Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08127; 22 Aug 92 23:20 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29519 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:13 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10444 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:02 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:02 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230222.AA10444@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #651 TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 92 21:22:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 651 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (John Higdon) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (David Lesher) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (William J. Vajk) Re: Telephone Company Tone Service Charges (Leonard Erickson) Re: Internet Access in Italy (Bill Pfeiffer) Re: My Email Address (Warren Burstein) That Email Address (Jerry Leichter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 23:32 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies On Aug 21 at 22:51, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Well, I work for a living also, but I don't know > anyone who is really worth all they get paid. But with inflation and > economic conditions as bad as they are right now, how could we work > for less? Allegedly, an employer hires an individual with the expectation that he/she will produce more value for the company than that person is paid in wages. In this day and age, the employer also has to factor in taxes, regulations, benefits, and other perks in the total expenditure. If the person is NOT worth MORE than he is being paid, then the employer is a fool. I ought to know; I have been in that position (employer/fool). But I did take exception to the comment about "corporate welfare". As an independent contractor/consultant, I have absolutely no W2 income. All of my sustinence is derived from what can best be described as "odd jobs". This tends to preclude "just sitting back drawing a paycheck". While I collect money from some big corporations, those checks are written for services rendered and if the service was not satisfactory or beneficial, I would not expect any repeat business. If I charge a company $1000 for a project which ends up saving thousands of dollars a month, then I certainly consider my services worth what I am being paid. As an employer, I came across many who had no concept of the value of their work. Their standard for wages was how much they needed a month to live on. I had a salesperson who in four months managed to sell not one dollar's worth of equipment. This was after training classes, sales classes, and other seminars (all provided at my expense) and a considerable amount of personal help from other successful salespeople. The unpleasant day came when she had to be told that we could no longer continue her draw. Her response? "I have been at my desk every morning at 8 AM sharp. I have stayed until 5 PM every day with only a 30 minute lunch. I have a family to support and rent to pay. How can you be so insensitive?" Yes, I am happy that many companies have hired my services over the years. But I am not "grateful" to them; we had a business relationship where value was exchanged for value. They did not "give" me any money. They did not "feed" me. I did that myself by exchanging something I had (expertise) for something they had (money). I would hope that those in the job marketplace keep that in mind, particularly in these recessionary times. As long as an employee is of value to the employer, he will not be laid off. And whose responsibility is it to make sure the employee's services remain of value? I leave that as an exercise for those who have figured out how to keep their jobs. This has a counterpart in the discussion of monopolies. When a company is assured business because of regulation, its incentive toward maintaining efficiency and value is diminished. If its fortunes are dependent on the quality of the job done, then the quality and value remain maximized. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 8:11:48 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex PAT said: > I meant those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, > effort and brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain > a monopoly despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I > supported AT&T intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it > was divested at the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters > who maintain a 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence. I *REALLY* had to choke on this PAT example. IMHO, Old Man Rockefeller invented the concept of Monopoly by Force. You sold his gasoline at your store, or else bad things happened. He was infamous for his treatment of employees, too. A late friend related the story of his uncles, who worked for John D. long before Sherman. They were pipeline walkers. In other words, they started at one end of, say, one hundred miles of pileline, and hiked to the other end, looking for leaks. {Now, this is done weekly by air.} They stayed at houses enroute. A trip took many days, of course. Then they started over. [And you thought YOUR job was boring ...] Well, they did this for decades. Then one day, just when they were reaching pension age, they were fired. Period. The excuse was there was a leak at the other end, and if they had really been there a few weeks before, they'd have seen it. [Of course, there was NO chance it had started leaking SINCE then, was there?] So clearly, they were not doing their job. This was, of course, far before Social Security. They died penniless. The easements for many of those lines are, ahem, interesting also. One of the ones I worked on was built in a big rush during WWII. (This was post-breakup, but old habits die hard.) Of course, there was no problem getting the farmers to sign, as the pipeline was part of The War Effort. While I never read them myself, the foreman who had to knock on the doors told me the important parts were: 99 year duration $1.00 rent {the kicker} If the line EVER needed to be moved, the landowner paid. This last one meant, for example, when a city wanted to build a park, they ended up spending bucho bucks, and I don't mean on trees and benches. So Mr. PAT, I submit that Standard OIl is a pretty poor example. Do you have another one, perhaps? wb8foz@skybridge.scl.edu [Moderator's Note: The examples you gave are anecdotal at best. Can you supply any actual names, dates, or places for these events? And if those things occurred, are the circumstances truly as you have described them? Now let us consider some things that John Rockefeller did do which are plainly evident today. He gave the original endowment to start the University of Chicago. He continued to give huge sums of money to the University until his death and UC today, a century later is still using the interest on Rockefeller's gifts, having not touched most of the principal in many years. During his lifetime he was the patron of one of America's best known liberal reformers and thinkers of this century: Harry Emerson Fosdick and his Riverside Church in New York City. He endowed Rockefeller Memorial Chapel here in Chicago. Standard Oil in Chicago continues to give large gifts to needy organizations, and Exxon is a substantial corporate sponsor to National Public Broadcasting. JDR was okay. I've got a rare photo of him walking with William Rainey Harper (first president of UC) along 59th Street in Chicago, circa 1893. I'd love to have met him. PAT] ------------------------------ From: learn@speedy.acns.nwu.edu (William J. Vajk) Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 12:42:58 GMT > [Moderator's Note: By 'legal, lawfully maintained monopolies', I did > NOT mean monopolies started by or protected by the government. I meant > those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, effort and > brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain a monopoly > despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I supported AT&T > intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it was divested at > the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters who maintain a > 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence. I agree, the free market > should be the only consideration. PAT] Then you fail to understand the essential nature of the beast. Rockefeller was removed from the state of Texas under court edict that he never return under penalty of death. The same court mandated that Standard Oil never ever be permitted to do business in the state of Texas again. Thus it was that Humble Oil, the longtime holding company for ESSO (now known as EXXON) did business in Texas. Even the name change in the 1960's from ESSO to EXXON was part of the remaining business of the Standard Oil divestiture as both the Standard Oil of New Jersey (Eastern Shore Standard Oil) as well as Standard Oil of Indiana (AMOCO) insisted that they had a right to the Standard Oil name. What you REALLY fail to understand, Pat, is that your statement above equates to saying you support bullies so long as they don't maintain being a bully by force, threats, or violence. Big business invariably becomes big through the very means which you decry. Each of the oldtime largest corporations in this country grew using underhanded means, and has been steadily shrinking since we, as a nation, have taken care that our businessmen remain businessmen, no longer accepting thuggishness as an ordinary business tactic. The railroads have shrunk to the competition from airlines and trucks. AT&T is shrinking and is headed for demise based on their internal failures to become efficient in a competitive marketplace (it will take quite a while ... they have so much money and momentum.) There was a time when Standard Oil (meaning EXXON) was in contention for the world's largest corporation. There was a time when RCA was thought to be untouchable (yet has been "raided".) Each of these three firms, in their heyday of growth, had a propensity to resolve issues in some rather "not so very nice" ways. But in those times, judges were more understanding, and many of our modern day laws to prevent corporate activities of questional moral and ethical value were not in place. Corporate shields protected individuals from responsibility for their actions. Either one accepts the modern view that robber barons did bad things which would probably make them into ordinary criminals today, or one suports the sort of actions which built what was euphamisticaly called "a natural monopoly" by those quite willing to rape the economy and the public at large. What's wrong with the implication that a clever businessman can improve his firm's standing by cleverness is that there are plenty of other clever businessmen out there, all ready to jump in and take part of the pie. The only thing which permits untoward growth by one to the exclusion of others in any marketplace is the exclusion of others by some means. My personal conclusion, in concert with many other people I've discussed this with over the years, is that some underhanded tactic, perhaps chargable though undetected, is at work in all cases where one company completely outdistances all others in a given business segment. "Natural monopolies" simply aren't. Bill Vajk [Moderator's Note: How curious to see you are still reading the Digest, Bill. I thought you had given up on me long ago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Telephone Company Tone Service Charges Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:11:51 GMT David Sangurima writes: > I'm curious about the touch-tone monthly service charges that telcos > apply to most of their users. Is it necessary to request the tone > service or is this some abuse on the part of the telcos? In Washington and Oregon, you had to specifically *request* touch-tone. A few years ago US West filed to drop the charge and make touch tone service universal on their lines in Oregon. I believe they did something similar in Washington. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) Subject: Re: Internet Access in Italy Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 17:35:35 CDT In a recent Telecom Digest alfredo@quickt2.it12.bull.it (Alfredo Cotroneo) writes: > Does anybody know how to get possibly_free Internet (email, news, > ftp, etc.) access via dialup lines from Italy? (or from any other > location in Europe? e.g. Germany, Switzerland, ...) Since you requested the Internet Radio Journal from me, a month ago, every attempt at e-mail to you has bounced. I am only using this forum because all else has failed. If you have a diferent address, write to me at wdp@airwaves.chi.il.us and I will start sending your Broadcasting digests. William Pfeiffer Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal ------------------------------ From: warren@worlds.COM (Warren Burstein) Subject: Re: My Email Address Date: 22 Aug 92 17:02:44 GMT Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org Organization: WorldWide Software Bryan King writes about his email address that comes out of DEC MAILworks. I'd like to point out that in addition to the very strange address which many mailers are not willing to even consider sending to, there is another problem with this mailer, or at least many installations of it. Notice how his article starts: >From: NAME: BRYAN P. KING / VSS-SPE SYSTEM MANAGEMENT > TEL: DTN: 293-5677 > ADDR: BXB1-1/J11 (BOXBORO) and the text of his letter follows: Now to a human who normally scans thru a page of mail headers before getting to the article that's no problem. To one who has a mailer that ignores certain header lines, it's still not so bad to see three more. But to the UNIX Listserv program (one of which I happen to be the keeper of, on nysernet.org), it matters that messages like this have a blank line between the end of the header and the "From: NAME:..." line. This blank line means that these three lines aren't part of the header, they're part of the message itself. So someone who sends a one line message to listserv@nysernet.org saying INDEX or HELP has actually sent a five line message. Since the entire body gets fed into the command parser, and since there doesn't happen to be a command called "From", the user gets back a message saying "Invalid command: FROM - the rest of your commands have been discarded" and gets very confused. I think that there may some way to convince this mailer to refrain from inserting these lines. I've noticed that people who I correspond with about these problems tend not to be mail gurus, and I've never gotten a definitive answer on whether it can be worked around, or how. The users usually ask if I could manually add them to the listserv. I usually decline, on the basis that I don't want to discourage them from complaining until this gets fixed (and thereby have to manually process their commands forever). Someone may ask, why doesn't the listserv just go on reading lines when it finds one it doesn't like? The answer is that I've gotten letters, in human language, of several pages, sent to the listserv instead of to one of the lists that it manages. > If people send me mail via king@msbcs.enet.dec.com it will still get > to me as I have forwarding set on VAXmail. Wouldn't everyone's life be so much easier if this mailer just put out this nice address rather than the mess of colons? warren@nysernet.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 10:54:42 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: That Email Address There've been several totally confused postings on the issue of Mr. King's Email address. Some facts; these all refer to DECnet Phase IV, which is in use today and has been for something like ten years. 1. DECnet address syntax uses "node::" as a prefix. This syntax is used in many places, not just mail - access to the network is built into the file system, so you can refer to a remote file as NODE::THAT.FILE. 2. In general, just as in TCP/IP, you can refer to any node from anywhere. That is, you just use "node::" from any node on the network. The mechanism used is like the old HOSTS. table; it is possible to set up a machine that doesn't know everyone's name. This was common in the old days when machines were small. To get around this, you can, in most cases (it depends on the network service involved) use "poor man's routing", a holdover from DECnet Phase II: You use a syntax like "node1::node2::something". What this really does is just send "node2::something" off to node1; you hope it knows who node2 is. (There is another reason to do this which I'll come back to later.) 3. DEC's Enet actually supports two different mail systems over the same physical network. a. MAIL-11, also known as VAXMAIL, comes standard with VMS. Addresses are just user login names. To get to PERSON on node THERE, you send mail to THERE::PERSON. MAIL-11 supports poor man's routing; the return address will show the entire route (which may or may not be needed to get back). You have to know the node someone has an account on, and their login name (which might not be their English name), to send them mail. b. ALL-IN-1 MAIL (which also goes under other names these days) can be set up in many ways. On DEC's Enet, it is set up so that addresses have the form "English.Name@Location", where Location is a three- letter site code, the same one used for sending intra-company mail. Engineers use VAX MAIL; managers use ALL-IN-1 MAIL. (These are broad generalizations.) VAX MAIL and ALL-IN-1 MAIL are about as closely related as UUCP-based mail and SMTP-based mail. Exactly as for UUCP vs. SMTP, there are various gateways provided that connect the two systems. Exactly as for stuff that crosses the UUCP/SMTP boundary, the return addresses can get very convoluted, and they can sometimes be unusable. There are also gateways that connect VAX MAIL to Internet mail. Needless to say, messages that have crossed through BOTH an ALL-IN-1 MAIL to VAX MAIL gateway, AND a VAX MAIL to Internet mail gateway, are even more likely to have strange-looking addresses. 4. Just to add to the confusion, DECnet Phase IV has run over its design limit of about 65,000 distinct nodes. (Keep in mind that 32-bit IP addresses are becoming a limiting factor, too, and that DECnet Phase IV pre-dates TCP/IP.) This gets worked around by a hack: Some node numbers, by convention, are reserved for "hidden areas", and never propagated network-wide. (This is done by abusing some of the software.) Since a hidden node H can't be seen directly, it always has to be reached by poor man's routing through some gateway node G, as G::H::. Many individual workstations are set up this way. As far as I know, you never have to pass through two gateways - there are no "doubly hidden" nodes. Since G is usually a "well known" node at the site where H lives, the difference between G::H:: and the Internet @H.G is more apparent than real. Jerry ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #651 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09877; 23 Aug 92 0:17 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12507 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:28 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18577 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:20 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:20 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230326.AA18577@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #652 TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 92 22:26:20 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 652 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: CPSR and Class: Rebuttal to Forrette, Harrell and Higdon (John Higdon) Re: Switching Systems (John Higdon) Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey) Re: No Information For 900 Numbers (Steven S. Brack) Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem (Steven L. Johnson) Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (David R. Zinkin) Re: 710 and ABCD? (Keith Furrow) Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (Michael A. Covington) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Paul A. Valin) Re: Pounding on an Octathorp (erik@pdnfido.fidonet.org) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Michael A. Covington) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Alan L. Varney) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 11:02 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: CPSR and Class: Rebuttal to Forrette, Harrell and Higdon gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > Suppose that were many local loop providers instead of just one. In > that marketplace, I would go with the one who promises not to use SS7, > and not to implement CNID. Since I don't have choice, I favor a > regulatory requirement. I believe this sums up your entire rebuttal. I do not wish to put words in your mouth, but what you seem to say is that you, personally, do not like this particular telecommunications advancement (SS7 and CLASS). Therefore, you do not want any part of it. Since it is integrated into the network, you are forced to deal with it. Therefore, you would like to see the technology banned so that no one could use it. To justify this position, you feel the need to convince others of the universal harm that will come from this technology. After all, if you are telling everyone to do without, you have to give them good reason to agree with you. You may be interested to know that your argument was once applied to the basic telephone. By the way, you will need to turn the clock back further than SS7, since SS6 also has calling number delivery capability. Endless commentary describing alternatives to CLASS features does not provide effective argument against the technology. One can make similar arguments against almost any product of the twentieth century. For instance, we all have to breath the air that is polluted by automobiles. Horse-drawn carts will take you where you need to go. Why not go back? Or how about the fact that on an ocean liner you can party, eat, sleep, and do all kinds of fun things. There is no need for aircraft. Airplanes crash. Let us ban them. IMHO, your arguments against modern telephone technology are a textbook example of the usual public resistance to anything that is new or poorly understood. I would think that someone who participates in computer forums would operate at a slightly higher plane. I have an alternative suggestion to your point of view: perhaps you should disconnect your telephone and be simply personally inconvenienced rather than attempt to deprive the rest of society of developments that you have deemed harmful and unnecessary. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 12:01 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Switching Systems On Aug 19 at 2:09, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: I thought the original 213-464 (back then, in the > 1940's it was known as HOllywood) exchange was panel. I guess I am > mistaken. PAT] I had friends who were served out of that office, which was SXS until the eighties. There was much joy when it was cut to 1AESS. Remember, it was a most unusual occurance to find SXS and Panel in the same city due to the inherent incompatibility. Much of the Los Angeles area was SXS, both GTE and Bell. But remember, Los Angeles was not the city it is now back in the thirties. Panel was only installed in MAJOR cities of the thirties, which is why San Francisco (a "major" city since the time of the Barbary Coast days) had Panel and LA did not. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: So with panel and SXS being incompatible, how were calls handled between those offices? PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:30:59 GMT In article jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY)) writes: > We had a interesting case here in Virginia where somethin similar > occured with the Governor, and the person who intercepted, and > recorded, and then disclosed Cellular communications was convicted; I > forget what he was sentenced for. He was sentenced under the communication act of 1934. He was not sentenced for any violation of the ECPA, which I found quite interesting. The ECPA was specifically enacted for such instances, but no one has yet been convicted (or even accused) under the law. I suspect this is because the law is too weak to be useful. You can thank your legislators for passing another worthless law that just takes up space on the books. scott ------------------------------ Date: 22 Aug 1992 15:44:29 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Re: No Information For 900 Numbers In article cantor@star.enet.dec.com (Dave Cantor) writes: > I tried to get 900 directory assistance tonight from Nashua, NH > (603-888). I got the following intercept: > "Due to a change in network architecture, the 900 information number > has been disconnected. This is no further information available > at this time." I just tried 900 555 1212, and I got an AT&T live operator intercept. It apparently dropped into her panel as if I had dialed "00," as she did not answer as an intercept operator. She did, however, have the record that I dialed *1* 900 555 1212. She didn't know why a 1+ call would drop into her position. Steven S. Brack sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu 2021 Roanwood Drive STU0061@uoft01.utoledo.edu Toledo, OH 43613-1605 brack@uoftcse.cse.utoledo.edu +1 419 GR4 1010 MY OWN OPINIONS sbrack@maine.cse.utoledo.edu ------------------------------ From: johnson@tigger.jvnc.net (Steven L. Johnson) Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem Organization: JvNCnet Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 20:00:27 GMT Hans Ridder writes: > In article spencer@phoenix.princeton. > edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes: >> FYI, two people have mailed me to say that the ATDT >> ,,, does work. So there's no need to >> rush out and get a BellSouth beeper or whatever it was :-) > I'd like to point out that in my experience this type of "open loop" > paging is probably not something you want to "bet your business" on, > as it is not very reliable. There are ways of making it more reliable, such as using the "wait for quiet answer" option available on some modems. Checking call progress status for no-dialtone, busy, no-answer and retrying also helps. I'm lucky that my pager is on the same CO as my computer and the answer times are very consistent. No pager is reliable. The radio portion can be much less reliable than the telco portion of the link. In order to close the loop, the system needs to retry the page until the intended receipient acknowledges the initial condition that caused the page. And if it is a bet your business emergency, you'll want an escalation procedure that doesn't depend on one person and one beeper. > I'd suggest using one of the dial-up paging protocols which actually > get an acknowledgement from the paging system, thus "closing the > loop." This doesn't close the loop as the paging system isn't the intended receipient. It can make one portion of the loop more reliable. Does anyone have a feel for the percentage of paging systems that can handle IXO protocol messages for digital beepers and will allow their customers access? I believe that my service only allows this for their alphanumeric beepers. Steve steve@johnson.jvnc.net ------------------------------ From: drz@po.CWRU.Edu (David R. Zinkin) Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 19:28:23 GMT Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different from standard long distance service? David R. Zinkin (drz@po.cwru.edu) Rochester General Hospital Radiology Dept. SUNY Buffalo School of Medicine Class of '96 (The sesquicentennial graduating class!) ------------------------------ From: keithf@pacifier.rain.com (Keith Furrow) Subject: Re: 710 and ABCD? Organization: Pacifier BBS Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 05:29:36 GMT In article fff@microplex.com (Fred Fierling) writes: > In article fff@microplex.com (Fred > Fierling) writes: >> In article James.VanHouten@f544. >> n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) writes: >>> Radio Shack supposedly has one. Model # 43-139. >> ^^^^^^^ Wrong!! > Abject apologies; it appears I am responsible for some of the noise > that netters complain about. Model 43-139 does NOT have the ABCD > keys. A respondent to my original posting and I had a misunderstanding. Well from what I heard and read (In old phreak newsletters) you can modify them to generate the extra tones. The chip can do all 4x4 rows, but normally the keypad doesn't come with ABCD (Why?). Keith ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:34:12 GMT In article rop@hacktic.nl (Rop Gonggrijp) writes: > Guess this does show what 'capable minds' set up the technology that > we are supposed to trust. Yet in the eyes of US law enforcement, we > would have been the criminals for experimenting with this (using > 555-XXXX numbers), and AT&T the poor victim. When you "experimented," you _did_ impose false charges on somebody, didn't you? Why _aren't_ you the "criminals" then? Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Aug 92 15:35:00 EDT From: Paul (P.A.) Valin Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Well according to proper CCITT-speak, thou shalt call the key to the right of the zero the 'square' key (Recommendation E.161). Rumour has it that at recent Geneva meetings 'square' key narrowly won out over 'tic-tac-toe' key. Oh, and the key to the left of the zero is called the 'star' key. Paul Valin Tel: + 1 613 763 7394 Bell-Northern Research Ltd. Email: pavalin@bnr.ca P.O. Box 3511, Station C Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 'only my opinions...' ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octathorp Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 14:41:31 EDT From: erik In article mc/G=James/S=Arconati/ OU=0105390@mhs.attmail.com writes: > In Telecomm Digest V12 #632, Spencer talks about the pronounciation of > the # symbol used on DTMF pads. > When I worked for Mother, some 'official' publications said that it > was called an "octothorp." > Seems to me that "pound sign" is readily understood by most North > Americans. > [Moderator's Note: We covered this in excruciating detail in a special > edition of the TELECOM Digest back in 1989. "Octothorpe" (with an \e\ > on the end) seems to be the designated name. In another message in > this issue, a reader asks if pounding off at the end of certain > dialing sequences is a normal, acceptable thing to do. PAT] Just because I am on vacation, my mind wanders ... I suppose it would be OK to "pound off" at the end of a dialing sequence only if they were dialing one of those 1-900 numbers you see on late night TV. Just my mind ... /* Erik */ [Moderator's Harrump: Trying to keep a straight face; trying to keep from smirking. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:36:20 GMT Is Octothorpe related to Oglethorpe, who founded the great colony of Georgia in 1733? Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 07:31:39 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp A few years ago, a supposedly computer-literate person called our Operations Group and asked for assistance. It seems there was a message on a screen with the words "Press Any Key to Continue." The very plaintive (and frustrated question was) "I can't find the ANY key." If PAT doesn't put this out, I don't mind. