Franklin" BSTNMAFR--- and the Phone Murals Message-ID: <173174.86384.qm@web31104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> On Friday evening, 02 October 2009, Bill Horne wrote in "Verizon strips murals from N.E.T. HQ at 185 Franklin St. in Boston" > According to the Boston Herald, Verizon has outraged preservationists > by removing the mural paintings that were shown in the lobby at > 185 Franklin St. in Boston. The paintings, which showed linemen, > switchboard operators, horses, trucks, switches, and various examples > of poles, wires, etc., were the centerpiece of the lobby at the > former headquarters of New England Telephone and Telegraph, where I > once worked. > > The building, which is to be sold, is a classic example of "art deco" > design, and it was updated to remove more recent changes and return > it to the art deco motif during the 80's. It's unclear if Verizon > will be donating the murals to a museum, reusing them in another > building, or selling them: I've seen different opinions or whether > the removal was done to preserve the murals or not, but given the > extensive (and expensive) work done to restore West Street in > New York post 9/11, I think Verizon's motives are proper. > > "Boston Franklin" was a major toll cable interchange point during the > electromechanical era, and held a lot of the "L" carrier and > microwave equipment for both N.E.T. and Long Lines, in addition to a > #4 crossbar tandem. It also housed the WADS office which served TWX. > I worked on the Radio Board there in the early 80's, and I was on the > team that maintained the ship-to-shore terminal, the paging > equipment, the air-to-ground telephone terminal, and the microwave > systems, as well as the broadcast tie lines that connected studios to > transmitters for most AM and FM broadcast stations in the city. > > http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1201623 This topic was also brought up on the Yahoo "Central Office" discussion group, and there were some who posted there who were opposed to Verizon for their removing the murals. But Verizon *SOLD* this building to Commonwealth Ventures and the new owner has no interest in keeping these murals. The article mentions that VZ is trying to find the murals a new home in the New England area. A museum in Rhode Island would like the murals, but some in Boston want the murals to remain in Boston where they have been for decades. I do NOT have any blame for VZ since they are trying to do what they can to preserve these murals, even though they have sold this historic building. Personally, I would hope that these murals will remain in Boston at a location where the general public can view (AND PHOTOGRAPH) them! Here is some information as to what is or has been located at 185 Franklin Street in Boston's financial district, at the (old) New England Tel & Tel building, in the way of switching... There was one of the original six #4 Crossbar toll machines located there back in 1949, the #4s did NOT even come with provisions for a card-translator box. #4s had to be MODIFIED later for a card translator (the thirteen original #A4As, Anticipated 4-Advanced were built for provision of card translators but initially didn't have them at installation). The first six #4s were renamed #4Ms (for modified) when they were significantly modified with the addition of a card translator. Nov.1949 BSTNMAFR02T, eventually a "class-2", 617-2, "Boston-2" Later on, Apr.1970, "Boston-9" was added, another #4A Crossbar toll machine, BSTNMAFR09T, also a "Class-2" in the old toll hierarchy, 617-3, was added. There were at least three XB-Tandems located at Boston "Franklin": BSTNMAFR03T "Boston-Metro" in June 1949, a Class-4, 617-43 BSTNMAFR05T "Boston-CAMA" in April 1957, a Class-4, 617-5 BSTNMAFR17T "Boston-17" in October 1972, a Class-3, 617-17 It does NOT appear that there were any 4ESS switches ever located at Boston "Franklin", neither owned/mandated by AT&T-LL nor by NET&T, pre- or post-divestiture. I really do NOT have any of the history of NET&T local central office switches at "Franklin". The mural is from the 1940s-era, and the building is "art-deco" also from the 1940s period. Were some #1XB switches installed here? Ever any Panel? Obviously there were some #5XB local central offices and later #1(A)ESS as well. I do find it interesting that the TWX/WADS main office for Boston (and probably the main one for all of NET&T) is located there. It would be a #5XB. AT&T-LL and the BOCs (and independent telcos) may have sold (US) TWX to Western Union circa 1970, but it took about ten years before TWX in the US was completely removed from the switch telephone (DDD) network and instead re-formatted onto Western Union's own switched Telex network. (TWX in Canada, until it was discontinued some 15 years ago, had always been a service of the Canadian telephone companies). There was also a D-TWX (Dial TWX) Assistance Operator board in Boston and I would assume that it would have been at "Franklin". In April 1972, the TSPS was installed at "Franklin", BSTNMAFR1EB. Since this was the main building for NET&T in eastern Massachusetts, I would expect that the toll/local dial-0 assistance boards would have been located here as well prior to TSPS. NET&T/NYNEX/BA/Verizon and AT&T-LL have had more recent tandems (i.e., the Verizon/NET&T LATA tandems), 4ESS toll switches, and operator/card service switches (VZ/NET&T DMS-TOPS, AT&T-LL 5E-OSPS), installed in Cambridge MA, Framingham MA, and Worcester MA, rather than in Boston MA (Franklin). (AT&T has since discontinued their OSPS in Framingham MA circa 2003, and rehomed New England to the 914-0T OSPS at White Plains NY for AT&T-LL Operator and card services). As late as 2005, there was a VZ/NET&T #5ESS, BSTNMAFRDS0, but there doesn't seem to be that #5ESS as of 2009. Back in 2005, and still today (but I don't know when it was installed), is another digital switch (owned by VZ/NET&T), but I don't have details as to whether it is a WECO/Lucent 5ESS, Nortel DMS-100, or some other manufacturer or model, BSTNMAFRDS2. The documentation I looked at simply indicated "-DS2" as being a "DS" (Digital Switch) in the equipment field instead of "5ESS", but someone did inform me that the "-DS2" entity is also a "5ESS" even though "DS" (generic Digital Switch) is in the equipment field. This BSTNMAFRDS2 5ESS switch SEEMS to be the only remaining public telco switch at 185 Franklin at this time, and Verizon is still planning to lease part of the building from the new owner, as a major tenant. Mark J. Cuccia markjcuccia at yahoo dot com TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition 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 Bill Horne. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne. Contact information: Bill Horne Telecom Digest 43 Deerfield Road Sharon MA 02067-2301 781-784-7287 bill at horne dot net Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 fifty 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. End of The Telecom digest (13 messages)