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note: That's *sooo* old ... I think the first time that was published in the Digest was back in 1985 ... it seems every company has one or more of those people working for it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 16:42:42 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article jhenderson@pomona.claremont. edu writes: > On a dialing instructions booklet I received from AT&T recently, it > suggests to dial a # after the last digit on international calls, so > the call can be completed quicker. > Since then, I've been dialing a # after the last digit on all my long > distance calls, both domestic and international, and they all seem to > complete faster. Is this just my imagination, or is the # really > helping? My LD company is MetroMedia, in case it makes a difference (I > have no idea why AT&T sent me the booklet, they've never been my LD > carrier.) I can't speak for MetroMedia, but Bellcore's recommendation is that all Country Codes (other than "1") be treated as variable-length, since they no longer want to bother sending out the updates every time CCITT decides to alter the fixed length of some country's numbers. It was a hassle to administer after divestiture, and getting it "wrong" leads to a lot of customer complaints. So (I believe) they are all set for the maximum range (7-to-12)? of valid CCITT numbers. So, yes, use "#" on International calls to stop the digit timing that otherwise occurs -- unless the number is already 12 digits. Note that "#" can do funny things to some phones (that change from pulse-to-DTMF on "#" or "*") and could have other meanings for some other CPE, such as PBXs. If MetroMedia is using FG-B access or 10XXX# cut-through, digit timing is up to them (or the real carrier acting for them, if that applies). If the CO is collecting all the digits and using FG-D access, the digits are timed at the CO and sent to the IXC with MF, terminated with an 'ST' digit. In most COs, a '#' on a domestic "1+" call is ignored by the CO, because it already knows it's received the last digit and has dropped the DTMF receiver. > [Moderator's Note: In Metromedia's case, I think pounding off in the > middle of a call will reset the dial tone for you, and allow another > call to be dialed. At least that's my experience with that carrier. I > think maybe AT&T allows this also on calling card calls, no? In the > dialing sequence, the # acts like a carriage return and forces the > processing to begin on what has already been dialed without waiting > for a timeout. "#" does speed up processing here -- maybe digit analysis doesn't get the digits until the Operator system has collected all the digits, either by time-out or "#". > I don't think it makes any difference with domestic calls since 11 > digits is expected and you have entered that many when you pound off. > It also matters on the few variable-length dialing situations we > have in the USA; Likewise, service codes like 72 and 73 process faster > with the # appended, but will work without it. PAT] (From memory -- I'm not at work ...) The evolution of Custom Calling access started with two-digit codes, followed by "#" to end timing. The number space for these included the "7X" codes for feature access, plus the "X" (X=2-9) and "NX" (N=2-4 & X=0-9). The two-digit codes on either side of the "7X" area were reserved. And, of course, Centrex was different, because of prior usage of "9" and "8". The next wave of planning recognized that the original Custom Calling features might be only a start, and changed to a "*XX" form of access. Speed Calling didn't change, so "#" was still useful there. Backward compatibility forced "72#", etc. to still be accepted, and required that "11XX" would serve as "*XX" for the (still-majority) telephones. Neither the "*" nor "11" form require timing for more digits, so "*72#" isn't helpful. Divestiture allowed Bellcore (with a lot of old Bell System folks) to re-examine the Access-to-Features issue. Thus "#XX" for service access and "*XX" for feature access (or maybe the reverse). Anyway, "#56" became the Switched-56 access code, and "#XX" was reserved for others. No dial-pulse equivalent was chosen. And most new features only briefly, if at all, mention "11XX" as an alternative to "*XX". Some areas/vendors don't support the older "72#" form, and others don't yet support the "*72" form. Bellcore is attempting to mine a few more feature codes by using the form "*1XX" and "*0XX" to add about 200 more codes. I haven't seen any mention of "111XX" being permitted. By the time they exhaust, they hope to have something even better for feature access -- maybe a multi-level menu with prompts!! Al Varney -- just MY opinion ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #652 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13727; 23 Aug 92 1:48 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15721 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:58:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22329 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:57:58 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:57:58 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230457.AA22329@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #653 TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 92 23:58:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 653 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Arthur L. Rubin) Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Vance Shipley) Re: Bell Canada Response to CRTC Announcement (Bob Blackshaw) Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (Toby Nixon) Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem (Tony Safina) Re: Analogue Problems With Digital Switches (Vance Shipley) Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! (John Higdon) Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward (Mark Baker) Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Howard Pierpont) Re: What CLASS Features Are Available? (Jack Adams) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 22 Aug 92 15:15:56 GMT Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) In waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com (Matthew Waugh) writes: > Note that having a message waiting light or stutter dial-tone is an > either-or option; you can't have both. The people who administer your > PBX will have to switch each line from stutter dial-tone to message > waiting light as you equip the phones. Our system here at Beckman Instruments is a ROLMphone (R) with ROLM PhoneMail (R), and I have both a flashing light and a stutter dial-tone if I have new messages. (They did program the wrong light, though; it's the one next to the "CONF" button.) I have no connection with Rolm other than a (usually) satisfied user. Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:14:08 GMT In article add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda V. Dasgupta) writes: > At work we have a Meridian-1 PBX system with Voicemail facilities. > The problem is that if I have a new Voicemail message I have no way of > finding out unless I lift the handset. If I have any message(s) I get > a breaking dialtone, otherwise a normal one. I wish to find a > solution so that I can see a little lamp on my phoneset glow when I > have messages. Simple, change your class of service to visual message waiting! Depending on how old your switch is you may or may not need an additional power supply for the message waiting lamps. The telephones are common and cheap. Or you can just add the proper neon lamp to your current set. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ From: cos!bob1@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Blackshaw) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Response to CRTC Announcement Organization: Corporation for Open Systems Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:03:04 GMT I didn't copy John's post simply to save bandwidth, but I would like to make a couple of points. John referred to the cost of local service as having remained below the inflation rate. The last stats I saw claimed a 300% rise in local rates since divestiture, God, I didn't realize that inflation had been that bad :-/. He also mentioned the two billion figure and laughed it away. What was forgotten was that the CRTC mandated that Bell Canada pay 70% of the interconnection costs and the new carriers pay only 30%, and in addition that their contribution to local rate subsidies would be about half of what Bell now pays. This is rather like having someone come into town and saying that he wants to start a business just like you have and expecting you to build his store. Frankly, the percentages should be the other way around. As to a more responsive repair service, I would not doubt it. In Canada (at least when I was there), a repair visit was a flat $25. Hell, the TV, Appliance, etc. repair people charged that much just to get to your house. Now that you own all your wiring, I imagine they can charge similar amounts here (I wouldn't know since I never call them -- after 33 years in the business, I figure I know as much as the guy in the C&P truck :-) ). No, the CRTC really screwed this one up, but then Keith Spicer always was a strange one. Bob ------------------------------ From: "Toby Nixon" Subject: Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? Date: 22 Aug 92 03:54:33 EDT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , jpc@avdms8.lambda. msfc.nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) writes: > Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a > documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals. > If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with > respect to the other? According to CCITT Recommendation V.11 (I don't have a copy of 422 handy, but V.11 is equivalent), if the voltage at A minus the voltage at B is less than or equal to -0.3 volts, then it is a "1". If the voltage at "A" minus the voltage at B is greater than or equal to +0.3 volts, then it is a "0". Translated into English, I guess this means that if B is more positive than A, then it is a "1". The chairman of the TIA TR-30.2 committee in charge of RS-422 is Fred Lucas of General Datacom. His email address is "flucas@attmail.com", and he does check it regularly in case you'd like to pose this question directly to him. > Send mail, I'll summarize. I tried, but it was bounced at ames.arc.nasa.gov. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 401243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: disk!tony@uunet.UU.NET (tony) Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 01:55:13 GMT spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes: > I guess you need a modem that's capable of dialing the # sign (let's > NOT get into a thread on how to pronounce that) ... my Dad had three The # sign? The POUND sign! At least according to my bank -- they say, "Enter the amount and then press the POUND sign." Well, I know they aren't referring to the asterisk ... so IT must be the POUND sign. Tony Safina -=- disk!tony@uunet.UU.NET ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Analogue Problems With Digital Switches Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 01:28:46 GMT > Anyway, I performed a quick test, which proved that there is no CPC > through the analog line ports of the Northern PBX switch.... > ... We looked in to converting the affected lines to E&M trunks, > with E&M to loop start converters (Northern says that the analog > trunks, as opposed to lines, do have CPC.), but at $500 or more per > line for the converters. Why not loop start trunks, instead of lines? > No ring voltage! oh well. In the end, Corporate has had to install a > bunch of CO lines to the affected lines. Meanwhile, they have > promises from Northern for a fix "soon". Well it is true that the SL-1 (or M-1 if you prefer :)) does not provide CPC on the 500 lines Northern have tried to help out in the short term with a software fix. A new class of service provides for the return of dial tone after the calling/called party has disconnected. This may be less than what we really want but I take it that the existing line cards would not support a line reversal type CPC signal. Since CO lines do not always provide CPC many manufacturers of CPE equipment such as answering machines and voice mail recognize that the return of dialtone signifies a disconnect and these will work well with the new SL-1 feature. In article rickie@trickie.uucp (Richard Nash) rants: > DONT HOLD YOUR BREATH!!! You will turn red, then blue, then black > doing so:) :) :) > Soon means sometime this or next year, or perhaps after somebody real > important has leaned on them real hard threatening all sorts of > litigation! :) :) They don't give a damn about accounts less than a > couple million clams! :) :) :) :) NT as well as any company makes mistakes. Most like this one are done because no one put it in the design spec, the engineer doesn't know what we'll do with it when he's through :). That's for people like us. Disclaimer: I don't work for NT and I speak solely for myself. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ...uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:00 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) writes: > In article msb@pegasus.att.com (Michael > Scott Baldwin) writes: >> My grandmother is in need of one of these infamous devices. > I'd be a bit careful about this one -- you want very high reliability. A member of my family needed one of these things. As we sat through some of the sales pitches, I could not help but think that there would be cheap and dirty ways of accomplishing this. But it all came down to monitoring: who would always be able to summon help twenty-four hours a day? Well, it turns out that very good arrangements can be made through local agencies and hospitals. The Santa Clara County Council on Aging provides an excellent unit with the little pendant and all for $30 per month. There is no up-front cost and the fee includes rental and monitoring. The agency takes all the information that the expensive late night TV outfits do: people to call in an emergency, doctor's name and number, etc. Unless you intend to sleaze it (remember that monitoring), I would shop around in your area for organizations that provide these things. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint.com Date: 22 Aug 92 09:22:00 UT Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213 It seems that Mr. Higdon only has negative things to say about GTE. I had thought that the GTE Bashing things was put to an end. I don't think that GTE always misses or loses things. My job with GTE California is to install Hi-Caps. I have yet to miss a date because of a GTE problem. We have had problems when the customer was not ready with the building or one of his contractors did not do his job. I install for LA Cellular, PacBell Cellular, MCI, AT&T, Sprint, and government agencies including the 15th Air Force at March AFB. I have many commendations as do others on our crews. I have worked with people in other areas and see the same commitment to getting the job done and done right the first time. I sometime ago had Mr. Higdon contacted by our Thousand Oaks Corporate Office and was told that the problems he had been having were all in the past and there was no current problems. All big companies have their problems. I can think of a couple of time where PacBell has caused us to miss or almost miss a due date. In fact I have seen Mr. Higdon bash PacBell on a lot of subjects including wanting to appear the PUC order on CID. He claims he has been in the business for 25 years. I believe he has. I'm sure he knows, but I wonder has he ever missed a date? I would like to see some other comments on this from other GTE people who I know are out there, but stay out of the threads as I have for a few weeks because I really don't want to argue to try to defend GTE with him since it will do no good. We have a Smart Park in Moreno Valley and another in Rancho, California and from what I have heard evey customer is very happy with his service. Mad Dog (Steven) Sysop: Apple Elite II -- an Ogg-Net BBS UUCP: steven@alchemy.UUCP (714) 359-5338 1200-2400 bps 8N1 Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif. COEI ------------------------------ From: mcb@ihlpf.att.com Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 07:33 CDT Subject: Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward Sorry to be a bearer or bad news (or good news depending on your viewpoint), but Call Return, aka Automatic Callback or Automatic Recall, attempts will not complete if the called line has Call Forwarding Variable active or Call Forwarding Busy Line and is busy. BellCore TR-TSY-000215, section 3.8 "Interactions" states that: "An AC request should be denied (i.e., the short term denial announcement [reorder]) if the called line has Call Forwarding Variable active or SCF [Selective Call Forwarding] in effect for calls from the AC customer." "AC attempts should be allowed to lines with Call Forwarding Busy Line, but call setup should only be attempted when the base station is idle." The TCAP message that is returned contains a indication that the DN is call forwarded in addition to the busy/idle status of the line. Mark Baker - just my opinion ... AT&T Network Systems ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 05:50:27 PDT From: HOWARD PIERPONT Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News In Telecom Volume 12 : Issue 648 chiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) wrote about cable shows. TELECOM Moderator noted: < [Moderator's Note: Yeah, but not true with the Jukebox Channel or < whatever it is called. I will defer to Bill Pfieffer here since he < knows more about the one in Chicago, but I think you 'put money in the < jukebox and make your selection' via a 900 number; eventually (a few < minutes or so later) whatever you selected is played. If two or more < people selected the same thing, then like with a regular jukebox it < still plays one time and lets each paying party assume *they* are the < one who is paying. :) When (whatever you picked) is played, all < pending requests for the same song are cleared from the stack. PAT] In Rhode Island the cable company has always played every request in the order received. [The same Madonna video every second or third video. The cable company houses the equipment but "rents" the channel to an independent. They are both making big $$. In upstate NY the cable company was told you play every request that was paid for or refund all monies collected so far. They used to clear from the stack, too. Now we get the same video over and over. Some folks never learn. Howard Pierpont DEC All disclaimer apply [Moderator's Note: I believe they pop the stack with multiple requests for the same music once the selection starts playing and if someone then requests it again two seconds later it goes back to the bottom of the stack once more. So if they play the same video every third or fourth time around, they may actually be getting two or three times as many calls for that video as they are actually playing. Five people ask for it while something else is on; once it starts all five requests pop the stack; then a couple others are selected and three more ask for the first one again ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: What CLASS Features Are Available? Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 13:18:58 GMT In article , hps@sdf.lonestar.org (Holt Sorenson) writes: > Hi. The switches that are digital in my NPA are #1 ESS, #5 ESS, and ^^ 1A perhaps? > DMS-100. I was wondering what CLASS features are available for these > switches. I've heard of the SS7 switch. How does it fit in with the > above and what are it's capabilities? Thanks in advance. Assuming you mean 1A, then all of the above are CLASS (trademark of Bellcore) compliant. SS7 is not a switch but a high speed packet switching network which routes call control signals between network elements (for the most part, switches). You need switches like the ones you've mentioned plus you need the SS7 connectivity between them. A more important issue however, is the tariffing of any or all of these services. The best answer on this is to contact your local telecommunications local exchange carrier and ask. Very often, some CLASS services get mired in public policy and legal debate (witness the state of Pennsylvania and Caller-ID) and thus may never be offered. Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} | (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #653 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15447; 23 Aug 92 2:19 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27089 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:53 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18338 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:45 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:45 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230528.AA18338@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #654 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 00:28:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 654 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (Hans Ridder) Re: Mag-Stripe Reader Phones (John R. Levine) Re: What Are People Using For "Telnet" (John Rice) Re: Are Online Phone Books Available? (Stewart Rowe) Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Kevin W. Williams) Re: 25 Years of 800 Service (Leonard Erickson) Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Mickey Ferguson) Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Vance Shipley) Re: Peculiar Event During Phone Call (Andrew C. Green) Last Laugh! Re: Deterioration of POTS (Aaron Barnhart) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hans Ridder Subject: Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 15:44:58 GMT [Moderator's Note: He asked for mail, but it bounced. PAT] In article jpc@avdms8.lambda.msfc. nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) writes: > Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a > documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals. > If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with > respect to the other? From EIA-422-A 1978: "The signalling sense of the voltages appearing across the interconnection cable are defined as follows: a. The A terminal of the generator shall be negative with respect to the B terminal for a binary 1 (MARK or OFF) state. b. The A terminal of the generator shall be positive with respect to the B terminal for a binary 0 (SPACE or ON) state. Note that MARK/SPACE refer to *data* circuits, and OFF/ON refer to *control* circuits, and that "binary 1" is *OFF* for a control circuit. > I know this has been a controversial topic in the past, with one > vendor doing one thing and another the opposite, but what is the > current thinking? I've never heard of any controversy. It's pretty clear in the standard. Don't they let you NASA guys have this stuff? Hans-Gabriel Ridder Digital DECwest Engineering ridder@rust.zso.dec.com Bellevue, Washington, USA {pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Mag-Stripe Reader Phones Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 22 Aug 92 19:49:21 EDT (Sat) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) In article is written: > I noticed a magstripe-reader SW Bell phone ... I wondered what the phone > would read if I swiped my AT&T Univeral Card thru it -- the regular MC > number, and bill it as an MC charge, or the AT&T calling card number, > [and it used the MC number] There is a fairly straightforward technical problem here. The contents of the magnetic stripe on the back of a credit card are well standardized (there are ANSI and ISO standards defining them) and there is only provision for a single credit card number on the stripe. There are three tracks on the stripe with the number recorded three different ways for historical reasons, but they all have the same card number. You can't change it without changing the millions of existing credit card readers found in businesses around the world. If AT&T has enough muscle, they might be able to get themselves assigned MC and Visa card prefixes that would identify the card as a telco calling card. It's my impression that the banks were rather upset when AT&T got into the bank card business using a rather peculiar little bank that does nothing but process charges for AT&T Universal cards, so I doubt that the MC and Visa organizations would do AT&T any favors. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: What Are People Using For "Telnet" Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 00:53:57 GMT > I got the latest and greatest from NCSA and went to Clarkson to get > the "packet drivers", and found a "This Stuff is Outdated" file in > Clarkson's telnet directory. I went back to our overworked networking > person to ask why NCSA has two different versions of Telnet for the PC > and Mac (2.3, and 2.5), and he suggested using the Clarkson packet > drivers only on the PC version of Telnet (version 2.3). > Someone else is looking into the Mac version. Well, here I am with > limited access to either a PC or a Mac, needing Telnet for others who > do have PCs and Macs to use to reach us. What configurations are in > use around the net? > jmoore@pixel.kodak.com, PROFS: EKSMTP(JMOORE) VMS: UX047A::JMOORE Since you enclosed a VMS sig, I assume you have VAXs and DEC access. I might suggest a look at DECs Pathworks TC-PIP package. The licenses aren't too expensive @ $100 per machine and they have both MAC and PC packages. We use both and they're stable and reasonably user friendly. We use them to connect MACs to SUNs, PCs to SUNS, HPs and both occasionally to our VAX cluster (although we're more likely to use Pathworks/DECNET or LAT for that, but it works). It might require that you have a Pathworks License for a VAX to get the PC/MAC pricing (I'm not in that loop so I don't know), but can't hurt to check. John Rice K9IJ "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially Not my Employer's.... rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ From: bg055@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Stewart Rowe) Subject: Re: Are Online Phone Books Available? Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:53:20 GMT Compuserve has two files, one (PhonFile" for residential users and one (Dun's Yellow Pages) lists business phones. Not cheap. Phonfile will run about 50 cents a name, DYP nearly $2.00 (but it also gives a bit of business information, if I remember). Stewart Rowe usr2210a@tso.uc.edu srowe@igc.org ------------------------------ From: williamsk@gtephx.UUCP (Kevin W. Williams) Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? Organization: gte Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:14:15 GMT In article , hgschulz@gaia.cs.umass.edu (Henning Schulzrinne) writes: > Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this > question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost", but > I'm interested in any examples, be it a small rural switch or a large > tandem switch. I'm trying to get some feeling for the costs of > switching bandwidth. A lot. Depending on size, configuration, trunking, features, etc., prices may vary by nearly 100%, but think several hundred dollars per line for a switch operating near the design center for the switch. I doubt any manufacturer (including my employer) would be willing to give detailed pricing schedules to anyone that wasn't actually considering buying one, but there are features of pricing that are fairly widespread in the industry: 1) A Base cost. This is the cost for the amount of hardware it would take to get the first line operational. 2) A per line cost. This is the price for each line added to the basic system. 3) Various per unit costs. Systems have growth increments where additional hardware must be added to expand the internal network size. 4) Office wide Right to Use fees. CLASS features are priced this way by a number of makers: the telco has to pay a given price to offer CLASS services to subscribers. 5) Per Line right to use fees. A feature like Calling Number ID could be charged on a per line basis from the manufacturer to the telco. 6) Miscellaneous common equipment costs. How many biling tape drives does the site need? How many administrative terminals? How many little DC-AC inverters to power 110 VAC equipment from a -48V supply? Depending on the market the maker is attempting to address, the ratio between these costs will vary, and can frequently be tweaked around for different sizes of office. If small line size switches are being sold, the the base cost would tend to be small, and the per line cost relatively high. If the target market is monster switches, the base cost can be boosted pretty high, but the per line cost would be lowered. Features are sometimes priced with different options to a telco. An office with only ten Centrex lines may choose to pay a per line charge, while one with 25,000 Centrex lines may choose to pay a flat rate that allows it to offer unlimited Centrex service (analogous to per-processor software license and site-wide software license). In general, the smaller the switch, the more it will cost when broken down on a per-line basis. A large urban area that uses switches with 100,000 lines only has to pay for one administration software package, one center stage for the network, one of any number of things, but gets to apply them to 100,000 lines. A mom-and-pop has to buy the exact same things, but only gets to apply them to 2000 lines. It is quite a design and marketing juggle to figure out exactly how to address a particular market size. Kevin Wayne Williams UUCP : ...!ames!ncar!noao!asuvax!gtephx!williamsk ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: 25 Years of 800 Service Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:21:18 GMT Thomas Lapp writes: > (the rest of this section talks about AT&T is facing competition > from other LD carriers, as well as from resellers who sometimes > use AT&T's name when making sales, causing headaches from > purchasers who think that they are getting AT&T follow-up > service as well. It mentions how the local companies are > getting into the act as well for intrastate (sic) phone > service (I think they actually meant intra-LATA?), since > Delaware has a huge credit-card banking industry which > relies heavily on 800 service.) No, Intra*state* calls require only dealing with the LECs and with the State PUCs. But since LATAs seem to cross state lines as often as not, they probably *aren't* doing specificly "Intra LATA" service. > Finally, a side article discusses how small businesses are using 800 > service by profiling several of the companies. However, the headline > is somewhat ironic, since the title is "With 800, Business Has Got > Your Number" (followup page says "Call 800: Business Has Your > (toll-free) number"). I was looking to see if there was anything in > the article about how businesses can get call detail on their 800 > numbers, thus getting ANI from callers. But not a word about it. I > guess they didn't want to scare off the 800-using population too > much. :-). More likely, that aspect of it never even occured to the staffer. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 12:05:14 PDT From: mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator Organization: Rolm In TELECOM Digest V12 No. 646 (item 10) Matthew Waugh writes: > Sounds like your company balked at paying $25 for replacing your > phones with new phones with message waiting lights. What you need to > do is retro-fit your phones with lights. You can do this in many ways, > places like Graybar will supply just the LED, or a new faceplate with > the LED installed, or gadgets with modular jacks that will plug into > your phone line. All these will respond to the 90 to 130VDC that the > PBX will put on your line when you have a message waiting. First, it probably isn't just as simple a matter as installing the new phone, and then expecting the technicians to update the phone configuration to know that you now have the message waiting light. It probably requires a different line card. Remember that the PBX has to supply additional current to power the light. Of course, I can't speak for any specific PBX. > Note that having a message waiting light or stutter dial-tone is an > either-or option; you can't have both. The people who administer your > PBX will have to switch each line from stutter dial-tone to message > waiting light as you equip the phones. Again, I won't speak for a particular PBX, but at least with Rolm, having the message waiting light and broken dialtone is not an either-or option; we always give the broken dial tone, whether the phone has a message waiting lamp or not. You should check with your particular vendor. Mickey Ferguson -- Rolm -- FergusoM at scrvm2 -- mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:09:46 GMT In article schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) writes: > Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what new features > it has ... Does it support CLASS? I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year ago. I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that uses CLID information to stamp the calls. Any one now of one? I'm hoping the new AT&T machine does. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 12:03:25 CDT From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: Peculiar Event During Phone Call Bryan King writes: > During the conversation his line went silent a couple of times. It was > as though I was on the 'waiting' end of call waiting. The line has > call waiting but no calls came in during our conversation. [...] > I'm curious what would cause this and what the problem is? Has he also got three-way calling? I had the same problems a while back, caused by a loose line connection in my phone. Pulling a bit too hard on the phone momentarily broke the line, which the system naturally interprets as a "flashed" switchhook. At that point it would put the incoming call on hold and give me a new dialtone. When I figured out that I was putting Party A on hold, not cutting them off, another flash on the switchhook would bring them back. I'm not sure that having three-way calling is strictly necessary for this, but the ringing you heard at one point was your caller thinking he'd lost you altogether and hanging up his phone, at which point it began ringing to remind him that he had (unknowingly) got you on Hold. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: barnhart@netcom.com (Aaron Barnhart) Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 01:19:02 GMT Organization: Netcom Reply-To: barnhart@netcom.com > [Moderator's Note: But do you remember the Anti-Digital-Dialing League > which formed in Berkeley, CA in the early 1960's to fight the > conversion of named exchanges into three digit numbers? PAT] "The Let's All Call Up AT & T And Protest to the President March" sung to the Michigan Fight Song (? how would I know, I went to Northwestern ?) by Allan Sherman 1962 (from the "My Son, the Celebrity" L.P.) It's the Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march Can you see him smirking and smiling Cuz he's got us all digit dialing It's the Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march So protest (So protest!) Do your best (Do your best!) Let us show him that we march in unity If he won't (If he won't!) Change the rules (Change the rules!) Let's take our business to another phone company! So Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march Let us wake him up in his slumber Get a pencil, I'll give you his number Which is 3 1 8 5 2 7 3 0 8 7 4 2 9 DASH! 5 1 1 4 9 0 6 7 4 0 8 5 2 HYPHEN! 1 1 4 6 2 0 5 7 9 hyphen dash 0 3 And now that you're on the right road Don't forget his area code Which is 5 1 8 2 4 7 9 0 5 hyphen dash 9 4 ! Where are the days of auld lang syne? (BUtterfield 8! PLaza 9!) Let's keep those beautiful names alive! (CRestview 6! RAmses 5!) Get ready to fight before it's too late! (CEntral 2! MUriel 8!) Let's let him know that this means war! (GInsburg 3! BLumberg 4!) Hoo-rayyyyyy! And millions of telephone subscribers, will erect a triumphal arc For the Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march! Aaron (Barnhart@netcom.com) -- posting from Evanston, Illinois [Moderator's Note: I'd forgotten about Allan Sherman! Thanks for digging that up. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #654 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02959; 23 Aug 92 11:50 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25669 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:54:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08796 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:53:56 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:53:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208231453.AA08796@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #655 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 09:53:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 655 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Calendar (William Degnan) Motorola 'Secure Clear' Cordless Phones (Tim Tyler) Computer Privacy Digest (comp.society.privacy) (Dennis G. Rears) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William.Degnan@mdf.FidoNet.Org (William Degnan) Date: 22 Aug 92 21:44:00 Subject: Telecom Calendar Vol. 2 No. 1 (and electronic edition 2.1) Aug 22, 1992 Copyright 1992, Communications Network Solutions (All rights reserved) ============================================================================ This is our compilation of events calendars for various aspects of the telecommunications industry, published from time to time by COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK SOLUTIONS, - Independent Consultants in Telecommunications, Austin, TX. Send calendar items, requests to distribute/reprint or comments to: Private Line, Calendar Editor, P.O. Drawer 9530, Austin, TX 78766-9530, or EMAIL to calendar@mdf.attmail.com, or calendar@mdf.fidonet.org Paid subscriptions are available. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Aug 29-Sep 3 National Association of State Telecom Directors Directors Annual Conference Baltimore, MD 606 231-1895 Aug 31-Sep 2 Southeastern Telecom Association Orlando, Fl 803 731-5640 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sep 1-3 International Mobile Comm. Expo/Fall Georgia World Convention Center Atlanta, GA 303 220-0600 800 525-9154 Sep 8-11 OE/Fibers '92 Boston, MA 206 676-3290 Sep 9-11 ComExpo Poland Marriott Hotel Warsaw, Poland 703 527-8000 Sep 10 Tennessee Telecom Users Association Nashville, TN 615 367-7676 Sep 10-12 Pacific International Expo (PIE) Clark County Fairgrounds Vancouver, WA 800 624-2569 Sep 13-17 Texas Telephone Association Houston, TX 512 343-0850 Sep 14-18 NTCA FAll Conference Chicago Marriott Chicago, IL 202 298-2300 Sep 20-23 Rocky Mountain Telecommunications Association Downtown Radisson Hotel Denver, CO 707 578-5580 Sep 21-23 Nevada Annual Conference Carson Valley Inn Gardnerville, NV 702 827-0190 Sep 21-23 NCF '92 Hayatt O'Hare Chicago, IL 312 938-3500 Sep 21-24 American Voice Input/Output Society Minneapolis, MN 408 248-1353 Sep 21-25 Tele-Communications Association Convention Center San Diego, CA 818 967-9411 Sep 21-25 Mobile Communications Marketplace Moscone Center San Francisco, CA 202 467-4770 Sep 22-23 USTA Operator Services Conference Los Vegas 202 835-3100 Sep 22-24 RF Expo/East Tampa Conv. Ctr. Tampa, FL 303 220-0600 800 525-9154 Sep 22-31 Phil Telecom '92 International Convention Center Manila, Philippines 415 573-6900 Sep 22-30 Bureau '92 Park Des Exposition Brussels, Belgium 415 573-6900 Sep 27-30 National Telephone Cooperative Association Fall Conference Nashville, TN 202 298-2300 Sep 28-30 ASIC '92 Riverside Convention Ctr. Rochester, NY 716 328-2310 Sept 28-Oct 1 BICSI Workship Windam Resort Paradise Valley Scottsdale, AZ 801 581-5809 Sept 29-Oct 1 PETE '92 Orange County Fair & Expo Ctr. Concord, CA 800 525-7383 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Oct 1 Fiber Fair '92 WA State Convention Ctr. Seattle, WA 206 277-1240 Oct 2-4 (or Oct 7-9?) CaribeCom '92 Caribe Hilton Hotel San Juan, Puerto Rico 305 670-9444 Oct 4-8 Intelec '92 JW Marriott Hotel Washington, DC 908 221-0013 Oct 5-8 (also reported as Oct 5-7) Unicom '92 North American Telecommunications Association (NATA) Sheraton Washington Washington, DC 800 538-6282 Oct 5-8 USTA National Convention New Orleans, LA 202 835-3100 Oct 5-8 Carolina-Virginias Fall Meeting Grove Park Inn & Country Club Asheville, NC 919 592-5751 Oct 6-8 NorthCon '92 Seattle Center Seattle, WA 800 421-6816 Oct 7-9? (or Oct 2-4?) CaribeCom '92 Convention Center San Juan, Puerto Rico 305 670-9444 Oct 11-14 MilCom '92 Sheraton Harbor Island San Diego, CA 619-534-3096 Oct 12-15 FOExpo Jacob K. Javits Convention Ctr. New York, NY 203 794-0444 Oct 12-17 Europas Telecom 92 Hungary Expo Center Budapest, Hungary +41 (22) 730-5444 Oct 18-21 CompTel Fall Business Conference Scottsdale, AZ 202 296-6650 Oct 19-21 CMA '92 Communications Managers Association (CMA) Telecom '92 New York Hilton NY, NY 800 CMA-EXPO / 908 766-3624 Oct 20-22 ComExpo Czechoslovakia Intercontinental Center Prague, Czechoslovakia 703 875-8620 Oct 26-28 Electronic Messaging '92 Fairmont Hotel San Francisco, CA 703 875-8620 Oct 26-30 Digital Cellular Telecom Seminar George Washington University Washington, DC 800 424-9773 Oct 26-30 Interop 92 San Francisco, CA 800 468-3767 Oct 27-30 9-1-1 Conference Holiday Inn Decatur, IL 217 782-4911 Oct 30-Nov 4 ExpoComm China '92 International Exhibit Center Beijing, China 301 986-7800 William Degnan, Communications Network Solutions -Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology- P.O. Drawer 9530 | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org Austin, TX 78766-9530 | !wdegnan@attmail.com | Voice +1 512 323 9383 [Moderator's Note: Thank you very much for sending this calendar of events along to the Digest, and I hope you will send them on a regular basis. I used to prepare these here a couple years ago but it took too much time and I had to quit doing it. I'm glad to see you involved. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler) Subject: Motorola 'Secure Clear' Cordless Phones Organization: UMCC Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 00:16:32 GMT "Cordless phone eavesdroppers are everywhere" says pro golfer Lee Turino, spokesman for Motorola. "But with my Motorola Secure Clear~ Cordless Phone, my private conversations stay private." So says a glossy brochure (# BA-81) that Motorola's Consumer Products Division (telephone # 800/331-6456) distributes to promote their new 'secure' cordless phone product line. When I first read the cover of the brochure, I said to myself, "Wow, I wonder what sophisticated technology it must use?" Motorola has been developing and selling secure voice and data systems, from DVP and DES up to the current 'FASCINATOR' algorithm for classified military and federal government secure voice for many years. Page Two of the slick brochure provides some rhetorical questions and answers: ***************************************************************** Why Motorola Cordless Phones? Q. What is meant by Secure Clear? Secure Clear is an exclusive technology that assures you no eavesdroppers will be able to use another cordless phone, scanner or baby monitor to listen in to your cordless conversations. Q. How difficult is it to eavesdrop on someone's cordless conversation? It's not difficult at all. Simply by operating a cordless phone, scanner or baby monitor on the same channel as you're on, an eavesdropper can listen in. Security codes alone DO NOT prevent eavesdropping. Q. What are security codes and what do they do? Security codes allow the handset and base to communicate with each other. With the Secure Clear cordless phone, one of 65,000 possible codes are randomly assigned every time you set the handset in the base. This means that a neighbor cannot use his handset to link with your base and have phone calls charged to your phone number. Q. Describe the basic difference between Secure Clear and security codes. Secure Clear protects against eavesdropping. Security codes prevent the unauthorized use of your phone line. Usually all cordless phones have security codes, but not both. Q. What is the purpose of the Secure Clear demo? The Secure Clear demo is a unique feature of Motorola phones that allows you to actually experience what an eavesdropper would hear when trying to listen to your conversation. By pressing the SECURE DEMO button on the Motorola phone, you and the person on the other end will hear the same scrambled noise an eavesdropper would hear. ***************************************************************** Hmmm ... I went to the Motorola Secure Clear cordless phone display at a Sears store, took a deep breath, and hit the demo button in order to hear what the "scrambled noise" which would protect a conversation from eavesdropping sounded like. White-noise like that of a digital data stream? Rapid analog time-domain scrambling? No, the scrambled "noise" sounded like inverted analog voice. That's right, they're using the 40 or 50 year old (3kHz baseband) speech inversion system -- the same one which they stopped marketing for their commercial two-way radio gear about a decade ago -- to make Lee Turino and other ignorant people's "private conversations stay private." For those of you not familiar with speech inversion, it simply flip-flops the voice spectrum so that high pitched sounds are low, & vice versa. It sounds a lot like Single Side Band (SSB) transmissions, although an SSB receiver will not decode speech- inversion scrambling. Prior to 1986, several companies -- Don Nobles, Capri Electronics, etc. sold inexpensive kits or scanner add-ons which could be used to decode speech inversion. Several electronics magazines also published schematics for making your own from scratch, at a cost of about $5. After the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, it became illegal to decode or decipher encrypted communications which you weren't a legitimate party to, so the standard practice of selling these quasi-legal products as 'experimental kits' or 'for educational purposes only' became common. Today, some companies will not specifically sell a 'speech-inversion descrambler,' but instead market a 'speech inversion scrambling system' which means the kit will encode as well as decode speech inversion, although most people buy them simply to hook up to their scanners and monitor the few public safety agencies and business that (still) use speech-inversion scrambling. Yes, technically, it is a felony for you to use a speech- inversion descrambler to monitor these Motorola 'Secure Clear' cordless. Or for that matter, the new Radio Shack DUoPHONE ET-499, cordless phone which also depends on speech-inversion for privacy protection. The public utility of the ECPA has been argued about ever since before it was enacted. It is rather obvious that the ECPA was pushed upon the ignorant, money-hungry Congress by the powerful (& wealthy) Cellular Telephone Industry Association (so the CTIA could propagate misinformation to the public, but that's another story ...). I also realize that the 46/49MHz cordless phone channels are apparently allocated for analog-voice only. Despite the ECPA, it is unconscionable to me that Motorola -- who surely knows better -- would produce the slick brochure and specifically market the 'Secure Clear' line as being invulnerable to eavesdropping. Their wording unequivocally gives the impression that the 'Secure Clear' conversations are secure, not only from other cordless phone & baby monitors, which have several common frequencies, but also against communications hobbyists with scanner radios. It is bad enough that many public safety officers still think that by using the 'PL' ('Private Line~,' also known as CTCSS) setting on their Motorola two-way radios, no one else can listen in. While the 'Private Line' fiasco might be attributable to misconception on the part of the radio users, in my opinion, Motorola's Consumer Products Division has to know that there are thousands of scanner monitors who have the technical ability to defeat the speech-inversion 'Secure Clear' system. A Motorola representative at the 1992 Summer Consumer Electronics Show in Chicago confirmed this to me, with a smirk on his face. There's a big difference between Motorola's aforementioned wording and that of Radio Shack's on page 3 of their 1993 catalog: New! Voice-Scrambling Cordless Telephone DUoFONE ET-499. Cordless phones are great. But since they transmit over the airwaves, your private conversations could be monitored. Now you can enjoy cordless convenience with voice scrambling for *added* [emphasis theirs] privacy protection -- frequency inversion makes transmissions between the handset and base unintelligible... It's not "Motorola should know better." Motorola DOES know better. Otherwise, they wouldn't be spending time or money on true 'secure' (based on current technology, of course) communications and transmission security systems. I sure am thankful that our federal government and military users of secure-mode communications systems don't rely on Motorola's marketing department to provide factual information as to the level of security provided by Motorola equipment. Too bad that for the most part, the public does. For anyone looking for a cordless telephone that offers a decent level of privacy, take a look at some of the new cordless phones which use 900MHz. Most of the new ones not only use CVSD digital voice for the RF link, but also direct-sequence spread spectrum. By no means are these phones secure ('encoded,' yes, but 'encrypted,' no), & the Tropez 900 actually seems to generate a very weak analog harmonic in the 440MHz spectrum, but you'll be a lot better off than poor old Lee Turino. Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org MCI Mail: 442-5735 C$erve: 72571,1005 P.O. Box 443 Packet: KA8VIR @KA8UNZ.#SEMI.MI.USA.NA Ypsilanti MI 48197-0443 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 07:58:44 EDT From: Dennis G. Rears Subject: Computer Privacy Digest (comp.society.privacy) Hi. This is an announcement of the Computer Privacy Digest which is gatewayed to the comp.society.privacy newsgroup. I am posting this here because several people have mentioned they are unaware of the forum. The Computer Privacy digest was created for discussion of the effect of technology on privacy. This forum of which I am the moderator started out as the Telecom Privacy digest three years ago and at the beginning of the year changed to the Computer Privacy Digest. At that time the comp.society.privacy newsgroup was created. The Digest is gatewayed into the newsgroup. This Computer Privacy Digest was established to provide a forum for discussion on the effect of technology on privacy. All too often technology is way ahead of the law and society as it presents us with new devices and applications. Technology can enhance and detract from privacy. The name of the digest should actually be the Technology and Privacy Digest but due to the USENET Hierarchy naming scheme the word Computer is instead. Topics include but are not restricted to: o Telecommunications - Caller-Id, ANI, monitoring of phones calls (cellear/cordless), tracking people's locations. o Cryptology - enhances citizens rights to safeguard their information. o Data Bases - Big Brother is here but it is not just the Government. It is also Corporate America. The advent of mailing lists has now reach an extremely high level. Consider the Social Security Number. o High Tech Surveillance Devices - ranging for sophisicated (SP) bugs, viewing devices, and audio devices. o The boon in video cameras and private citizens taping events; e.g. Rodney King episode. Video as well as photographic information can be forged. o The effect of technology on privacy in the legal arena (e.g admissibilty in court of items produced by new and old technology). o Misc - National Identifier Numbers, Bar coding currency, electronic toll devices mounted on autos, etc. This group is not intended for the overall issue of privacy, (e.g should a rape victim have their name published). Submissions go to comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administration stuff to comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil. Dennis G. Rears MILNET: drears@pica.army.mil UUCP: ...!uunet!cor5.pica.army.mil!drears INTERNET: drears@pilot.njin.net USPS: Box 210, Wharton, NJ 07885 Phone(home): 201.927.8757 Phone(work): 201.724.2683/(DSN) 880.2683 Moderator: Computer Privacy Digest & comp.society.privacy [Moderator's Note: The Computer Privacy Digest begas as Telecom Privacy and had its origin here in TELECOM Digest as a result of a huge overflow of messages on Caller-ID. Dennis has done a great job with it since the beginning and I thank him for handling the task very well. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #655 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29061; 23 Aug 92 23:24 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09356 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:32:00 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23900 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:31:40 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:31:40 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240231.AA23900@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #656 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 21:31:22 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 656 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (John Higdon) Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (Leonard Erickson) Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Michael Schuster) Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Greg Jumper) Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (Rop Gonggrijp) Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (John Gilbert) Re: Deterioration of POTS (Leonard Erickson) Re: Deterioration of Pots (vs. Monopolies) (Alan L. Varney) Re: Make Mine Extra Dry, Please, and Hold the Olive (Jack Adams) Re: What are Personal Communication Services (Jack Adams) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 01:02 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213 Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif. COEI writes: > It seems that Mr. Higdon only has negative things to say about GTE. I > had thought that the GTE Bashing things was put to an end. As far as I am concerned, I hope it is never allowed to end until GTE at least gives lip service to cleaning up its act. To date, there has been no evidence that I can see anywhere that this is the case. > I don't think that GTE always misses or loses things. No, maybe not ALWAYS. But it seems to ALWAYS lose the first report of trouble. In the past five years I have yet to have anything repaired as a result of the first call, or even the second. > My job with GTE California is to install Hi-Caps. I have yet to miss > a date because of a GTE problem. We have had problems when the > customer was not ready with the building or one of his contractors did > not do his job. There is that blaming someone else again. You obviously do not work in any areas of northern or southern California in which I am forced to deal with GTE. Long Beach will soon be history, thank God. > I install for LA Cellular, PacBell Cellular, MCI, AT&T, Sprint, and > government agencies including the 15th Air Force at March AFB. I have > many commendations as do others on our crews. I have worked with > people in other areas and see the same commitment to getting the job > done and done right the first time. You take my criticisms of GTE personally. Obviously you know not of mine, my associates', and my clients' very numerous miserable dealings with GTE. No company is perfect and I understand that. But GTE goes beyond all reason in its crummy performance. As I said, you apparently were not on any of the hundreds of jobs that have been botched super-royally by GTE. Be thankful that I have not asked PAT to devote several digests to a detailed list of GTE screwups in just the past couple of years! > I sometime ago had Mr. Higdon contacted by our Thousand Oaks Corporate > Office and was told that the problems he had been having were all in > the past and there was no current problems. Well, that turned out to be a big horse laugh. If anything, it has all gotten worse. It got so bad that our Long Beach client had to move or throw in the towel. When a city starts losing its commerce because of excrementally bad telephone service, I would hardly call that "no current problems". > All big companies have their problems. I can think of a couple of > time where PacBell has caused us to miss or almost miss a due date. Yes, Pac*Bell has missed dates and screwed up orders. No company is perfect. But there are two major differences: 1) Pac*Bell readily admits it error and offers "deals" to compensate (GTE always denies any culpability and blames everything on everyone else); 2) Pac*Bell has more successes than failures by a wide margin (GTE almost always turns the simplist job into a major pig fornication). > In fact I have seen Mr. Higdon bash PacBell on a lot of subjects > including wanting to appeal the PUC order on CID. I have major disagreements with the corporate practices of Pacific Telesis. I will do whatever I can to keep that corporation from ripping us all off. I have made no secret of that. But regular readers will also tell you that I have very high praise for the men and women who provide my Pac*Bell service. They are professional, responsive, and treat me as a valued customer. GTE treats me, and most everyone else like garbage. Pac*Bell goes to major effort to provide service properly and timely. GTE does not appear to give a bowel movement about anything except bill collection. > He claims he has been in the business for 25 years. I believe he > has. I'm sure he knows, but I wonder has he ever missed a date? I not only claim it, I can prove it. Have I missed a date? Many times. Have I copped to it with the client? You bet. Nothing enhances credibility like straight talk and a forthright manner. I have never lost a client admitting to mistakes. But I have seen plenty of others in this business get sacked trying to sweep things under the rug or trying to divert blame. > I would like to see some other comments on this from other GTE people > who I know are out there, but stay out of the threads as I have for a > few weeks because I really don't want to argue to try to defend GTE > with him since it will do no good. No, because actions speak much louder than words. I am sure there are many GTE people who would like to punch out my lights and defend their company. That does not change the truth of the matter. The best way to change my mind about GTE (and say nice things about the company) would be for the service to do an about face and have the company act like a real telephone company for a change. I can guarantee you that pleasant experiences from GTE would send me to the keyboard just as fast as pleasant experiences from Pac*Bell. And I am on record praising Pac*Bell when it was warranted. > We have a Smart Park in Moreno Valley and another in Rancho, > California and from what I have heard every customer is very happy with > his service. As I have said before, somehow, somewhere there are a few people that like GTE -- for whatever reason. If "every customer" is happy with his service, then the credibility score is low. No telco provides that level of service. It may say something about the "telecom knowledgeability" of the customers. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213 Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:43:17 GMT john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > aimla!ruby!rudholm@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Rudholm) writes: >> Can't somebody put GTE out of our misery??!!! > Well, you could always do what a major client of mine is in the > process of doing. Ignoring advice to not locate a billing center in > GTE area, this outfit took space in a Long Beach industrial park. For > the past year the GTE horrors have been non-stop. > So next month Long Beach will lose a thriving company and Anaheim will > gain one. Is it any wonder that the Town Council of Los Gatos passed a > resolution condemning GTE? I wonder if it'd be possible for a large group of business and residential customers that have been shafted by GTE to somehow file a class action suit against GTE? If it is, and you win, I'll settle for .1% of the total judgement! Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 11:41:58 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC In article vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) writes: > In article schuster@panix.com (Michael > Schuster) writes: >> Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what new features >> it has ... > Does it support CLASS? I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year ago. > I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that uses CLID > information to stamp the calls. Any one now of one? I'm hoping the > new AT&T machine does. Apparently is is identical to the 1337 except for time-day stamp. Even has the same limited 8-minute recording time. The Panasonic KX-T8000 seems the way to go although it, too, does not support special line services. Mike Schuster NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: jumper@spf.trw.com (Greg Jumper) Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II Organization: TRW Sensor Data Processing Center, Redondo Beach, CA Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 00:07:21 GMT In article vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) writes: > In article schuster@panix.com > (Michael Schuster) writes: >> Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what >> new features it has ... > Does it support CLASS? I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year > ago. I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that > uses CLID information to stamp the calls. Any one now of one? I'm > hoping the new AT&T machine does. I got the new 1339 about six weeks ago. As far as I know (not having had a 1337), all the 1339 adds is time-and-date stamp, voice announcement of number of messages, and more memory. There is no (mention of) CLASS capability. Greg Jumper TRW Signal Processing Facility jumper@spf.trw.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool From: rop@hacktic.nl (Rop Gonggrijp) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:35:03 WET/D Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: >> Guess this does show what 'capable minds' set up the technology that >> we are supposed to trust. Yet in the eyes of US law enforcement, we >> would have been the criminals for experimenting with this (using >> 555-XXXX numbers), and AT&T the poor victim. > When you "experimented," you _did_ impose false charges on somebody, > didn't you? Why _aren't_ you the "criminals" then? If we did not experiment, we sould never have found this trick. AT&T would say their system was totally secure. YOU would trust a system this stupid. I did not use this system to make calls, I used it to show that it could be done, and I have done some testing to see what you could and could not do with it. As a reporter that is into these things, that is what I have to do. You may not appreciate it, but I'm doing you a favour. Believe me, AT&T can live with about thirty to fifty dollars in "losses". They should have "lost" a few hundred thousand dollars through this hole, as far as I am concerned. Knowing that this kind of thread can go on for ever, and is likely to become a shouting match, I will not respond to any further posts on this subject. One thing: I hate to have to explain why I do things every second posting I make. Can my motivations be included in the FAQ for this newsgroup? ;-) ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:00:44 GMT > I remember that phreaks used to use ABCD to hack directory assistance. > Without getting into the specifics, you could use certain combinations > during a call to DA, and you would be put in a trunk from which you > could actually answer information calls. Ten years ago calls such as these to 555-1212 in some areas would allow certain test modes. One of these was a loop around test. Two people could call 555-1212 at a prearranged time and talk without charge. This method is so old and well known that if it still works, someone must want it that way. Most loops that previously passed the full audio bandwidth now only pass a 1 KHz test tone. ATT at one time had a set of loops available to equipment manufacturers that required a person to talk simultaneously onto both ends of the loop to set it up. After this, the full audio bandwidth was available. This technique worked effectively to prevent these loops from being used as a phone phreak meeting place. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:51:52 GMT mdw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (mark.d.wuest) writes: > I think another side effect of the break-up is the shift away from > pure research at Bellcore. They're laying off more people as I type. > Bell Labs is rumored to be headed toward a market-driven approach to > development (but *that* rumor's been flying around for awhile now ...). > Who know what the end result will be? That "rumor" was essentially *confirmed* in an article in {Scientific American} a few months back ... Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 11:50:06 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS (vs. Monopolies) Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein) writes: > The point of my original message was that the fragmentation of phone > service has caused problems for non-techie users, who have not been, > are are unlikely to become, the beneficiaries of most of the > competitively driven advances in telecommunications technology. Lots > of fascinating alternatives and services will be opening up for > business users, but nobody really wants to spend a lot on the > residential POTS market (since it is mostly all regulated > services) -- and things are getting tougher for exactly that segment. > And contrary to some opinions we've seen, I do feel that it is > important for the technologists (that's us!) to watch out for "Aunt > Martha" and her needs as well. Most of the arguments about the break-up center over the differing needs of business and residential service. The needs of large businesses center over price and day-to-day quality. Residential users are usually willing to pay more if they can just ignore the damn thing -- just make it work. Thus the hand-holding attitude of the old Bell System; they over-stocked the limited selection of things to be able to respond quickly to unanticipated demand, and over-hired for the same reasons. But if the goal is universal service, I can't think of any alternative that would have reach the same level of SERVICE. In today's environment, the businesses benefit (and "large" home users), but one can't easily say "just make it work" to anyone, even for a higher price. Al Varney - just MY opinion [Moderator's Note: I have a deteriorated pot I bought many years ago in which to cook carrots and peas. Today when I looked at it, it had gotten a crack in the bottom so I threw it out. Maybe I should send it to Judge Greene and ask for a new pot if he can't make this one work right again. I'll demand that he rule the deterioration of pots has to stop immediatly even if Tru-Value Hardware has to be divested in the process. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: Make Mine Extra Dry, Please, and Hold the Olive Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:33:00 GMT In article , coleman@twinsun.com (Mike Coleman) writes: > I was sitting in traffic behind a PacBell repair van and noticed two > large weatherproof socket covers (the kind of thing you see on outdoor > power receptacles) on the upper rear of the van. One was labeled > "DRY" and the other "WET". I'm puzzled; anyone know what these are? Not really sure of this instance, but I'll render an opinion (after all, any clod can have the facts 8^)! Wet and dry are slang for whether or not a trunk has a battery and ground feed (Wet, or the line contains "juice") versus a circuit without battery and ground feed (Dry, sorry, no olives!) Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: What are Personal Communication Services Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:45:32 GMT In article , perl@dwrsun4.UUCP (Robert Perlberg) writes: > I have seen mention in many industry magazines of Personal > Communication Services (PCS). ...stuff deleted > ... How is PCS different from/better than cellular? The common usage of PCS around here, NEW BUZZWORD ALERT -> NOMADIC SERVICES!, is to establish a single number for each person, allowing the intelligence of the network to figure out where to route it to (home, macro cellular, micro cellular, etc.) Visionaries also view PCS as not simply single phone number, but seemless service as well. i.e., voice mail on busy/don't answer, call park and page, plus all the services operating uniformly no matter where the customer happens to be. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #656 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01184; 24 Aug 92 0:20 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26231 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:36 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12070 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:26 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240330.AA12070@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #657 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 22:30:30 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 657 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Brett G. Person) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Bob Kupiec) Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! (Leonard Erickson) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Dan Danz) Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (John R. Levine) Re: NYTel LATAs (John R. Levine) Re: What Does This "Western Electric" Box Do? (David S. Wise) Re: Ameritech Complete MasterCard (Jerry Greenwood) Re: Switching Systems (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:15:10 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us (Nick Sayer) writes: > Our Moderator Notes: >> I've no complaints about it at all. I have NOTHING against >> competition. But I have NOTHING against legal, lawfully maintained >> monopolies either. [ RBOC comments deleted } > Government has proved time, and time, and time, and time again that it > cannot hope to be as clever at regulating RBOCs as the RBOCs are at > evading regulation, bribing regulatory officials and ripping off the > public. The answer is not government. The answer is free markets. > [Moderator's Note: By 'legal, lawfully maintained monopolies', I did > NOT mean monopolies started by or protected by the government. I meant > those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, effort and > brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain a monopoly > despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I supported AT&T > intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it was divested at > the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters who maintain a > 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence. I agree, the free market > should be the only consideration. PAT] Some of those so-called 'lawfully maintained monopiles' that you so admire got that way by fear, threat, intimidation, bribery and sundry other tactics that run the gamut from unethical to unlawful. Kinda depends what the laws are at the time and whose ethical standards are being applied. Personally, I've always considered 'business ethics' to be somewhat of an oxymoron. Hard work and effort (is there a difference?) is usually only part of the story and often a minor part. Cleverness can be more important and cutthroatness doesn't hurt sometimes. These types of advantages are even more important if we harken back to the glorious days of yesteryear -- the age of the Robber Barons -- when many of the monopolies (mostly now metamorphasized into oligopies) that our Moderator so admires were an economic and ethical scourge on society. Also, you are a little skewed in your thinking about what a free market is. If the benefits of a free market flow from competition and the market forces it applies to a company, then by definition, a monopoly will not be best for society because a monopoly will not be subject to such forces. Of course some concensions to property rights must be made in the interests of innovation, hence patent monopolies, but anti-trust laws exist because it has been demonstrated that some business practices which also lead to monopolies do not have a societal benefit and often have the opposite effect. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: plains!person@uunet.UU.NET (Brett G Person ) Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Date: 23 Aug 92 23:25:38 GMT Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network PAT, you are citing examples of charity, NOT employee/corporatee relations which is the key to why Standard was broken up. Getting back to the original thread. AT&T was just too damned big. It was THE PHONE CPMPANY. Tell me, would you want to buy gas from only Mobile, cars from only Ford, clothes from only JC Penney? How 'bout if the only television station you had was WGN? I'm sure the details of the breakup are somewhere in the archives. I'll look them up before I log out tonight. I may agree with you after I have read the details. But right now,I don't think I can say that I do. There is just something wrong about having only one service provider. The comparison with IBM is Dead Wrong. IBM is big, no doubt, but there are at least other choices. What other choices besides AT&T were there before the breakup? Brett Person Guest Account North Dakota State University person@plains.nodak.edu || person@plains.bitnet [Moderator's Note: There were lots of choices prior to the breakup. MCI was selling long distance service ten years before the breakup as was Sprint. The catch was the inconvenience in using their service with the extra digits one had to dial and the extra cost their customers had to pay in the form of local phone message unit charges to the competitor's switch. Repeat: I have nothing against any form of competition. I believe AT&T should have been ordered to interconnect with the others in a fair way at arms-length. They should have been ordered to include the newcomers in the Separations and Settlements process and let the local Bells handle the billing and collection for some fee like they do now. PAT] ------------------------------ From: olwejo!root@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Kupiec) Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 05:53:30 GMT In , the Telecom Digest Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: You are correct. I live in a different world than > many of the readers here. I live in a dirty, very impoverished, crime- > ridden and rapidly dying inner city. I've seen you write how much you dislike the city many times, and if you don't mind me asking, what is keeping you there? I don't think that I would have lived in those surroundings for very long, I would have packed my bags and gone somewhere else. Bob Kupiec - Olwejo System Admin. - N3MML !: uunet!cs.widener.edu!olwejo!bob UUCP: olwejo!bob@cs.widener.edu Internet: kupiec@hp800.lasalle.edu School: LaSalle University, 20th St. & Olney Ave., Philadelphia, PA [Moderator's Note: Very simple. I do not have the cash reserves I feel I would need to live somewhere else for a month (or two or three?) while looking for employment without being a burden on my new community in the process. The current economic recession is a real killer. I can barely keep my bills current. The idea of going somewhere else without pre-arranged employment and housing is very scary to me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:19:08 GMT toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) writes: > In article msb@pegasus.att.com (Michael > Scott Baldwin) writes: >> My grandmother is in need of one of these infamous devices. > I would think the best solution is to have the autodialer go into > speakerphone mode after making the connection so the callee can try to > listen and/or talk to the caller. Also I would want an alarm so your > grandmother knows when it's dialing, rather than silent operation, so > she can abort any false alarms. You probably DO NOT want to directly > call the emergency services due to the "boy who cried 'wolf'" > syndrome. It wouldn't surprise me if they start totally ignoring > automated calls and/or charging big bucks for false alarms. In many jurisdictions, it is flat out *illegal* to have an automated system directly dial the police or fire department. These laws came about for exactly the reasons you cite above. (It's amazing what you pick up by reading the stuff enclosed with things like alarm systems.) Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) [Moderator's Note: I got a system like that for my mother. It goes through an answering service which is trained to handle those calls; they in turn call her neighbors, the doctor, the police, etc. I pay $30 per month for it to some company in Colorado. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dan@quiensabe.az.stratus.com (Dan Danz) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Date: 23 Aug 92 18:30:13 GMT Reply-To: dan@tucson.az.stratus.com As a former technical writer, I was blessed with an editor who adamantly refused to allow phrases like: "Hit the return key" (Too violent) and "Depress the return key" (Too depressing, we have HAPPY keys) I wonder what she would have done with: "Pound the return key" or "Pound the pound key". L. W. "Dan" Danz VOS Mail: Dan_Danz@vos.stratus.com Sr Consulting Software SE NeXT Mail: dan@az.stratus.com Customer Assistance Center Voice Mail/Pager: (602) 852-3107 Telecommunications Division Customer Service: (800) 828-8513 Stratus Computer, Inc. 4455 E. Camelback #115-A, Phoenix AZ 85018 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 23 Aug 92 15:19:50 EDT (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different > from standard long distance service? It's Software Defined Network. In Olden Days when long distance rates were much higher than now and switching was relatively much more expensive than it is now, large companies usually rented lots of fixed leased lines among their various facilities to carry intra-company traffic. This saved money relative to toll rates and also sometimes avoided problems of not being able to get through at peak hours. But now leased lines have become an anachronism, because the modern network is much better at providing bandwidth on demand, so long distance companies provide various billing hacks to give modern equivalents of leased lines. Once such hack is the "virtual private line" which is a long distance ringdown circuit -- whenever you pick up the phone at one end it quickly calls the other end to give you pretty much the same effect as a leased line but at lower cost since they don't need to provide bandwidth when you're not asking for it. SDN is basically a bulk calling plan for large businesses that replaces networks of leased lines. One dials 10732 to make an SDN call (and gets a message saying to call your account rep if it's not a line assigned to an SDN account) but as far as I know the calls are carried just like other AT&T calls. Then there's the matter of Tariff 12. AT&T, still being the dominant long distance carrier, still has regulated rates which means that they have to offer the same terms to everyone. When dealing with large customers, though, the only way a carrier can keep their business is to create a package deal that meets their particular needs. When AT&T makes a package for a large customer, e.g. DEC, they file it as an offering under Tariff 12 which means that if you happen to need exactly the same service as DEC does, you can order it at the same price. But filing under Tariff 12 is expensive and slow so it doesn't make sense to do it for other than the largest accounts. To fill in this gap, there has arisen a bunch of grey-market AT&T resellers. There is an SDN offering that covers multiple locations and sends each location its own bill, but with a price based on the total volume, which many companies use when each location handles its own overhead expenses. The resellers buy this service and resell it to smaller businesses, and AT&T then bills each of the smaller businesses directly. I'm not sure how the resellers make money, whether it's by charging a fee directly to the customers or by somehow getting a rebate from AT&T. AT&T doesn't seem to be entirely thrilled by this development, since it gets them involved in situations with resellers who are often marginal, low-overhead, and somewhat slimy, but it is a way they can offer competitive prices to businesses too small for the bulk plans but too big to be happy with something like Reach Out. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NYTel LATAs Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 23 Aug 92 15:26:13 EDT (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > New York Regional Calling Area: > New York City (212/718/917 area codes); Long Island (516) except > Fisher's Island; ... Aha. I'd long been wondering where Fisher's Island gets its phone service. It's physically close to New London CT, has a New London zip code (the only place in the country out of state zip sequence) and the only way to get there is by ferry from New London. So I guess SNET provides their phone service, too. > Albany Regional Calling Area: > Capital District and Adirondack Region - all of Area Code 518 and Hancock, > Massachussetts in Area Code 413); That's odd, the New England Tel phone books claim that all of 413 is in the Western Mass. LATA. The exchange is 413-738. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 10:51:13 -0500 From: David S. Wise Subject: Re: What Does This "Western Electric" Box Do? Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman) writes: > I moved into a new apartment this weekend, and found a mysterious box > plugged into an electric outlet, with wires running into a telephone > junction box. Various writing on the box reads: > Western Electric > 2012C Trnsf. > [Moderator's Note: It is indeed a transformer to light the dial on a > Princess phone ... a style long since replaced by the Trimline models. > The reason you do not need it on the Trimline is because instead of an > actual little light bulb under the case of a Princess phone, the newer > Trimline model uses LED's under each push button and they light up Amendment: Sometime before 1984, ITT sold a Trimline clone -- "Trendline" I believe was the cloned name. The original Trendline (with heavier "Indestructible 500"-style components) uses the transformer/bulb arrangement Pat ascribes to the Princess. BUT, the bulb was not delivered with the instrument although the phone was already wired for it (yellow/black). The Trendline 2 uses a modified LED arrangement, similar to what Pat describes for the Trimline. Both these are fully modular phones, and so the original is likely to be plugged in where it doesn't belong. Thus, the following is not for novices: for $1 you can buy a bulb and plug it in to a Trendline. If you still have such a transformer, you now have a WELL lighted phone. Not all the transformers started fires, but a specific subset was URGENTLY recalled. LOC (which installed it) should still be able to identify a nasty, but would probably just beg you to unplug it. WARNINGS: If you have such a transformer and don't need it, please UNPLUG IT. If you want to keep it, check its recall status before using it. DO NOT ATTACH ANY 2-LINE phones. Competent rewiring might save you, but I would not have both in the same building. And if you put a bulb into an original Trendline, BEWARE OF 2-LINE wiring. David S. Wise +1(812)855-4866; fax: +1(812)855-4829 dswise@cs.indiana.edu Computer Science Dept., Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405-4101, USA ------------------------------ From: grnwood@gagme.chi.il.us (Jerry Greenwood) Subject: Re: Ameritech Complete MasterCard Date: 23 Aug 92 07:21:21 GMT Organization: Gagme Public Access UNIX, Chicago, Illinois. Also ... the May 1990 issue of {Consumer Reports} has the four major ways in which the interest is computed. They list them according to their desirability. Armed with these one can make a good choice. There is even a 7.9 percent card out there ... the catch is that it has a $39.00 fee. That would be great for me as I carry a large balance. I'll probably get that card and when the balance is paid off ... switch to a no fee card. Jerry Greenwood N9NRG grnwood@gagme.chi.il.us 312-545-2219 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 22:34 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Switching Systems On Aug 22 at 22:26, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: So with panel and SXS being incompatible, how were > calls handled between those offices? PAT] There were several hacks that were used. Early on, there were mechanical translators to convert revertive to rotary and visa versa. While it was not much trouble sending a call from SXS to Panel the other direction was problematic. In the former, a switch level was connected to special trunks from the Panel office equipped with the same type of rotary receivers that the subscribers used. However, the only output language spoken by Panel is revertive and this had to be converted to rotary pulses. Due to the handshaking in revertive signalling, conversion to rotary was not a trivial task. And the native tongue of SXS IS rotary. Later on, calls between SXS and Panel were routed through the local tandem switch. The first of these were crossbar, and as you will recall crossbar speaks all traditional signalling languages fluently. This was how calls between San Mateo and San Francisco were handled decades ago, when San Mateo had a major amount of SXS and San Francisco still had some Panel offices. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #657 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02302; 24 Aug 92 0:56 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06092 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:03:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17755 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:02:57 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:02:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240402.AA17755@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #658 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 23:03:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 658 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Conversation Attack: Software Blue Box in Germany (Wolf Paul) Odd Calling Card Rates at NYTel (Douglas Scott Reuben) Interesting Stuff in a Box (Roy Smith) Question About PBX Phone (Dave Grabowski) Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens) Sprint and Network 2000 Sued by Sellers of Long Distance (Joe Konstan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul) Subject: Conversation Attack: Software Blue Box in Germany Reply-To: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf N. Paul) Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:14:04 GMT The following is from the Austrian newsweekly "profil", No. 34, Aug. 17, 1992. "Conversation Attack" -- German computer hackers permit cheap telephoning around the globe. The demonstration setup was extremely simple. A PC, a monitor with an earphone socket, a modem, and -- most importantly -- a disk with special software. The man in front of the keyboard dialled the digits 0130, the prefix for Germany's "freephone" numbers. A few digits later the connection to Canada was established, the diskette began to spin and sent some fake signals across the Atlantic. A few moments later another dial tone could be heard, and the computer freak at the keyboard leisurly keyed in the number of a girl friend in Tokyo with whom he'd wanted to talk for some time. The faces of the men who are looking over the computer freak's shoulders show increasing dismay. Experts, particularly telco experts, don't like to be confronted with the ease with which they can be defeated. And that's exactly what this writer for the German magazine "Capital" did in July. The man took his time with his call to Tokyo. The call didn't cost him more than a call to his mother at the other end of town. The bill would be paid by someone else. The diabolically genial program developed by German hackers caused the meters to rotate at the Canadian firm whose "freephone" number was dialed at the beginning of the demonstration. Experts from "Telekom", the German telco, had assured the public that security precautions against this kind of unwelcome "conversation attack" had been been perfected. But this demonstration by "Capital" -- which had been previously announced -- mercilessly revealed the weaknesses of the telco's defenses against hackers. Here' how it works: In addition to the deluge of conversations which pours through the ether, there are signals which are sent on certain frequencies. These signals indicate to the phone systems who is connected to whom, and most importantly, who pays for what. As soon as the hackers have found out which frequencies are used for these signals, it becomes child's play to fool the receiving system with counterfeit signals and make it pay for the call. The telco has started the counter-attack. Telekom spokesman Juergen Kindervater: "We are in the process of installing technical blockers in the network which will make access more difficult". The hackers are not discouraged by this. The have started to offer their software package "Blue Box" (cost inclusive one year's warranty: DM 25,000 or $12,000) to a wider public -- as yet under the counter. If the telco should change its system, that wouldn't be a problem, the hackers assure potential customers. The program could always be adjusted to allow for new measures. "Kimble", the alias of the hacker who wrote most of the program, is convinced that this system is "perfectly legal in Germany" and plans to start a company to publicly market his program. Telekom spokesman Kindervater compares the situation to a tortoise-and-hare race. As soon as telco technicians close one loophole, the hackers have found a new one. Kindervater: "We won't have a chance until we can separate the voice and signal channels." This is supposed to happen by next spring when Telekom introduces the new digital "Signaling System Seven". A Hamburg hacker comments gleefully: "A digital network will increase our possibilities even more. We'll be able to get into anything, even the main telco computers." The damages caused by these "telecom-parasites" are still comparatively small (according to Kindervater), maybe in the tens of millions of Marks. But the future perspectives are disquieting. German and Austrian telco officials are afraid of the specter of Eastern European companies who might want to increase their communications budget by purchasing this software from the German hackers. That could raise damages into the billions. The software functions equally well in Austria. One simply uses the Austrian "freephone" prefix, 0660. While Austrian telco spokesman Stadbauer claims that this has not yet happened in Austria, and that measures are in place to prevent it, "Kimble" claims that several of his customers are using Blue Box in Austria. Telco technician Adalbert Dirnboeck admits that the Austrian security network is not yet perfectly tight: "The analogue portion of the network still has some loopholes, but the digital portion is safe." Very reassuring, especially since two-thirds of Austria's 0660 numbers are still handled by the analogue portion of the network. In any case, "Kimble" is not fazed by the prospects of a digital network. "Blue Box will still work -- we are demonstrating that even now in Hamburg, which is already digital." Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center wnp@rcvie.co.at Alcatel-Elin Research Center +43-1-391621-122 (w) Ruthnergasse 1-7 +43-1-391452 (fax) ELIN RESEARCH A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe +43-1-2246913 (h) ------------------------------ Date: 23-AUG-1992 19:07:28.56 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Odd Calling Card Rates at NYTel I recently got a bill for Calling Card calls from NYTel, reflecting charges for calls made from Shoreham, NY, to NYC, NY. The calls were made at 1AM, and lasted for one minute each. Each call cost $1.10. I thought that was a bit expensive, so I called my business office to check these charges. Here's what happened: 1. I was told "We charge a 40 cent surcharge, plus the coin rate, plus toll". I asked what that came out to be, and the rep said "We don't have that information here, but we will get back to you." They never did. 2. Called back the next day from Mass (collect, of course!). I asked why my call was not returned. Rep. said she tried to call me back, but no one was there. I told her I had an answering machine or voice mail at EVERY number I gave her, but received no message. No answer from her. She then tells me the same thing she did the day before, and I repeat my request for an exact breakdown of the charges, with actual dollar amounts. She says she will get back to me. Again, never did. 3. Repeated calls go on all week, no answer. I call the NYTel "President's Helpline". Rep. there sounds VERY concered (they always do! :) ). Next day I get a call on voicemail from the NYTel supervisor for my office, she says that they have looked into the problem, and the rate is "a 40 cent surcharge plus the coin rate for the call." According to her, a call from a PAYPHONE in Shoreham, NY, to NYC, NY, is 70 cents for the first minute, and $.15 for each additional minute. Thus, a minute call is $.40 (surcharge) + $.70, which comes out to the $1.10 which I had been billed. I didn't think this was correct -- in the past, NY Tel (and presently all LECs that I deal with) charge a surcharge, plus whatever the direct dial rate is -- there is no special rate from payphones. Thus, a payphone call has a certain "coin surcharge" plus the direct dial rate if one pays by coin, a calling card call has a "calling card surcharge" plus the direct dial rate, and operator assist calls have a given number of surcharges (depending on what she does) plus the direct dial rate. 4. I called the NYTel Pres. Helpline again, noted the above, and told the rep. that the NYTel phone book says "Calling card calls cost a 40 cent surcharge plus the direct dialed rate, if handled by NYTel". She said yes, but there is a DIFFERENT direct dial rate for payphones than what one pays from non-coin phones. Nice, ambiguous use of the term "direct dial", eh? Giving up on NYTel to resolve this, I called the NY Public Service Commission. I spoke to someone on the Rates and Tariffs staff, who after looking up the concerned tariffs, said yes, indeed, NYTel is correct, but ONLY for calls in the NY Metro LATA, and only for calls from payphones. Thus, she said, there is a separate "direct dial" rate from payphones, and if I had made the Calling Card call from a business or residence phone I would pay a different (cheaper) rate. (This STILL doesn't sound right to me, but it seems the PSC allows and agrees with this.) Thus, a NYTel handled call from downtown Albany to one of the Albany suburbs is $.40 + toll direct dial (or local direct dial) rate. So, if it cost me $.10 for a one minute call from Albany to another Albany number, it would cost $.50 for a one minute calling card, ie $.40 plus $.10, regardless of if the call was made from a payphone or a business/residence phone. However, a call of EXACTLY the same mileage from NYC to another number in NYC (let's say from one payphone to another right next to it) will be $.65, that is, $.40 surcharge, plus the cost of a placing the call with coins, which is $.25 cents. And indeed, upon inspection of my bill, I note that calls from payphones are billed as such. As I noted earlier, this is the only case where I have EVER seen this rate. Having TWO direct dial rates (e.g., one from coin and another for non-coin phones) seems to go against the industry "standard" of having a set toll rate and then attaching surcharges to that rate for special telco-offered services, like Calling Card calls, etc. In the case of the 1AM call from Shoreham to NYC, I think it would have been a bit cheaper to dial 10288 first (this is allowed in NY for INTRA-LATA calls), as AT&T would charge something like $.80 surcharge + $.15 (or less) toll. From now on, I'm not using NYTel for calls in the New York Metro calling area (NYC - 212, 718, 917; Southern Westchester - 914; Greenwich/Byram, CT - 203; Rockland - 914, and Long Island - 516 except for Fisher's Island). One of the reasons I obtained a Calling Card was to avoid the high coin-deposit surcharge; apparently NYTel has managed to convince the PSC to allow them to charge it again via Calling Card calls in the NY Metro calling area. If I can place a no-surcharge call with Metro Media for $.20, or a surcharge call with AT&T which for non-local calls is cheaper than what NYTel will charge me from a payphone, why bother with them? This seems self-defeating -- Calling Card calls save the Telco time in collecting coins and having to tie up a payphone while a customer deposits them. By encouraging me to use coins, or to give my money to someone else (although NYTel gets a cut in any event), they will gain less revenue. I assume they expect no one to notice and/or care about this new rate structure , and thus the minimal revenue loss from customers such as myself who do migrate to other services is of little interest to them. Oh well ... :( Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Subject: Interesting Stuff in a Box Organization: Public Health Research Institute, New York Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:46:49 GMT I was just walking down the street in midtown Manhattan and came to a Con Ed (New York's gas and electric utility) truck parked by an open equipment box. It was obviously some sort of gas pipeline monitoring station. In one side of the box was what looked like a large gas pressure regulator and random sorts of valves and sensors. Underneath was a large circular chart recorder. Another part had a digital thermometer for outside air temperature, etc. The interesting part was the section which contained some neat looking telecom gear. There was a Radio Shack alarm dialer, a plain-jane wall-mount telephone (presumably for the convenience of service people installing or testing the equipment), what I could swear was a Telebit Trailblazer modem (couldn't see the front panel but the box and rear panel look exactly like a Trailblazer), and a neat pair of boxes which I assume were the guts of a cellular phone. One box was a slim metal case with a piece of fat (RG-8?) coax coming out one end, the other was a fatter box connected to it with a nameplate that said "CelJack", and had an RJ-11 jack on it, into which were plugged the Telebit, alarm dialer, and telephone via a random assortment of T-connectors). One piece of gear I couldn't identify was a slim, approximately 10 x 16 inch box which was a Hewlett/Packard model 48060 (anybody know what a HP-48060 is?) It had two sets of barrier-strip type terminals, one on each end. I'm assuming it was some sort of industrial process control computer. OK, my question is, why the cellular phone? Obviously, this is some sort of setup where they monitor gas pressure/whatnot and download data periodically to some central point. The alarm dialer presumably can send in some sort of emergency message. But why the cellular phone? Why not just run a regular copper phone line into the box? It's not like it's out in the boonies or someplace. I can think of only two reasons for the Telebit. One is that there is so much data to be sent that hey really want the speed you get from those to cut down on cell air time. But, if that's the case, wouldn't a land line be cheaper? The other possibility i that this is such a critical station that they need the reliability you get from a Telebit. But if that's the case, why go with an alarm dialer from Radio Shack? roy@wombat.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA ------------------------------ From: dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) Subject: Question About PBX Phone Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:16:59 GMT I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works fine. Dave ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 23 AUG 92 21:56 Subject: Weird Intercept I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." (There are the standard SIT tones at the beginning.) This is odd since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. (I also tried it as 310-663, but got a "Your call cannot be completed as dialed" intercept.) Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com >>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<< Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 20:15:40 -0700 From: konstan@postgres.Berkeley.EDU (Joe Konstan) Subject: Sprint and Network 2000 Sued by Sellers of Long Distance The {San Francisco Chronicle} August 18 Business Briefs Section has a short under the title: Sprint is Accused of Pyramid Scheme To summarize, 52 resellers in 18 states have sued Sprint and Network 2000 (a marketing company whose only client is Sprint) charging that they were recruited into an illegal pyramid scheme and were denied commissions. The suit demands $25,000 per plaintiff. Joe Konstan ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #658 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04571; 24 Aug 92 2:04 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18971 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:48 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14038 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:38 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240512.AA14038@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #659 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Aug 92 00:12:43 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 659 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Internet PRIVACY Forum (Lauren Weinstein) Announcing "The Electronic Dimension" (Lambda Computer Associates) SS7 and Call Forwarding Variable (James VanHouten) Three-Wire Phone Hookups? (Gabe M. Wiener) Information Wanted: Toryo (Ray Normandeau) Baby Bells and States (Dave Niebuhr) FAXes Over Internet (David Link) ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? (Irving Wolfe) GTE California Changes (Matt Holdrege) Please Help Absolute Beginner (Timothy Murphy) Cellular Phone Usage From Airplanes (Jordan Hayes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 14:26:59 PDT From: lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Internet PRIVACY Forum Greetings. This is a reminder regarding the availability of the Internet PRIVACY Forum digest and related archive materials. The PRIVACY Forum is a moderated digest for the discussion and analysis of issues relating to the general topic of privacy (both personal and collective) in the "information age" of the 1990's and beyond. Topics include a wide range of telecommunications, information/database collection and sharing, and related issues, as pertains to the privacy concerns of individuals, groups, businesses, government, and society at large. The manners in which both the legitimate and the controversial concerns of business and government interact with privacy considerations are also topics for the digest. The PRIVACY Forum digest is supported in part by the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) Committee on Computers and Public Policy. Except when unusual events warrant exceptions, digest publication is limited to no more than one or two reasonably-sized digests per week. Other mailing lists/digests relating to some of these topic areas, with somewhat different submission and editorial policies, may be more appropriate for readers who prefer a higher volume of messages regarding these issues. The goal of PRIVACY Forum is to present a high quality electronic publication which can act as a significant resource to both individuals and organizations who are interested in these issues. The digest is best viewed as similar in focus to a journal or specialized technical publication. The moderator will choose submissions for inclusion based on their relevance and content. The PRIVACY Forum is moderated by Lauren Weinstein of Vortex Technology. He has been active regarding a wide range of issues involving technology and society in the ARPANET/Internet community since the early 1970's. The Forum also has an "advisory committee" consisting of three distinguished individuals who have offered to act as a "sounding board" to help with any questions of policy which might arise in the course of the Forum's operations. For more details regarding the PRIVACY Forum, including FTP and listserv archive access information, please send a message to: privacy-request@cv.vortex.com with the command: information privacy in the BODY of the message. Or to subscribe, send a message to the same address but with the command: subscribe privacy in the body of the message. Thanks much. --Lauren-- [Moderator's Note: This is NOT a duplicate. Lauren's publication is entirely separate and distinct from the one published by Dennis Rears which was discussed here earlier today. Both digests deal with privacy issues: The one Dennis started a couple years ago had its beginning here in telecom. The one Lauren started a few months ago is similar, but with a different set of guidlines as Lauren noted. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ddsw1!akcs@ddsw1.mcs.com Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 15:57 CDT Subject: Announcing "The Electronic Dimension" T H E E L E C T R O N I C D I M E N S I O N BBS Newsletter Premier Issue to be released - OCTOBER, 1992 Dedicated to all members of the on-line community Six bi-monthly issues per year, in printed format. One year subscription: $15.00 Featuring articles of interest on: * BBS Software * Telecommunications Software * Feature stories on different BBS's * Modems & PC Hardware information * Shareware and Freeware * and much, much more! Sign up now for your complimentary issue! To receive the premier issue free of charge, complete the coupon below, and mail it to: Lambda Computer Consultants P.O. Box 264 Park Ridge, IL 60068-0264 (708) 827-3615 OR Netmail your name, address and phone number to: Toby Schneiter or Gloria LaHay FidoNet > 1:115/769 Attention SysOps & Industry Vendors: Advertise your product or multi-line BBS for FREE !!! Supply us with camera ready art, or just typed copy, and we will run a 1"x2" add in the premier issue of THE ELECTRONIC DIMENSION NEWSLETTER. (This offer is limited, so please submit your ads early!) Quarter, half or full page ads are available on a limited basis for a nominal fee. .............................................................. . . . Name ___________________________________________________ . . . . Address ________________________________________________ . . . . City,St,Zip ____________________________________________ . . . . Phone #: (_____)________________________________ . . . . . . Yes! Please send me the free Premier issue of . . THE ELECTRONIC DIMENSION NEWSLETTER, and sign me up for . . a yearly subscription at $15.00. . . Enclosed is my __check __money-order __Visa . . __MasterCard . . . . Credit Card #: _______________________________________ . . . . Expiration Date: ______________________ . . . . Signature: __________________________________________ . . . . . .............................................................. ------------------------------ From: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 04:52:11 -0500 Subject: SS7 and Call Forwarding Variable > [Moderator's Note: I did this for awhile with my recorded message > service back in 1973-74. Someone living in Joliet, IL had a metro area > unlimited line which included all of northern Illinois and Chicago. I > paid the cost for a real cheap incoming only (no outgoing calls > without extra expense) line for him to receive calls on. He made his > outgoing calls on the unlimited line which he also left forwarded at > all times to my number in downtown Chicago. People in Aurora, Joliet > and Will County called that number locally. Eventually IBT got sore > about it and we turned it off rather than argue with them. PAT] From what I understand SS7 is putting an end to this. If Party A is calling Party C thru Party B and it is normally a toll call for Party A to call Party C then it will not complete the call or will complete with a charge. On a different topic: Is there a tariff that prevents subscribers from dedicating modems together on POTS lines. One of my customers has 20 auto parts stores that call into their parts computer every morning at 7 AM and they stay up until about 6 PM. How are they getting away with this?? James Van Houten, Vice President | Voice: +1.301.248.3300 CIS 72067,316 Metropolitan Security Services, Inc | Fax: +1.301.967.7220 WN 55:4004/0 P.O. Box 502 | Data: +1.301.967.7220 FIDO 1:109/544 Temple Hills, MD 20757-0502 | Internet: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1. USA | fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Three-Wire Phone Hookups? Organization: Columbia University Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 05:13:56 GMT For years I have always known that telephone service is carried on tip/ring pairs. Yet for some reason I have memories of being told that phone service was carried on three wires when I was growing up in the 70's. I recently came across some old "How it works" book from the same era, replete with B&W photos of WECO 500 sets and non-modular wiring blocks, and there was some description of how the "telephone ring is carried on the red and yellow wires" and "when you pick up, the yellow wire is disconnected and the voice is carried on the red and green" or some such. Has there ever been a time when the CO loop to the customer was carried on three wires? I have many antique phones and even *they* work on two-wire systems (albeit they called it L1 and L2 then). And please, don't anyone chide me because the first Strowger systems worked on five-wire (yes, five-wire) systems :-) Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ [Moderator's Note: It was thought in the past that a phone should be grounded for best service, user protection, etc ... and frequently the yellow wire served this purpose. Often times it provided the ground for the bell which is higher voltage than the rest of the connection. Now the yellow and black wires are most commonly used for the second line in a two (or more) line installation. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Information Wanted: Toryo From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 24 Aug 92 03:02:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) I have a two line residential phone with brand of Toryo. Last I heard the company was out of business. DAK I think had bought the last of the stock of the two line models. So ... if you have trouble tracking down company, now you know why. The phones also have the A B C D buttons. ray.normandeau@factory.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 06:55:39 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Baby Bells and States I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover many. Would this be based on the population at the time? Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: David Link Reply-To: david@mike.lrc.edu Subject: FAXes Over Internet Date: 23 Aug 92 10:38:37 EDT Organization: Lenoir-Rhyne College, Hickory, NC Does anyone know if it is possible to send FAXes over the Internet using TCP/IP? If it can be done what hardware/software would be needed, how much would it cost, and who sells it? Thanks for any information. David J. Link david@alice.lrc.edu Lenoir-Rhyne College Hickory, NC 28603 (USA) ------------------------------ From: irving@happy-man.com (Irving_Wolfe) Subject: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? Reply-To: Irving_Wolfe@happy-man.com Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:31:05 GMT I've been approached by a company called ANI (through a man in Chicago who apparently is a personal salesman for them, operating out of his own space) to change my business long distance service to ANI. He claims that AT&T would still be carrying the calls but that I'd save 20% or so (on a $250 or so long distance bill) by using them instead. Does anyone know these guys? Are they okay? Does what they said make sense? Why would AT&T carry my calls for 20% below its own ProWatts rates through them? What's the catch? Irving_Wolfe@Happy-Man.com Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x101 4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399 fax x108 We publish SOLID VALUE for the intelligent investor. NextMail OK Info free; sample $20. Send POSTAL addrs: Solid-Value@Happy-Man.com [Moderator's Note: There is no catch. Assuming they are otherwise legitimate, they do what they say. AT&T carries the traffic and handles the billing for them at the quoted rates under what is known as Tariff 12. A message earlier today discusses Tariff 12 in some detail. Look through earlier messages in the past several hours for details on this. ANI makes its money through a fee they charge you. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 16:47 GMT From: HOLDREGE_MP Subject: GTE California Changes John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas. Excerpts from 8/19 {Los Angeles Times}: GTE California, the state's second-largest telephone company, plans to close the LA area facilities and transfer as many as 400 jobs out of state, union officials said Tuesday. GTE officials confirmed plans to close the company's Norwalk and Thousand Oaks long-distance access centers, which employ 255 people. A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. The company is also considering closing its Long Beach network operations monitoring center, which could imperil another 160 jobs. While I can't blame any business from wanting to leave California, what with the crazy laws, high insurance and benefits corruption, I am upset that our phone company is pulling out. Is is especially upsetting that the Network Operations Monitoring center is leaving. The center, which opened only six months ago, was responsible for alerting technicians to problems. Who is going to do this now? Computers in Texas? Matt Holdrege 5156065@mcimail.com holdrege@eisner.decus.org 714-229-2518 [Moderator's Note: I'd like you to know a great deal of Illinois Bell's monitoring of its Chicago area facilities during off hours is done from Springfield, IL a couple hundred miles away. There are very definite disadvantages: after all, how do you think that terrible fire we had in 1988 got so far out of control? A technician in Springfield got the alarm but decided to insert his own judgment from afar over that of someone locally who might have made a difference in the time it took for the Fire Department to arrive. Good luck, Californians! PAT] ------------------------------ From: tim@maths.tcd.ie (Timothy Murphy) Subject: Please Help Absolute Beginner Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:32:47 GMT My apologies for intruding on esoteric discussions of ISDN, X400, etc -- but I have a very elementary question, and I should be most grateful for an answer to it. I have two phones, one brand new (Northern Telecom) and one possibly antique. (My wife thinks it beautiful, and wants to use it.) The new phone has six wires attached to it, variously coloured. The old phone has eight such wires. My question is -- is there any sort of standard meaning to these colours? eg; does red always mean the same thing, and if so what? I've managed to get the new phone working on our public system, after some experimentation. The system here only uses two wires - so there were only 30 = 6 x 5 possible combinations. But I'm still interested to know what the other four wires are for. Are they vestigial relics, like the appendix? I've made no progress with the eight-wire antique. I am wondering if some of the wires have to be connected together -- in which case it is hard enough to calculate the number of possibilities, let alone go through them. Is there an FAQ for people like me? If so, please accept my apologies for creating noise on your line. If not, is there any simple book on the subject? The problem here is that until recently one was not allowed -- or I should say supposed -- to connect one's own apparatus to the public network. So little or no public information was made available. Any help gratefully received. Timothy Murphy e-mail: tim@maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland [Moderator's Note: In the USA at least, the colors go like this: red/green for line one; yellow/black for line two if the phone is so equipped; blue/white for some supplementary feature such as an intercom signal, etc. Usually only two-line phones have the blue/ white pair. Was your Northern Telecom phone built for use here in the USA or specifically constructed for use in Ireland? It matters. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:22:31 EDT From: jordan@imsi.com (Jordan Hayes) Subject: Cellular Phone Usage From Airplanes Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC Someone here wants to use a Cellblazer while commuting by aircraft, but I remember hearing something about an FCC rule prohibiting the use of cellular phones while airborne. My guess is that it would make the cells that are now equidistant from the phone go crazy trying to figure out who has the best signal. What about tall buildings? What about hilltops? Does anyone have the real scoop on this, and (more importantly), have any good ideas about how to "stay connected" using SL/IP or PPP while in the air? jordan [Moderator's Note: We go 'round and 'round on this from time to time here and perhaps some readers will send the appropriate past messages direct to Jordan or correspond with him in email. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #659 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28385; 25 Aug 92 1:46 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19104 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:57 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26836 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:43 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:43 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208250435.AA26836@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #660 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Aug 92 23:35:30 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 660 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Dialback Management (Bob Ackley) Panel Nostalgia(?) and Trivia (Jack Winslade) Call Forwarding/CLASS Version (cinpmx!cdid!ralphw%proty@attmail.com) A Wierd Thing Happened on a Call to CA (Aninda V. Dasgupta) AT&T and Sandia (Jim Haynes) PacBell Message Center Woes (Jeff Stieglitz) NEED: Data/Protocol Analyzer (Richard B. August) Celluar Payphone (David Brightbill) 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Jeff Garber) Interfacing Modem to Telephone System (Eric Jacksch) Looking For DID Call Transfer Device (Paul Robinson) Help With ROLM REDWOOD Flashing LOCK on WYSE (Robert Patrick MacKin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 03:05:03 CST From: Bob.Ackley@ivgate.omahug.org (Bob Ackley) Subject: Dialback Management Reply-To: bob.ackley@ivgate.omahug.org In a message of <29 Jul 92 07:49:39>, Richard Nash (11:30102/2) writes: > pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Peter Alexander Merel) writes: >> The reason that dialback modems are sometimes not secure is that a >> cracker can call into the modem and wait for the modem to hang up, >> and then remain on the line, playing dialtone back to the modem. The >> modem "thinks" it is dialing on the network, but instead it reaches >> the bad guy's modem. >> This is possible because many central offices will keep the circuit >> up for up to about 22 seconds if the calling party remains off-hook >> after the called party goes on-hook. This is a long enough window >> for the dialback modem to re-seize the line and start dialing. > To eliminate that type of hacking possibility, it is mandatory that > the dialback portion of the modem call is originated from a different > line. Therefore, if you have 'n' number of phone lines to be used for > dialback, you require n+1 lines. It is required that the host system > performs the dialback procedure in order to determine the correct line > to use. It also has the added benefit in that system administration > of the modem pool can be centrally administered by the system > adminstration folks. > [Moderator's Note: A much easier solution is to simply have three way > calling on the modem lines and on all outgoing calls have the dialing > string begin with a switchhook flash. That'll leave the phreaks out in > left field every time. PAT] Our mainframe at work has a very large (bigger than a refrigerator) box containing eight or nine modems (and a LOT of air); one is the dial-in line, the remaining modems are outbound only. The user dials in and identifies him/herself to Gandalf (they make the box and contents, so that's what I call it), which then hangs up and dials the user back on one of the outbound lines. There are at least thirty empty modem card slots, so I suspect that we will be adding more lines. If anyone is looking for something that big, I think Gandalf is located in or near St. Louis. Pat's solution is undoubtedly MUCH less expensive. msged 1.99S ZTC Bob's Soapbox, Plattsmouth Ne (1:285/1.7) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 22:02:38 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Panel Nostalgia(?) and Trivia Reply-To: jack.winslade%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha In a message dated 19-AUG-92, John Higdon writes: > sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: >> I have, over the year I've read the Digest, become fairly telecom >> literate. Recently, people have talked about a type of swiotch called >> a "panel" switch. Could someone tell me what panel is, and how it >> differs from crossbar or SxS switches? > The panel switch was (for its day) an amazing monstrosity. It was also > the first major attempt at "common control", where a pool of > components would complete calls on a non-dedicated basis. Unlike the > SXS switch which operated in lock-step with the pulses from the > subscriber's dial ... As I've mentioned before, I've been fascinated by the panel switches ever since being served by a quirky one and eventually seeing one in action. The first full-scale deployment of the panel switch was on the ATLantic office here in Omaha in 1921. A while ago I posted a 1921 newspaper article about it. It may be in the archives (Pat ??) but if not, if anyone wants a copy, mail me and I'll send it. The original installation lived until the mid 1960's when it was replaced with a 5-Xbar. (Note that it lived 40+ years -- I'm now seeing mid 1970's 1A ESS machines being trashed in favor of later models.) The last panel switch in Omaha was replaced in 1973, but I know there were a few left in Manhattan in the late 70's. The action of a panel switch can best be described as monkeys sliding up and down on flagpoles. The one I saw was a real Rube Goldberg contraption of sliding rods and cork-covered rollers. Pat's 'cannonball' comment brought back a memory I had far back, and that was the distinctive 'rattle' during call setup (and sometimes during the call itself) which was plainly audible. Add to this a very scratchy sound of ringback and busy tone (which John explained a while back) and you will see it was not the clean, quiet switch that we're spoiled with now. (And BTW, that was a very loud and obnoxious BAAAAA BAAAAAA BAAAAAA busy tone, not the pleasant tweet-tweet-tweet we hear now. It really rubbed your nose into the fact that you had reached a busy number.) The quirk I remember most was that when dialing a busy number, one, maybe two cycles of ringback tone would frequently be heard, followed by scratches and clicks, and then the raucous BAAAAA BAAAAA busy tone. Good day. JSW Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 402-896-3537 (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ From: cinpmx!cdid!ralphw%proty@attmail.com Date: 24 Aug 92 22:08:55 GMT Subject: Call Forwarding/CLASS Version (was Call Return vs. Call Forward) [description of feature interaction between call forwarding/call return] > Unfortunatly, the telephone that you have forwarded your calls to will > get no indication that you were an intermediary. In effect, the line > that you made the nuisance call to will appear to be calling directly > to the line you have your phone forwarded to. It would seem to me that, in a CLASS environment, the call forwarding implementation described above is 'buggy', since the 'dialed number' is not signaled to the users of the forwarded-to 'terminating' phone. Since distinctive ringing is available in CLASS environments, one could reserver a special cadence for 'call forwarding' calls. I'd also expect that the 'mother-in-law' bits in the CLID format could be used to indicate the actual dialed number. (my Motorola CLID chip spec sheet labels an unused sequence of bits in the message as 'mother-in-law' bits, presmuably for the situation where someone is calling your mother in law, who has a distinctive ringing number terminating at your instrument.) What would YOU suggest? disclaimer: I don't design telephone features for a living. It's more of a hobby, I suppose. ------------------------------ From: add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda V. Dasgupta) Subject: A Wierd Thing Happened on a Call to CA Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, New York Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 19:37:40 GMT A wierd thing happened today when I was talking on the phone (from Westchester County, NY) to San Diego County, CA. As my friend and I were speaking, suddenly I heard another conversation break into our line, and my friend's voice disappeared. I could clearly hear every word being said in this other conversation. It appeared the participants of this other conversation were recently connected 'coz they were exchanging "hellos". I hung up, waited two minutes and dialed my friend's number again. The phone rang and I was reconnected to this ongoing conversation. I finally asked the AT&T operator to dial the number and at the first attempt she got a busy tone and on trying again got through to my friend. My friend reported that everytime she tried to get an outside line she too got connected to this other conversation. Neither my friend, nor I were on a cordless phone. (She did mention later that her cordless phone has run out of batteries.) Any clues as to what was going on? Was this a switch malfunction (crosstalk?) and if so, which switch might have been the culprit, the CO on my end, or the one in CA or something in between? What are the likely causes of such a malfunction? Bad programming, system overload? Again, how did the AT&T operator manage to get through to my friend's number? Just curious ... Aninda DasGupta (add@philabs.philips.com) Ph : (914) 945-6071 Fax : (914) 945-6552 Philips (No, we don't produce Gas, we make lightbulbs) Labs. 345 Scarborough Road\n Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510 ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: AT&T and Sandia Date: 23 Aug 1992 21:58:51 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or what? haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ From: stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu (Jeff Stieglitz) Subject: PacBell Message Center Woes Organization: University of California, Irvine Date: 23 Aug 92 00:17:55 GMT Just what is the problem with Pacific Bell's Message Center? Today I called my home phone number after six rings I heard: "We are having technical difficulties, please call again later" I hung up and called right back. This time I heard a tinny, machine-synthesized voice: "I'm sorry, due to technical difficulties, Pacific Bell and the Message Center are unable to take your call. Please . I'm interested in knowing the details of what is going wrong with the Message Center. This marks the fifth time I was unable to leave and retrieve messages, not to mention the numerous pre-announced outages. Someone asked this before in the Digest, but there was no reply, so someone please tell me: What are the technical reasons for the recent outages? Jeff Stieglitz stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:02:38 PDT From: AUGUST@JPLLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV (Richard B. August) Subject: Need: Data/Protocol Analyzer We are currently looking for a good-better-best Data/Protocol analyzer. It must be portable (preferably PORTABLE vs. LUGGABLE). If there is one available that fits in your briefcase, and leaves room for other stuff, that would be the one. Want all the "bells and whistles" we can get due to the fact that we don't know just what type of problems we will encounter in the 'field'. Price is not of extreme importance, but we don't want to "break the bank" ( we need about ten of these things). Please mail your responses to me directly at: august@jpllsi.jpl.nasa.gov and I will post results of the responses to the group. Thenks in advance. Richard B. August august@jpllsi.jpl.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 21:44:43 -0400 From: David Brightbill Subject: Celluar Payphone I received an advertisement today that I thought the readers of the Digest might be interested in. TCP - Telular Cellular Payphone Available in a variety of enclosure types, the TCP is equipped with a microprocessor based call control network that provides the latest in intelligent payphone features and functionality. The TCP can be configuted to handle coins, tokens, credit cards and/or debit cards. For more information ... call Telular at +1.708.256.8000 Disclaimer: I have no connection with Telular other than being a, thus far, satisfied customer. David Brightbill ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 05:01 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: 911 on Jerry Springer Show On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los Angeles) the topic was 911. Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my own ears. The man died, although he was not suffering from a heart attack, and it was determined that he would have died even without the delay in reaching help. I never heard what he actually died of. What good is it to have a phone with you if you can't use it in an emergency? I've used L.A. Cellular to call 911 many times and have had no problems like this. The call goes first to the California Highway Patrol, and if it's not a CHP type problem, they transfer you immediately to the emergency agency that handles the area and type of problem you are reporting. The show also had a woman who dialed 0 (instead of 911) when her daughter was being assaulted. Evidently it took awhile to get the information to the right place. When the police got there, they found the victim dead. They had a 911 operator on the show complaining about people calling 911 for non-emergency calls. No one mentioned that callers to police stations, etc. are often told to report their non-emergency problem to 911. Jeff Garber My opinions are just that. ------------------------------ Subject: Interfacing Modem to Telephone System From: jacksch@insom.eastern.com (Eric Jacksch) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 20:36:26 -0400 Organization: Insomniacs' Guild, Toronto, Ontario, Canada At work I have a Harris Lanier electronic key set on my desk (the ones with a number of lines, intercom, etc ... don't know why as I will only talk on one line at a time, but that's besides the point ...) The wall jack is a standard four conductor modular jack. I would like to connect a modem so that I can make outbound calls. Are these phones digital, or are two of the four wires a "normal" ring and tip phone circuit? Any suggestions? Also, is it possible to build an interface to allow connection via the handset cord? Thanks, Eric Jacksch, jacksch@insom.eastern.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: tdarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 18:37:45 EDT Subject: Looking for DID Call Transfer Device I would like to find out if there is an inexpensive method to process a DID trunk line for small volumes, either using a small device or a device plugged into a Personal Computer. What I'm looking for is something to handle, say, five DID lines and as many phone numbers as I want to put in. I'm thinking of something which would sell for about $250 which would transfer a call depending on the number passed to the device. This may not currently be capable but I'd like to find out if something is possible and what it would cost. I hope I can find something not too expensive, as I know there is a demand for this type of device if it was available. The reason I'm thinking about it is to allow me to assign different phone numbers. I know there are some devices available but I don't know what they cost. In the alternative, what does this require to do this, i.e. to generate a ring signal and generate a ring voltage to a telephone, and stop both when it is answered, as well as reversing the polarity when it is (so the caller is charged). Sounds like it's more complicated than I think it is. I'm not so interested in making outgoing calls, it's more like what is used for a Voice Mail system or something similar. ------------------------------ From: rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Subject: Help With ROLM REDWOOD Flashing LOCK on WYSE Organization: University of Western Ontario Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:39:27 GMT I can get in from a 400 set on the admin port. But if I try to use the WYSE-50 plugged into the back, I get the title greeting, asked for the password, and it even echoes the *****, but it then clears the screen, flashes LOCK on the top line, and you are left with a hung terminal. I know the password is correct because I can get in from the 400 set. It is a single cabinet ROLM Redwood running release 3.0 PBX lib card. H E L P !!!!! ( please... ) rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Western Business School -- London, Ontario [Moderator's Note: It is apparently sending a Control-O or an ESC # which are the two things which are used to lock the Wyse keyboard from the remote site. If you use the ADDS-VP mode then a Control-D or ESC 5 would cause the lockup. Just hit the unshifted Set Up key to release the lock and remove the message. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #660 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21853; 26 Aug 92 1:26 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30538 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:18 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30351 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:06 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208260410.AA30351@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #661 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Aug 92 23:10:10 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 661 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Foreign Calling Cards (David R. Zinkin) Where Can I Get TL1 Software Package? (Qian Li) Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Brett G. Person) Pulse Dialing Still Useful (Bennett E. Todd) GSM Adaptative Time Alignment (Jean-Louis Fuccellaro) 800 Portability (Bill Huttig) Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Phill St. Louis) San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Daniel M. Rosenberg) Standardized Exchange Names (Leonard Erickson) Who Offers National Alphanumeric Paging Service? (Brent Chapman) GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) (Jim Gottlieb) Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis) Archive Access (Paul Lutt) Polite Thief (Jerry Leichter) Asking Something About SLC-120 From AT&T (Yee-Lee Shyong) Spread Spectrum (Lesley S. Saitowitz) "Congestion in My Area" (Gabe M. Wiener) PicturePhone Power Pinout? (Bill Romanowski) Anti-Digital Dialing (was Deterioration of POTS) (Mark Brader) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: drz@po.CWRU.Edu (David R. Zinkin) Subject: Foreign Calling Cards Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:41:01 GMT Does anyone know how to get a calling card from a telephone company in another country? A friend of mine would like to get a calling card from Japan in the hope that using it would be cheaper than dialing directly. I know that AT&T offers "Country Direct" for non-US citizens who have calling cards from home; can US citizens get these cards and use them in the same way? Please respond by mail as my time for reading this group is decreasing rapidly. Thanks, David R. Zinkin (drz@po.cwru.edu) Rochester General Hospital Radiology Dept. SUNY Buffalo School of Medicine Class of '96 (The sesquicentennial graduating class!) ------------------------------ From: QIAN Li Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:27:33 -0400 Subject: Where Can I Get TL1 Software Package? Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility I am going to buy a TL1 software package which can be stored in PC. If you have any information about this package, please send a E-mail to me: qianli@ecf.toronto.edu. Thank you for your information. ------------------------------ From: plains!person@uunet.UU.NET (Brett G Person) Subject: Automated hate Calls in Minnesota Date: 25 Aug 92 01:41:24 GMT Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network I was watching the lcoal news last night and saw a strange news report from Minneapolis. Apparently, people there I getting alls from a new kind of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc. It sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's office says that this doesn't violate any laws. Any comments? Have any of you gotten phome calls like this? Brett Person Guest Account North Dakota State University person@plains.nodak.edu || person@plains.bitnet ------------------------------ From: bet@cyclone.sbi.com (Bennett E. Todd) Subject: Pulse Dialing Still Useful Date: 26 Aug 92 02:36:49 GMT Organization: Integration - Salomon Inc., NY I decided not to pay extra for DTMF dialing, so the phone company has it blocked on my line. I've found a use for this setup: I've got a regular trimline phone, and a cordless, both switchable. I use the regular phone for placing calls; I only want the cordless for receiving them. Living in an apartment in NYC it seems quite possible that someone within range would have a compatible phone -- but by switching the base unit of the cordless to tone dialing, I can make the cordless phone effectively incoming-only, so nobody else can use their cordless handset to place calls on my phone line. Bennett bet@sbi.com ------------------------------ From: Jean-Louis Fuccellaro Subject: GSM Adaptative Time Alignment Reply-To: Jean-Louis Fuccellaro Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 12:30:05 GMT According to what I understood : GSM uses adaptative time alignent to determine the transmit timing advance required at the MS to receive bursts in their correct timeslots.Timing advance can have 64 levels. If two users (MS) have the same carrier (they have one timeslot from the same frame) are in the same place, the timeslots will arrive at the same time in the BS. Does the BS change the carrier of one of them or do I miss something? Thanks for answer. Jean-Louis Fuccellaro Post : HP Labs E-mail: jlf@hplb.hpl.hp.com Filton Road phone : (44) / (0) 272 228 122 Stoke Gifford Bristol BS12 6QZ U.K. ------------------------------ From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) Subject: 800 Portability Date: 25 Aug 92 14:48:34 GMT Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be phased in? Will every possible exchange become avaiable? Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as a large company? Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing problems? I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I would hate to have to write that database). Bill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 10:59:20 PDT From: stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill St. Louis) Subject: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada The Subject says it all. I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? Thanks, Phill ------------------------------ From: dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) Subject: San Francisco Area Exchange Names Date: 25 Aug 1992 18:42:22 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Reply-To: dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough to list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay? The one I know in Palo Alto was for the main 32x exchange, known as "DAvenport," from an old sign. Davenport? What's that have to do with Palo Alto? Did the phone company just make that up? And did the 424's, 85x's, 497's and so forth come from anywhere? Where could I find out? Any hints appreciated. Daniel M. Rosenberg Dan.Rosenberg@Corp.Sun.COM +1 415 688 9580 Opinions expressed above aren't Sun's. ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Standardized Exchange Names Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:49:35 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Another Hyde Park exchange is FAIrfax (324), > which it is said was named in honor of a University of Chicago > trustee, Fairfax Cone. I think "FAirfax may be a "standard" name of some sort, as the 32x exchanges in Spokane used that in the 60's. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: brent@greatcircle.com (Brent Chapman) Subject: Who Offers National Alphanumeric Paging Service? Organization: Great Circle Associates; Mountain View, CA Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:47:52 GMT What companies offer national alphanumeric paging service? I'm aware of MobileComm, but I don't know how to contact them for more info. I know SkyPage offers national numeric service, but what about alphanumeric service? Can anybody provide me with contact info for MobileComm or SkyPage, or other companies that offer national alphanumeric paging? Thanks! Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 ------------------------------ From: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 06:19:16 GMT I am pleased to announce that GTE has finally fixed my DISA, over one year after it stopped working. My Direct Inward System Access lets me access my home centrex system when I'm out of the house. Over one year ago it stopped accepting my security code. Since then, calls to repair service have resulted in nothing but the problem being "cleared", or worse, being told that my DISA number does not belong to me so there is no way they can take a report. As recently as last week, GTE dispatched technicians to my home (twice) to try to fix the problem (good diagnosis, GTE!). After enlisting help from the business office, I was finally able to convince someone at repair that I actually do subscribe to this service, it used to work, it doesn't any more, and it's a software problem so stop sending people to my house. The message finally got through and they fixed it on Friday. While I had their attention, I asked if they could please change my security code from 1234 to something a bit more secure. "Sorry, it's hardcoded" was the reply. I don't believe it. And I am surely not going to pay for any calls when someone discovers this. GTE ... I'm still not impressed. Jim Gottlieb E-Mail: or V-Mail: +1 310 551 7702 Fax: 478-3060 Voice: 824-5454 ------------------------------ From: Adrienne Voorhis Subject: Monitoring of Broadcasts Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 8:18:08 EDT jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell)> writes: > It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any > mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it. > This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even > covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time > to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one > else. Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have legitimately obtained. What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band radio and heard a newsworthy event? Could he or she legitimately be punished for reporting this information? Adrienne Voorhis Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx, New York Just MY opinion... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 13:51:49 PDT From: pwl@tc.fluke.COM (Paul Lutt) Subject: Archive Access I seem to have misplaced my notes on how to access the Telecom Archive. I am interested in getting a copy of the stuff dealing with the IXO/TAP protocol. I do not have direct Internet access, so an email interface would be required. Could you please send me a copy of the directions on how to use the archive? Thanks. Paul Lutt Domain: pwl@tc.fluke.COM Voice: +1 206 356 5059 UUCP: uunet!fluke!pwl Snail: John Fluke Mfg. Co. / P.O. Box 9090 / Everett, WA 98206-9090 [Moderator's Note: This question comes up frequently. The Telecom Archives can be accessed using anonymous ftp from lcs.mit.edu. When on line, then cd telecom-archives. Various email > ftp services are available and instructions can be obtained from the operators. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 08:49:52 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: Polite Thief Yesterday, I tried to place a long-distance credit card call using a pay phone in Piscataway, New Jersey. LD service was from some company like "American Network Services". Needless to say, I dialed 10288 first. The response was interesting: A ring, then a polite recorded female voice, sounding just every official telco message you ever heard (but without any SIT) told me that "it is not necessary to dial a long-distance access code" with the number I was dialing. Well, of course, it wasn't NECESSARY - I just had to be willing to pay whatever exorbitant rates the AOS would charge. No combination I tried would let me select AT&T; either the sequence was (legitimately) declared invalid, or I got the "not necessary" message. Most people, having learned about 10288 from AT&T's ads, would surely have responded to the "not necessary" message by trying again, WITHOUT the "optional" carrier selection. And this is right in the heart of AT&T land: Fire a gun in any direction and you'll probably hit an AT&T facility! I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? Jerry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 08:50:37 CST From: apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) Subject: Asking Something About SLC-120 From AT&T Does anybody out there know the architectures or specifications anout SLC-120 Network Access System from AT&T? How the Automatic Protection Switching Unit work? (E1 Trunk). Thanks in advance ! Apollo ------------------------------ From: saitowit@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (SAITOWITZ L S) Subject: Spread Spectrum Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads). Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:56:54 GMT Hi my name's Lesley. I'm looking for information on spread spectrum techniques. Specifically what are the bandwidth versus capacity trade offs? What are the power/distance versus error rates say on open wire or in fibre optics (preferably both)? Is anybody familiar with this area? I'm doing a pie in the sky design, but would just like to gauge how way off or near the mark I am. Please give references if available. Thanks, Lesley :) ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: "Congestion in My Area" Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:49:20 GMT I'm in the process of installing two more NY Tel lines into my place, and am running into a little technical hitch that I'm not quite grasping. The lineman came out and punched the new lines into the RJ-21X that feeds my system. he then went down to the (antiquated wooden) breakout box in the basement to get it onto a pair back to the CO. No dice. He couldn't find one. So they apparently had to move somee stuff around, bring it over from another building, etc. Anyway, today at 5:00 I plugged into the RJ21X with a test set, and ... ah ha! No dialtone, but there was talk power. My DTMF pad worked, I had sidetone, but still no dialtone. Progress, I thought. Four days late, but at least some progress. Anyway, I called the "president's help line" (misnomer, since they've never been too helpful), and after waiting on hold for several minutes while the "executive representative" apparently called the CO or whatever, I was told that there is "congestion" in my area and they don't have enough pairs and I'd have to wait until their engineering dept. figures out a way to bring the service in. Now wait a sec, I thought. What am I missing here? I've got power on the line. If it isn't coming from the switch, then where the heck is it coming from? But more to the point, is there any means of, shall we say, getting them to take to the matter a little more aggressively? Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ From: billabs@nic.cerf.net (Bill Romanowski) Subject: PicturePhone Power Pinout? Date: 25 Aug 92 17:33:04 GMT Organization: CERFnet I have a pair of PicturePhones and want to provide them with correct power. I know they can't be used as phones ... the have what appears to be two video in/out bnc's and I want to connect them as a "video mirror" ... The units have no serial or product id's. Power looks like it comes in on a pin header (with seven pins). They are heavy aluminum boxes,camera on the top, landscape oriented monitor on the bottom. A small WE (bell in a circle) logo on the front on a greenish gray plastic bezel. They'll be cool if I can get 'em up. Any ideas out there? bill romanowski vp of antiuquities prairie research ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:25:00 -0400 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Anti-Digital Dialing (was: Deterioration of POTS) Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada > Two billion, one hundred fifty-six million, six hundred forty five > thousand, four hundred thirty two" (last n digits changed to protect > my mother who still lives in (now) twelve billion, one hundred fifty Oh, come now. Since the "ten billion" digit isn't really part of the phone number, this must be international format. But in that case it should be: POSITIVE twelve billion, one hundred fifty... Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #661 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24199; 26 Aug 92 2:24 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23636 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:53 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04178 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:38 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:38 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208260520.AA04178@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #662 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:20:40 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 662 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Tackles Hurricane Disaster! (William Degnan) Help Needed: Programming Info on an EXTROM HMS-612EE (Robert P. MacKin) Staying Up All Night - Or All Day (Lars Poulsen) How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (Shailesh M. Potnis) Need Fiber Optic System (Wayne Jones) How Are Intercept Codes Interpreted? (John Gardiner Myers) Hearing Radio on the Phone (Robert Aaron Book) Decoding Touchtones With a PC (Robert Aaron Book) CWA Members Ratify AT&T Contracts (Phillip Dampier) CLID Format Compatibilty Question (Mike Riddle) Gating the Pound (was Pounding on an Octothorp) (Nigel Roberts) Request for Line/Trunk Emulation Boxes (Allen Barrett Ethridge) Newest MCI F&F Offer - Free Calls! (Bill Rubin) Good For a Laugh ... (Scott Fybush) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William.Degnan@mdf.FidoNet.Org (William Degnan) Date: 25 Aug 92 14:21:46 Subject: AT&T Tackles Hurricane Disaster! AT&T PREPARES FOR HURRICANE ANDREW'S SECOND LANDFALL NEW YORK -- As Hurricane Andrew headed west this morning, so too did a convoy of about a dozen AT&T trucks carrying an emergency crew, portable generators and enough transmission equipment to provide emergency long distance service to a small city. The trucks hold enough AT&T people and equipment to quickly restore thousands of phone circuits anywhere along the Gulf Coast, if needed. Initially stationed in Windermere, Fla., in case AT&T service was affected by hurricane damage in southern Florida, the trucks and crew have now moved on to Bonifay, Fla. They stand ready to respond to any damage that Andrew might do to AT&T's network along the Gulf Coast. Bonifay is located about 105 miles east of Pensacola. AT&T long-distance calling on Monday totaled 172.1 million calls, making it the second busiest day ever on AT&T's long distance network. Overall calling on the network today is up 13 percent from the same day a week ago. AT&T, reporting that its network has so far weathered the storm with minimum damage to facilities, said calling into and out of Florida was still running 300-500 percent above normal today. Because of local network congestion, some people may encounter delays in completing their calls, AT&T said. The company said that calling to and from New Orleans was beginning to build this morning. "Our network has performed superbly," said Jim Carroll, vice president, network operations. "And our emergency telecommunications restoration team is ready and prepared to respond if the hurricane hits the Gulf Coast." Meanwhile, to help with restoration efforts now underway in southern Florida, AT&T is: -- Carrying calls between the United States and Cuba via third countries -- Spain, Italy, Canada and the United Kingdom -- due to the loss of an AT&T microwave radio tower in Goulds, Fla., that was part of a radio link handling calls between the two countries. If the Cuban government agrees, AT&T is prepared to activate a 140-circuit undersea cable that was installed in 1989 between West Palm Beach and a point near Havana. -- In partnership with Cellular One, providing free long distance cellular service to relief agencies in the Miami area. McCaw Cellular, which operates as Cellular One in Florida, has provided the agencies with 500 phones. -- Moving portable generators and phone banks to areas in southern Florida affected by hurricane damage for the use of local residents there anxious to make long distance calls. -- Working with local telephone companies to help restore local service. # # # Disclaimer: I'm just passing this along. William Degnan, Communications Network Solutions -Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology- P.O. Drawer 9530 | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org Austin, TX 78766-9530 | !wdegnan@attmail.com | Voice +1 512 323 9383 [Moderator's Note: My sympathies go out to the people in Homestead, FL and surrounding communities. Homestead is 95 percent wiped out; the town is totally demolished. All phone service is dead there. As usual in these situations, AT&T the company which can't be trusted to stay in one piece lest they treat the come-latelys unfairly is leading the way to restoration of the telephone network. Maybe someone from MCI and/or Sprint can write and tell us what those companies are doing to assist the relief effort in southern Florida today, and perhaps in New Orleans on Wednesday. :( PAT] ------------------------------ From: rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Subject: Help Needed: Programming Info on an EXTROM HMS-612EE Organization: University of Western Ontario Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 16:00:42 GMT I got the phone system at a flea market. It works just fine, but I want to change the programming (line ringing, toll restrict, SMDR, etc.) A copy of a programming manual would be appreciated. Could anyone help with info? Thanks a million ... rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Western Business School -- London, Ontario ------------------------------ From: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Staying Up All Night - Or All Day Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:24:03 GMT In article James.VanHouten@f544. n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) writes: > Is there a tariff that prevents subscribers from dedicating modems > together on POTS lines. One of my customers has 20 auto parts stores > that call into their parts computer every morning at 7 AM and they > stay up until about 6 PM. How are they getting away with this?? Until a few months ago, this GTE service area had flat rate local calling, but now all business calls are metered. The rate is about $0.02 / minute daytime, $0.01 / minute nighttime. Residential subscribers have a choice between flat rate and measured local calls. I would not be surprised to see flat rate phased out in a couple of years. The net result is that for a wide area of rate bands, from local to transcontinental, it is cheaper to lease a line than to keep a call up for more than about seven hours per day. How common is flat rate or per call local calls anymore ? If you will mail me your data, I will summarize for the Digest. Sample: Line, daytime night City or suburb, ST Co NPA-PFX Plan Monthly Percall Per min Per min Santa Barbara, CA GTE 805-682 Bus $35.00 $0.02 $0.02 $0.01 Santa Barbara, CA GTE 805-682 Resflat $12.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l Telephone: +1-805-968-4262 Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083 TeleFAX: +1-805-968-8256 ------------------------------ From: smp@cathedral.cerc.wvu.wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) Subject: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? Date: 25 Aug 92 20:01:24 GMT I am in the process of installing a modem and a few extra telephone outlets. I have a few pieces of indoor telephone cable which I used to use at my previous address. If I have to splice them together to run a longer distance, I have to add two male connectors at each splicing ends and thn use an inline female connector to connect the male connectors. I see this grossly redundant. Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a telephone cable to make a longer one? Essentially what I would emagine would be similar to the two male connectors fused together. All comments and suggestions are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Shailesh Potnis, Associate |Concurrent Engineering Research Member of Technical Staff |Center, West Virginia University ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 15:01:43 MDT From: jones@sunspot.sunspot.noao.edu (Wayne Jones) Subject: Need Fiber Optic System Here I am again with another request for help. I previously asked for information on the Mitel SX-200 digital pbx. Now I am wondering if this is our best option. Perhaps someone out there could help steer. We have a small campus environment (8 buildings, 120 phones) situated on top of a mountain (9200 ft. elev.) and lightning is our major concern. We've lost our AT&T pbx several times to the tune of $10k in repairs. I have already installed a fiber backbone for the computer network, video distribution, etc., and now I am looking for a way to put telephone distribution on the fiber as well. I have heard that 24 voice channels can be multiplexed onto a T1 line, then the T1 can be put on fiber. T or F? Is there maybe a better way to do this? Can this be done with the Mitel SX-200 digital? I guess what I need is to speak with a consultant with this sort of expertise but I don't know one (hint, hint ;-). At this point I will be glad to hear from anyone. Thanks in advance. Wayne Jones email: jones@sunspot.noao.edu National Solar Observatory voice: 505-434-7043 P.O. Box 62 Sunspot, NM 88349 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:52:03 -0400 (EDT) From: John Gardiner Myers Subject: How Are Intercept Codes Interpreted? How does one interpret the codes a the end of an intercept. For example, I get something like "[SIT] We're sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check your number and try again. 412 1T." I assume "412" is the area code generating the intercept. What is the interpretation of the "1T"? [Moderator's Note: The letter and number following the area code identify the switch within the area code. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) Subject: Hearing Radio on the Phone Organization: Rice University Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:46:13 GMT Recently I was talking on the phone to a friend of mine in Long Beach, California, and she told me a a repetitve problem she had been having on her phone -- whenever she used the phone, she heard a *radio* *station* on her phone line. I listened carefully, found that, on the other end of the line, I heard the same thing (only when I was talking to her), only not as loud. We identified the radio station as KFI (640 AM, Los Angeles). A few weeks later, I found another friend had the same problem, also in Los Angeles, but with a different radio station. The latter person had just installed a new phone, so perhaps it has something to do with a circuit in the phone instrument responding to the radio signal. I've heard of RF intereference before, but this is ridiculous. It reminds me of a fictional story I once read about someone who got a tooth filling that picked up radio stations. Does anyone know why this happens, or what can be done to fix the problem (or reproduce it)? Robert Book rbook@rice.edu [Moderator's Note: There are line filters available which will cure this problem. The telco has no special responsibility to handle the problem as long as the lines are 'clean' when they had them over at your premises. Typically newer electronic phones seem to have this problem more than older style instruments. If someone is located within a mile or so of a radio station transmitter/antenna the problem can be more difficult to clear. You might want to check out an article which appeared in TELECOM Digest a few years ago: "Praise the Lord and Pass the RF Filters" told the story of the fight residents of the north side of Hammond, IN had for a long time (maybe still?) with FM radio station WYCA whose transmitter facilities are located about four blocks away in Burnham, IL. Maybe I will reprint that article if there is sufficient interest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) Subject: Decoding touchtones with a PC Organization: Rice University Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:53:51 GMT Is there any device which can connect to a phone line on one end and a PC (through a serial port?) on the other, and translate touch-tones into numbers understandable to the computer? Any modem (almost) can *produce* the touch-tones; I am looking for a device that can understand them. A way to use a modem to do this would be even better; a device that could also produce touch-tones and flash would be great. I have many applications in mind, but the one that first triggered the question is that with such a device, and three-way calling on my phone, I could call my home phone from my office (a local call), type in a password, then a long-ditance number, then have the computer flash and dial the long-distance number, thus setting up a three-way long distance call and saving me the calling card surcharge when I am local to my home phone. This is essentially a reproduction of the discontinued MCI "around town" feature, which allowed you to make long-distance calls with no surcharge when local to you home phone (or within 11 miles, or something to that effect). Any ideas? Robert Book rbook@rice.edu ------------------------------ From: Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 18:37:01 -0500 Subject: CWA Members Ratify AT&T Contracts CWA MEMBERS OVERWHELMINGLY RATIFY AT&T CONTRACTS WASHINGTON -- Members of the Communications Workers of America have overwhelmingly ratified new three-year contracts with AT&T, CWA Vice President Jim Irvine announced today. "Our members voted favorably by better than 88 percent to accept the national operation and the national units contracts," said Irvine, the union's chief negotiator in prolonged negotiations with AT&T. The ratification votes protect retroactively on wages and other provisions back to May 30, although the talks continued another six weeks past that date before agreements were reached. The unit-by-unit breakdown on local agreements follows: Bell Labs 89.3 percent Installation and CARAs 85.03 percent MMS 73.2 percent Manufacturing 89.7 percent Operations 88.04 percent The settlement, valued at $1.5 billion over three years, covers 100,000 workers represented by CWA and another 27,000 workers represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. IBEW members also ratified these agreements. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:29:16 CST From: Mike.Riddle@ivgate.omahug.org (Mike Riddle) Subject: CLID Format Compatibilty Question Reply-To: mike.riddle%inns@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE An interesting question came up today, one which I couldn't answer but am sure that someone in this group can. The Phone Company is currently marketing two versions of CLID in the Omaha area: 1. Number- only. 2. Number and name. Someone who wants to purchase the service is served by a DMS-100. According to TPC, the DMS-100 currently can only support the number-only CLID format. The potential purchaser wants to know, and no one local seems able to answer definitively: 1. How long before the generics for DMS-100 will support number and name? 2. How interoperable are the number-only and name-and-number display boxes? The intent is to buy a name-and-number box, use it for number only service, and upgrade when the software is available for the DMS-100. The other side of this question, will a number-only box work at all on the name-and-number service, appears to be "no," but no one other than a TPC Marketing Droid seems to be quite certain about this. Can anyone help? Thanks. <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>> mike.riddle@inns.omahug.org | Nebraska Inns of Court bc335@cleveland.freenet.edu | +1 402 593 1192 (Data/Fax) Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet | V.32/V.42bis / G3 Fax Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.3 inns.omahug.org +1 402 593 1192 (1:285/27.0) ------------------------------ From: roberts@frais.enet.dec.com (Nigel Roberts) Subject: Gating the Pound (was Pounding on an Octothorp) Organization: IC Software AG (on contract at DEC) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:08:30 GMT In article , Richard Cox writes ... > The common name for it here, is "hash": but BT, when they introduced > facility codes for PABXs and Network Services, decided they would give > it their own name. They sold phones with the "thorps" missing from > the octothorp symbol: and then told us all to call that key the > "square". > Even today, when you set up any diversion or call barring, an > automated voice tells you what the network is about to do, adding "If > incorrect, dial square." I recently had occasion to order Call Waiting (it's on free trial at the moment) and Call Barring for my parents house in Liverpool. I wanted to know what the commands were, so I phoned 150 (local BT Business Office) to ask. In referring to the # key, the sales rep. called it the "gate key". Because it looks like one, I suppose. (Sort of a Five-Barred Gate, huh?) Nigel Roberts | roberts@frais.enet.dec.com | Tel. +44 206 396610 European Engineer | P O Box 49,Manningtree,CO11 2SZ | & +49 6103 383 489 G4IJF | "Life is but a tale . . . " | FAX +44 206 393148 ------------------------------ From: allen@well.sf.ca.us (Allen Barrett Ethridge) Subject: Request for Line/Trunk Emulation Boxes Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 01:49:34 GMT I'm looking for hardware that would connect into a PC or workstation and allow several analog lines and/or analog or digital trunks to terminate into and be controlled from the workstation. A VME based solution (as I believe someone else has already requested) would be excellent. An HP-UX compatible solution would also be excellent, but I'm open to any suggestions. I can be reached at work as 'ethridge@bnr.ca' or at play as 'allen@well.sf.ca.us'. I prefer the work address (it's free and I have a real editor there). Thanks, Allen Ethridge ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:25:06 EDT From: Bill Rubin Subject: Newest MCI F&F Offer - Free Calls! I saw a new (to me) MCI Friends and Family ad last night between Murphy Brown and Designing Women. Here's the offer: specify any one person in your calling circle and receive a free ten minute call to that person every month for the next year. While aimed at new customers, they invited existing F&F customers to call in to select their choice as well. Well, I called right away, after first getting no ringing at all, and then dialing again and having it ring for a few minutes, someone finally picked up and said that everyone was busy, they'd have to call me back. About 30 minutes later, they did. They did try to get me to add other people to my calling circle (including local numbers, for when I travel and call them w/a calling card -- interesting approach). I declined and just left it at the one number for free calls. Anyway, the number is 1-800-756-4FRE(E). Bill Rubin ------------------------------ From: fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us (Scott Fybush) Subject: Good For a Laugh ... Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 20:01:17 EDT Heard on Paul Harvey Monday ... A reader noticed an item in a Kentucky newspaper: Apparently an elderly woman called up the complaints department of telco, saying that her phone cord was too long and she was afraid she'd trip over it, fall, and hurt herself. Her request to the operator went like this: "Now, dear, if you could just start pulling in on it from your end, I'll let you know when you've taken in enough!" :-) Good day ... Scott Fybush -- fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us -- Waltham, MA USA ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #662 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25990; 26 Aug 92 3:12 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07739 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:05:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06745 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:04:56 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:04:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208260604.AA06745@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #663 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Aug 92 01:05:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 663 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson City of Omaha to Tax Telephone Books! (Jack Winslade) GTE Feature Dialing (Randy Gellens) Busy Call Forwarding Options in CA? (Kevin Wang) More Phone Line Woes (Dan Lanciani) Information on X.38 X.39 and X.5 Standards (Thomas K. Hinders) New Sony 696HF VCR's for $329! (Aaron M. Barnes) Looking For Modem to Computer Network Service (Josh N. Pritikin) 911 From CMT (was 911 on Jerry Sringer Show) (Mark W. Earle) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 22:15:45 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: City of Omaha to Tax telephone books! From: jsw@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha Imagine this conversation ... Officer: I'm afraid I'm gonna have ta take ya downtown, Mac. Citizen: But wha'd I do, officer ?? Officer: I don't see a tax stamp on that phone book you're carrying. But seriously, the Omaha City Council has passed a $.25 tax on telephone directories with the stated purpose to encourage recycling . The Omaha city budget is facing a shortfall in the megabuck range, and this is one solution, along with such items as raising the 'temporary' wheel tax. According to television station WOWT ... 'Another revenue-raiser passed by the City Council today would put a $.25 tax on telephone directories. We've got a dollar's worth of tax right here. (announcer holds up four directories) It is promoted as a tax to encourage recycling -- US West questions that.' (cut to tape of Dick Johnson, US West representative) Johnson: 'If the council truly believes that this tax is necessary to resolve landfill problems, they must apply the tax to these other entities also, particularly to newspapers.' Omaha is blessed with having two full-service phone directories, now both available in full-size and yuppie-cellular size. ;-) One is, of course, the 'real' US West book, and the other is that black-covered 'phony' one put out by some other company. I've heard merchants gripe about having to shell out twice since the second company came to town. I will say one thing about the competition. Before they came to town, it was like pulling teeth to get a book from Ma Bell. Since the competition came, both books are available everywhere. In my opinion, the Omaha book should have been split into white and yellow books long ago. Now I doubt it will happen, since I doubt if either company would want to be the only one without a 'handy' white-pages section. I wonder how they will enforce this tax. Because it's a city tax, it cannot extend past the city limits. (We live about two blocks outside.) If it's on books distributed within the city, I can see PILES of new books sitting at supermarkets just outside the limits, with them being few and far between within the city. Good day. JSW ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 25 AUG 92 04:21 Subject: GTE Feature Dialing I happened to be reading the recent post discussing feature access (xx# vs *xx, etc) while going through my paper mail, and came across the new feature instruction pamplets I has requested from GTE. (I had asked for three sets, so I could tear off the quick-reference guide from the last page and keep by the phones I usually use. I always forget the codes for last number redial and busy number redial.) They've updated the pamplets since I got the features (a couple of years ago). For instance, busy number redial used to have a vague phrase about being limited to "calling certain numbers within your local calling area." Now it clearly says "The use of the Busy Number Redial feature is currently limited to other numbers within your switching office." Not sure I like this change -- to me it implies a long-term restriction, otherwise why bother? Also, the old pamplet had instructions for both speed calling 8 and 30. The new one only lists 8, and underlines the word "eight." (Oh, busy number redial is now called "Busy Number Redial/Camp On.") One really funny change is that now, each feature has at least two pages, with the first (left-hand) page showing pictures of how to activate the service! For BNR, for example, there are three pictures on top of each other on the left-hand page, showing a rather old-fashioned looking phone keypad (with the letters for each digit arranged in a half-circle above the digit), and a forefinger (with painted and polished nail) on a digit (the pictures show the finger pressing the "6", "6", and "#" keys.) This is done for all features! For call waiting, there is one big picture (instead of the three small ones) showing the hand pressing the switch-hook on a 2500 set (side view). All features are activated with an xx# sequence. The instructions note that for rotary phones, "disregard the '#' symbol." The pamplets now come with a line-tag card (a card with a slotted hole for the phone line cord) with "CALL FORWARDING" in huge red letters and "This telephone is equipped with a special {\bf Custom Calling Service}" in smaller blue letters. I guess so you can tag your phones if you forward them. There is also a peel-and-stick quick reference card (new) that says at the bottom "If you are using a SmartCall telephone, press the button that corresponds to the features you want to use instead of depressing the hookswitch or dialing a code." What is this? Does GTE sell phones with buttons that are preprogrammed to dial feature access codes? Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com >>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<< Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ From: kwang@zeus.calpoly.edu (Kevin Wang) Subject: Busy Call Forwarding options in CA? Organization: The Outland Riders Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:14:17 GMT I was looking for busy call forwarding, relatively cheap. I would install a hunt group, but unfortunately, our house line and my line are on two separate billing names, so I cannot use that option. I would like to use Busy Call Forwardning (CommStar ][ ) except that the cost quickly climbs up beyond what I would like to pay. Anyone have any alternatives? I'm in San Luis Obispo (Central Coast) and we don't have the latest and greatest in CO equipment. (However, Cal Poly, SLO is setting up ISDN to end-users' homes, so soon we'll have 64kb access to the internet! 8> ) Email me if possible, I don't read this newsgroup often enough. Kevin Wang kwang@hermes.calpoly.edu or kwang@gauss.elee.calpoly.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:51:35 EDT From: ddl@das.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) Subject: More Phone Line Woes [Some time ago, I described here a problem with my phone service. Since then I've been running the twisty little maze of the repair service. As I don't seem to be getting anywhere, I am almost ready to write to the PUC. I would expect the bulk of such a letter to be a description of what has happened so far and a first pass appears below. Any comments are welcome.] For at least the past eight months, New England Telephone has been unable to resolve a problem with their service in spite of my repeated requests. The details of the problem are as follows: Every night, starting at approximately midnight (but occasionally as early as 10pm) persons to whom I speak experience dropouts (gaps) in the audio from my line. These gaps are of varying lengths (some are long enough to delete entire phrases) and at varying intervals from seconds to many minutes. These gaps are not accompanied by clicks or static -- they are simply a complete loss of audio. I hear nothing unusual from my end of the connection. The problem occurs regardless of whether I place or receive the call. In addition, the problem occurs on my mother's phone (different number, same address) so it is not line-specific. The problem never occurs during the day. I have tried a different phone connected at the demarkation point with identical results. In order to best illustrate the problem, a friend and I each taped the same phone conversation from our respective sides. The tapes clearly show that speech which was present at my line is completely muted at the other end. I have experienced the problem on calls from my home in Gloucester to Somerville, Cambridge, Reading, and Chicago. As these are the only exchanges that I typically call at night, I do not know how widespread the problem is. Below I chronicle my most recent of several attempts to have this problem resolved. I omit conversations with first-level repair persons who made the expected suggestions that the problem was with my home phone and/or wiring. During the week of July 20 I reported the problem to the repair service and spoke with a supervisor (Mrs. Grant). She said that my line would be "moved to a different switch" as a precautionary measure although they could find nothing wrong. My line was disabled from afternoon until mid morning the next day (presumably to make the change) but the problem remained. At the end of the week I spoke to a different supervisor (Judy) about the problem. I played the tapes for her and she suggested that it was probably a problem with the trunks that could be quite difficult to track down. She assured me that they were working on it. Two weeks later, on August 7, I called repair and spoke to Judy again. She expressed surprise that the problem had not been resolved and said they would work on it. As of August 14 the problem remained and I spoke to Judy again. She suggested that it would be useful to have the problem reported by a party with whom I was speaking when the problem occurred. I had my friend report the problem the next time it occurred (which was, of course, the next time we spoke at night). Unfortunately, the repair service told him that the problem must be with my end and they would send someone to check my home wiring. However, no one arrived. On August 21 I attempted to reach Judy again but she was away from her desk. A different supervisor was able to have Catherine from the central office call me back. Catherine indicated that they had not looked at the problem at all yet because they did not have an adequate description. I described the problem and played the tape for Catherine and then her supervisor came on the line. He suggested that I check the wiring in my home. When I explained that I had connected a different phone at the demarkation point with identical results, he said that they would "go into the line group" that night and get back to me first thing Monday morning. By Monday (August 24) afternoon, neither Catherine nor her supervisor had called back and I again contacted Judy. Judy said that others were experiencing problems and Catherine would call me back. Catherine called back and said that they had not checked anything on Friday but that they could set up to monitor my line this night. However, I would have to be on the phone in order for them to test. I asked why they could not simply establish a test call of their own and monitor the line. Catherine said that I was the only person having trouble and therefore they had to use my line. Moreover, they could not put up a call on my line: I had to be present and talking for them to test. I pointed out that this seemed wrong as my mother's line showed identical symptoms to mine. I asked whether they couldn't just put on a test tone and monitor that. But she said she had been told to tell me this and could do nothing about it. Monday night I arranged to be on the line with a friend from approximately 11:45 PM until 4:30 AM in order to give ample opportunity to locate the problem. The problem occurred and there were several splendid examples of entire phrases being dropped. On August 25 I contacted Judy to find out how the test went. She had Catherine call me back. Catherine said that the monitor listened for as long as she could but it is "very difficult on a 5ESS switch because they must start over each time you hang up and call." I pointed out that this was why I maintained the same call from 11:45 PM until 4:30 AM. She suggested that perhaps I had had the other party call me back; I said no. She could not explain further. She did say that the monitor detected some static but no dropouts. I asked if the monitor was simply listening to my line and, if so, how she could hope to detect the dropouts since they showed up only on the other end. She said that there was no way for them to monitor the other end because it was in a different office. I asked what was the purpose of the test if it couldn't detect the problem. She did not explain. She did say that they had both moved my line to another switch and changed some software. I mentioned that they had moved my line before but she said that this time they "really" moved it. (Curiously, this move did not produce the long service interruption of the previous one.) I asked what software they had changed. She said that it was far too intricate to explain. I suggested that she try anyway because, if this did solve the problem, I would want to be able to request something similar the next time the problem appeared. She said she could not go into it. I contacted Judy again to complain that I was not satisfied with the way things were progressing. [End of what would go to the PUC ...] Several questions come to mind: Is it really impossible for NET to test a routing path without involving my line? Even if they have to involve my line, is it true that I must be on the phone talking? Can't NET make a connection at the office and put up a call themselves? What is the purpose of listening only to my line? I suspect they wanted to show that the dropouts were coming from my phone/wiring. Dan Lanciani ddl@harvard.* ------------------------------ Date: 25 Aug 92 21:05:11-0900 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: Information on X.38 X.39 and X.5 Standards I am seeking information on several "new" (maybe ?) CCITT standards: X.38, X.39 and X.5 Can anyone provide a brief description of these standards. Thanks in advance. Thomas K Hinders Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f) ------------------------------ From: aj008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Aaron M. Barnes) Subject: New Sony 696HF VCR's For $329! Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:20:42 GMT Thats right -- New 696HF VCR's for $329. All you have to do is send your request for information to this gentleman: interpol@casbah.acns.nwu.edu He let me know about this, but did not specify the dealer. I am sure he would appreciate any and all responses. Thanks. Aaron Barnes aj008@cleveland.freenet.edu [Moderatpr's Note: Two questions: Do you think that is really such a good deal, and who is 'interpol' here in the Chicago area. Casbah is a work station here at Northwestern University in the Academic Computing Center. Oh, never mind, I will finger interpol myself: [casbah.acns.nwu.edu] Login name: interpol In real life: Drew Cheng Directory: /home/u2/interpol Shell: /bin/csh Last login Wed Aug 26 00:04 on ttyp1 from elvex.nwu.edu No unread mail Plan: To search out and destroy every computer geek that FINGERs people to try to find out their real names! Do you HEAR me, you nerdy little hackers? I'M AFTER YOU! Finger THIS, you putzes! PREPARE TO DIE!!! HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA..... AHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! hahhahahahahahahaha!!!!!! hahahah ha I kill me (sorry, I've been on Prozac lately...) [Moderator's Note: I guess so. I think I'd rather buy a used car from this guy than a VCR. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:51:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Josh N. Pritikin Subject: Looking For Modem to Computer Network Service I am looking for companies that provide a service such that customers with personal computers can using their modem to locally connect to a network from which they can connect to our unix box. Currently, I am aware that PSI provides such a service and Tymnet may also. Are these the only two? Josh Pritikin joshp+@cmu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 15:58:04 CDT From: mearle@pro-party.cts.com Subject: 911 From CMT (was 911 on Jerry Springer Show) Here in South Texas, Southwestern Bell Mobile systems operators handle the initial part of a 911 call. This is because the area a cmt works in covers a large number of Law Enforcement juristictions. For instance, my service, based out of Corpus Christi, TX, works in: CorpusChristi, Alice, Rockport, Beeville, Kingsville, Refugio, Raymondville, and other places. That's an area represented by a rectangle 100 x 80 miles! So when I dial 911, a SWBMS operator answers, asks where I am (approximately) and transfers the call to the proper agency, announcing "mobile call from xxx-yyyy". She/he stays on the line during the call, in case of some trouble on the mobile side. They NEVER (in my experience) hassle one, or question the nature of the call -- they just connect one to the law enforcement agency as quickly as possible. Cellular One has a similiar procedure. Mark W. Earle mearle@pro-party.cts.com (Mark Earle) [WA2MCT/5] FidoNet at Opus 1:160/50.0 Bitnet adblu001@ccsu.vm1 Internet 73117.351@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #663 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21416; 27 Aug 92 3:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02778 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:10:09 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01685 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:09:59 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:09:59 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208270709.AA01685@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #665 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Aug 92 02:10:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 665 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Baby Bells and States (Bill Sohl) Re: Baby Bells and States (Nigel Allen) Re: Baby Bells and States (Darwei Kung) Re: Baby Bells and States (J. Butz) Re: Polite Thief (Eugene R. Schroeder) Re: Polite Thief (Bob Halloran) Re: Polite Thief (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Polite Thief (Andy Behrens) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (John Karabaic) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Robert S. Helfman) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Bill Mayhew) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Marshal Perlman) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Ronald Oakes) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Andy Sherman) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Dave Niebuhr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET (22501-sohl) Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 12:41:57 GMT In article dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be > assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It > seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover > many. Would this be based on the population at the time? As memory serves me, the decision involved AT&T, the 23 telcos (NY TEL, Pacific Bell, etc) and the court. The goal was to have seven regional companies of approximately equal financial size. Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!dancer!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 2:06:20 EDT dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes in Volume 12, Issue 659: > I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be > assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It > seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover > many. Would this be based on the population at the time? I think the intention was to create seven regional companies of roughly the same size. I don't have any numbers handy, but I think all the RBOCs have a similar number of access lines. My guess is that the decision to have seven (rather than three or 22) regional companies was made by AT&T to maximize shareholder benefit. If AT&T had chosen to split its local operations into fewer than seven companies, they might have been harder to manage. ------------------------------ From: kung@actin.ee.washington.edu (Darwei Kung) Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Organization: University of Washington Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:27:22 GMT Judge Harold Greene decided the fate of the Bell System. His rulings still stands today, and he is still the man who has the final say on the fate of RBOCs. Darwei Kung [Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbutz@homxa.att.com Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:03 EDT Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be > assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It > seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover > many. Would this be based on the population at the time? Well according to my "Engineering and Operations in the Bell System" text (a book still handed out to new AT&T employees), the current RBOC territory boundaries seem to follow the same boundaries that formed the old Western Electric Regions. Also, I think the same boundaries constituted the various regions of the old AT&T Long Lines. LATA determination went by "area/regions of interest" or some other buzz term. I suppose this was by population, though I cannot say for sure. J Butz jbutz@homxa.att.com AT&T - BL ER700 Systems Engineering ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:51:01 EDT From: ers@cblpe.att.com (Eugene R Schroeder) Subject: Re: Polite Thief Organization: AT&T In article Jerry Leichter writes: > Yesterday, I tried to place a long-distance credit card call using a > pay phone in Piscataway, New Jersey. LD service was from some company > like "American Network Services". Needless to say, I dialed 10288 > first. > No combination I tried would let me select AT&T; either the sequence > was (legitimately) declared invalid, or I got the "not necessary" > message. > I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense > like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? The number to report having 10288+0 blocked from a public phone is 1-800-742-6260 (we got stickers some time ago to put on our calling/universal cards). Presumably this results in AT&T taking action to get the phone unblocked. Hopefully you can make the 800 for free. Non-disclaimer: I work for AT&T Gene ------------------------------ From: rkh@ucs.att.com (Bob Halloran) Subject: Re: Polite Thief Organization: AT&T Universal Card Services, Jacksonville FL Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:53:06 GMT In article Jerry Leichter writes: [Moderator's Note: See earlier message this issue for the text. PAT] Off the sticker they sent to stick on my card, it's 1-800-742-6260. I recall they'll want to know where the phone was, when you tried to make the call, and the AOS. Bob Halloran AT&T Universal Card Jacksonville FL rkh@ucs.att.com Any similarity between opinions stated here and AT&T's corporate opinion are purely coincidental. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 06:30:03 -0700 From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: Polite Thief Jerry Leichter writes: [stuff about the phone rejecting the 10288 prefix deleted] > I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense > like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? The number you're looking for is 816-654-8000. They accept collect long-distance calls for the purpose of making long-distance calls over AT&T's network. Presumably, they then go after offending operator for blocking 10288 calls. Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com ------------------------------ From: andyb@europa.coat.com (Andy Behrens) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:00:36 -0400 Organization: Burlington Coat Factory Reply-To: Andy.Behrens@coat.com Subject: Re: Polite Thief This has been illegal since January 11 of this year. To get AT&T's help, dial 1-800-CALL-ATT, then select options 2+1+0 from the menu. Tell the operator that you want to report a phone that won't let you dial 10ATT. You should also file a complaint with the FCC: Informal Complaints and Public Inquiries Branch Enforcement Division Federal Communications Commission 2025 M Street, N.W., Room 6202 Washington, D.C. 20554 Andy Behrens P.O. Box 116, South Strafford, Vt. (802) 765-4138 Burlington Coat, HC 61 Box 1B, Lebanon, N.H. 03766 (603) 448-5000 [Moderator's Note: I'd like you to know that a couple weeks ago I was in the Executive House Hotel in downtown Chicago to meet someone and every payphone in the place was operated by some AOS outfit. They all had 10288 blocked and they all had a notice next to the phone actually claiming 'it is not illegal to block 10288; to reach AT&T simply dial the operator and asked to be 'splashed back' to AT&T ...'. I tried it and the operator had no idea what I was talking about. I asked her if I was speaking English or some other language, and if English was she having difficulty in hearing me; if so I could begin screaming in the phone at her to help her hear and understand me better. It was like talking to a turtle or a goldfish. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jkarab@NeXT.COM (John Karabaic) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Date: 26 Aug 92 13:40:06 GMT Reply-To: jkarab@NeXT.COM Jeff Garber writes: > On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los > Angeles) the topic was 911. Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati > area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was > having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told > him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually > played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my > own ears. Rest easy, that dispatcher was disciplined. She (I think it was a she) misinterpreted the policy. Since 911's Caller-ID doesn't work with cellular phones, despatchers had been instructed to ask specific questions of cellular callers. This despatcher either misinterpreted the training, was under stress and made a mistake, or was a bozo. I use my cellular phone with 911 all the time to report motorists in need of assistance, accidents, and the like. I state where I am, where the person who needs assistance is, and am usually cheerfully thanked. If asked, I provide my name and my cellular number. For non-emergencies, some despatchers will hook you up with the state police or county sheriff. Since I have the (dubious) privilege of having a phone, I figure it's my duty to use it this way. John S. Karabaic, Systems Engineer, jkarab@NeXT.com, 513 792 5904 NeXT Computer, Inc.; 4434 Carver Woods Dr.; Cincinnati, OH 45242 cellular: 513 532 0224; fax: 513 792 5913; territory: OH, IN & KY [Moderator's Note: I try to use my handheld in the same way. I pass by accident scenes and situations where police intervention is required almost every day ... and I call it in. PAT] ------------------------------ From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:43:35 GMT In article Jeff Garber <0005075968@ mcimail.com> writes: > What good is it to have a phone with you if you can't use it in an > emergency? I've used L.A. Cellular to call 911 many times and have had > no problems like this ... I have PacTel Cellular and have also had no problem using 911. I saw a man down being beaten by someone in the right lane of Santa Monica Blvd (the victim was holding his head and screaming while the other guy was kicking him). I grabbed the phone about 200 feet past the scene, called 911, told them (they had real difficulty getting the correct intersection -- it was obvious they weren't anywhere in the area), and drove on. About another 200 feet down the street, I passed the fire station, where several sheriffs were starting out on their bicycles. I rolled down my window and told them what I'd seen and they said they had just been dispatched. Net time: about 45 seconds. ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:28:59 GMT Here in Ohio, the Highway Patrol will accept calls from cellular telephones at 800-525-5555. Luckily I have not had to call the OHP, but the instruction book I received from Cellular One recommends this number for reporting emergencies. The same book also mentions that 911 may be called to report emergencies. Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (140.220.1.1) ------------------------------ From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:30:12 GMT I don't know where you are, but in California the 911 people LOVE cellular phones. I've never called 911 from a regular phone but I understand you get right in touch with a police or fire person. When you call 911 from a cellular you get a 911 operator and you tell them who you want to talk to, I.E. "Please get me the Huntington Beach PD", then you tell the PD what is wrong. I use it all the time to report accidents, and they are glad to hear from me. I'll also call in when I see broken down [like with smoke comin' out of the hood or a broken axel] car with people near it, or even little things like traffic lights being out or large chunks of metal in the road it is a free call and they are always glad to hear from me. Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency. I only use that for *emergencies*, but I call the city all the time for things like stop-and-go lights out of order, open hydrants, dead animals on the street or parkway, street/sewer cave-ins, etc. I do not call through the main City Hall centrex number; I call direct to the appropriate dispatcher and am always thanked for my report. PAT] ------------------------------ From: oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 9:42:32 CDT haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) writes: > I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve > as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy > Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is > this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or > what? I do not think that any decisions have been made yet. However, Sandia will remain open -- or at least it is supposed to. I have heard rumors that the University of New Mexico is thinking of taking over the management, and I suspect there may be other interested parties. I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close. My father has worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and indirectly most of the population of Albuquerque, NM -- my home town -- would be effected by its closing. I suspect that AT&T's decision to not renew the contract to operate Sandia is related to the large number of lay off's that have been occuring at the AT&T division around here, the automation of operator services, and the other steps that they seem to be taking to streamline operations. Ronald B. Oakes ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 12:56:53 EDT From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Reply-To: andys@flatline.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) In article , haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) writes: > I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve > as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy > Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is > this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or > what? This was AT&T's decision. As far as I know the lab will remain open, but with peace breaking out all over you can never tell. As I recall The official word was on the order of "we'd like to concentrate on making money now". The Sandia contract was cost + $1.00. Andy Sherman Salomon Inc - Unix Systems Support - Rutherford, NJ (201) 896-7018 - andys@flatline.sbi.com or asherman@mhnj.sbi.com "These opinions are mine, all *MINE*. My employer can't have them." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:38:30 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia What is happening is that the contracts between the DOE sites and AT&T are up for renewal and apparently Sandia is going with another company for their long distance carrier. My employer, Brookhaven National Laboratory, is negotiating a contract right now and I don't know who the players are at the present time. It should be noted that these contracts are of approximate ten-year duration which would put the beginning of the AT&T-Sandia one in 1982, the same as BNLs. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #665 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22967; 27 Aug 92 4:50 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31452 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:44:11 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07752 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:43:56 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:43:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208270743.AA07752@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #666 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Aug 92 02:44:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 666 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Michael A. Covington) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Steve Forrette) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Laurence Chiu) Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Angie Clarke) Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Kenneth A. Becker) Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Ang Peng Hwa) Re: GTE California Changes (John Higdon) Re: GTE California Changes (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (R. Kevin Oberman) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Jim Rees) Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Richard Nash) Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Dan Odom) Last Laugh! Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Brad Hicks) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 05:54:39 GMT In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell)> writes: >> It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any >> mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it. >> This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even >> covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time >> to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one >> else. > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it > would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, > that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have > legitimately obtained. Hmmm? Never heard of confidentiality? Jon was describing the Communications Act of 1934, which forbids disclosing or "using" information obtained by listening to non-public radio services. (Broadcasts, hams, CBs, and a few other things are freely disclosable.) That law simply imposes a kind of confidentiality on people who, through technological pursuits, come into possession of other people's private messages. Just like telephone repair personnel, mail carriers, etc. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 goes further: it forbids _listening_ to private radio communications (cellular phones, ship-to-shore phones, etc.). But it also makes it clear that non-encrypted police and other public service communications, as well as ships and aircraft (other than phone calls intended to be private), are not subject to the prohibition. Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 07:43:25 GMT In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it > would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, > that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have > legitimately obtained. I'm not a First Amendment lawyer either (or any other kind of lawyer for that matter), but I do know that there is a common misconception that the various amendments prevent any restrictions whatsoever on certain activities. There are many cases where "lawfully obtained" information cannot be legally discussed: - The tried and true "fire in a theater" example. - Trade secrets that you legally obtain in the course of employment. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:36:04 GMT In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band > radio and heard a newsworthy event? Could he or she legitimately be > punished for reporting this information? Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up the cell-phone frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him. Laurence Chiu ------------------------------ From: aclarke@stsci.edu (Angie Clarke) Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone Reply-To: aclarke@stsci.edu Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore MD Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:18:42 GMT I certainly am interested in the article that appeared in TELECOM Digest a few years ago: "Praise the Lord and Pass the RF Filters". Please post. Thanks. Angie [Moderator's Note: Okay, I will hunt it up and use it soon, maybe over the weekend. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:16:38 EDT From: kab@hotstone.att.com (Kenneth A Becker) Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone Organization: AT&T In article , rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) writes: > Recently I was talking on the phone to a friend of mine in Long Beach, > California, and she told me a a repetitve problem she had been having > on her phone -- whenever she used the phone, she heard a *radio* > *station* on her phone line. I listened carefully, found that, on the > other end of the line, I heard the same thing (only when I was talking > to her), only not as loud. We identified the radio station as KFI > (640 AM, Los Angeles). > [Moderator's Note: There are line filters available which will cure > this problem. The telco has no special responsibility to handle the As it happens, I have one of these line filters in my desk, a Z100A radio interference filter sold in AT&T phone stores. Quote: PURPOSE: The Radio Interference Filter is designed to eliminate extraneous noises from local AM band radio stations that you might hear through the receive of your phone. It will also minimize interference from other sources such as FM band radio stations, citizen band, and ham radios. Hope you all find this useful. Ken Becker kab@hotstone.att.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:39:16 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone I had the same problem of radio on the phone when I lived in LA. It was a rap station that got louder the longer I stayed on the line. The PacBell technician came over and after some checks concluded that it was my cheap $4 phone bought literally off the street (guy unpacked a box on the street) in Greenwich Village, NY. He plugged in one of those heavy-enough-to-use-as-a-weapon phone and there was no rap music. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:26 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: GTE California Changes HOLDREGE_MP writes: > GTE California, the state's second-largest telephone company, plans to > close the LA area facilities and transfer as many as 400 jobs out of > state, union officials said Tuesday. It does not stop does it? I have to admit that this even surprised me. Actually I am very delighted: now the SoCal people can experience the joy of dealing with someone who confuses Santa Monica with Santa Barbara (hell, they're all 'Santas' aren't they???). Now everyone in CA with GTE "service" can try talking with people with southern accents. Oh well, people who cannot help you, cannot help you. > GTE officials confirmed plans to close the company's Norwalk and > Thousand Oaks long-distance access centers, which employ 255 people. Really dedicated to the communities that it "serves", no? > A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing > effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North > Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. Is it not funny that Pacific Telesis can be located fully within California, use local reps and business offices, maintain local walk-in facilities, fully integrate with the served community, and even contribute to local, regional, and state funds for the arts and philanthopic causes, and STILL provide real telephone service at much less cost than GTE? > The company is also considering closing its Long Beach network > operations monitoring center, which could imperil another 160 jobs. Well, I do not blame them for doing that. The phone service in Long Beach stinks. I would move, too. In fact, a client is moving! > While I can't blame any business from wanting to leave California, > what with the crazy laws, high insurance and benefits corruption, I am > upset that our phone company is pulling out. Pac*Bell seems to be able to make it in California. My phone company is not leaving. And I pay less for my phone service than you do; Pac*Bell's tariffed rates have always been lower than GTE's. > Is is especially upsetting that the Network Operations Monitoring > center is leaving. The center, which opened only six months ago, was > responsible for alerting technicians to problems. Who is going to do > this now? Computers in Texas? Probably no one. But then I doubt that you will notice any service level reduction. It could not get much worse. I have reported trouble in the Los Gatos CO on a Friday night, but of course it is Monday or Tuesday before GTE can fly someone up from southern California to fix it. There is an amusing story here. After calling GTE repair repeatedly (necessary to get ANYTHING fixed), someone from the "network control center" called me on Saturday to tell me that they were on top of the problem. The problem, he said, was that someone had removed some of the wiring improperly from the frames. He could see the problem from his terminal right there (in Long Beach?). Well, I guess I was impressed! "So how long to fix it?", I asked. "Should take no time at all once we get someone up there -- no later than Tuesday." John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:30:11 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: GTE California Changes Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article HOLDREGE_MP writes: > John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in > Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the > incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas. > A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing > effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North > Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. Does this mean they will be programming the computers to ignore and throw away trouble tickets ? Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Date: 26 Aug 92 18:23:09 GMT In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill St. Louis) writes: > The Subject says it all. > I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will > work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) > RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will > these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for them. The RJ45 will not work. The idea of the MMJ was to have a different connector for data to avoid blowing up data equipment by putting the telco battery (and ring) on it. While might have been a good idea, it never caught on and I don't know of anyone other than DEC using it. Other vendors have either ignored the problem or have designed their equipment to be uneffected by telco voltages. MMJ jacks are available at about the same cost as RJ-45s, so it's not too expensive to use them. It's just a pain in the neck! R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: koberman@llnl.gov (510) 422-6955 Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing and probably don't really know anything useful about anything. ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:05:14 GMT In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill St. Louis) writes: > I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will > work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) > RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will > these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? The jacks are the same, except for the notch. The difference is in the cable. A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end. A notched cable is wired straight. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:38:18 -0600 From: rickie@trickie.uucp (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? David G Lewis writes: > In article hgschulz@gaia.cs.umass.edu > (Henning Schulzrinne) writes: >> Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this >> question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost"... > Actually, I think it's more along the lines of asking "how much does > an airplane cost?" Depends -- are you talking a Cessna 172 or a B2 > Stealth Bomber? The above comparison is a wee bit misleading. Even though the machine looks identical (minor internal equipment provisioning differences), the price can be radically different if a toll machine, versus a local switch, or also, who you are! Software prices are very expensive. After all, it is those expensive tastes of the contracting software developer and 1000 percent markup of the equipment vendor that has to be satisfied. At least that is how it appears to be done in Canada. :) :) Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: danodom@cutlass.ksu.ksu.edu (Dan Odom) Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? Date: 26 Aug 1992 09:43:13 -0500 Organization: Kansas State University A switch can cost a LOT. Like another poster said, nobody will give out exact information, including my school. But I did some asking around and heard a "rumor" that our switch ran about $10,000,000. I don't know if I believe this (they are barely willing to spring for $130,000 in computer equipment), but it's a start. Dan Odom danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu Send email for PGP key. ------------------------------ From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 26 Aug 92 16:04:23 GMT Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Pounding on an Octothorp > The very plaintive (and frustrated question was) "I can't find the > ANY key." Back when I worked at a major defense contractor, I was sitting next to a guy who took one of these calls. He just barely stifled his smirk, explained to the user that meant that if he hit any of the keys on the keyboard, the computer would continue. Which one? ANY of them! After a brief pause, the user replied: "Well, I just hit a key and nothing happened." What key did you hit? "The Shift key." Now, YOU smirk. I think this is a a "fair cop." Once he understood the directions on the screen, the user followed them ... and because the instructions were wrong, it didn't do him any good. I guess it COULD have said "Press any non-modifier key to continue." But my ex-wife, who writes specifications and user documentation for another company, designs the screens now so that they say "Press Enter to continue." In fact, the programmers write it so that it works if you hit any non-modifier key, but the user is much, much better off with simple, unambiguous directions. J. Brad Hicks Internet: mhs!mc!Brad_Hicks@attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTmail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad I am not an official MasterCard spokesperson, and the message above does not contain official MasterCard statements or policies. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #666 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23809; 27 Aug 92 5:11 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00898 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:59 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20589 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:49 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:49 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208270618.AA20589@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #664 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Aug 92 01:18:54 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 664 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T and Hurricane Andrew (Ed Hopper) Disaster Reporting (Dave Niebuhr) Another AOS Experience (J. Butz) New England Telephone Brings Back "Granite State Calling" (Mark Eklof) Recommendations Wanted For Pager/Beeper (Ray Normandeau) Do-It-Yourself Car Phone Installation? (Andrew C. Green) Another Valuable Service From Pac*Bell (John Higdon) Cell Phones in the Air (Tom Gillman) Modem Noise on Line (Steve Shapiro) How Do I Locate Graybar? (Michael Schuster) Slamming Prevention (David Caldwell) Anyone Hear of PROVOX? (Larry Rachman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: 26 Aug 92 20:25:03 GMT Subject: AT&T and Hurricane Andrew Pat: Here is an item of interest from AT&T Today, the internal electronic newsletter. HURRICANE AID *** As of 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, 80 AT&T employees in southern Florida were unaccounted for, and the homes of an estimated 100-150 employees were devastated in the wake of Hurricane Andrew. No figure on total AT&T employees in the affected area was immediately available. Company efforts are underway to locate unaccounted-for employees and to help others move belongings from their homes and find temporary shelter. The AT&T Foundation donated $100,000 today to the American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund for Florida. There is an URGENT need for supplies for our friends and co-workers in Dade County, Fla. The following items are needed: portable radios, batteries (size C and D), flashlights, Coleman stoves, matches, ice chests, paper products (towels, utensils, trash bags, toilet paper), bottled water and juices, manual can openers, canned food, linens, cots, blankets, towels and washcloths. Adult items needed are clothing and toiletries. Children's items needed are shoes, clothing and toys. Baby items needed are diapers, formula, baby food, clothing, bedding, powder and ointment. Other items needed are aspirin, Bandaids, bug spray, sunscreen, pet food, litter and litter boxes, collars and leashes. Donations should be sent to Pioneer Office, 6451 N. Federal, Room 101B, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. 33308. Ed Hopper AT&T - IMS Atlanta, GA [Moderator's Note: Ed, I am more than happy to help spread this call for assistance through the telecom industry among the readers of this Digest. How about let's all take a few minutes Thursday and prepare boxes of stuff to be sent, preferably via Federal Express so that it will arrive by the weekend or Monday at the latest. The need is very great *right now*. Grab stuff that you do not need from the list above, toss it in a large cardboard box and send it to the Telephone Pioneers in Ft. Lauderdale. These donations will be distributed throughout Dade County with telco employees in the area given priority. Perhaps readers can post this on company bulletin boards and have other employees bring in stuff Friday morning. If you prefer (or can spare yet a second box full of stuff) your packages can be sent to the City Clerk, City of Homestead, Homestead, FL marked 'disaster relief supplies'. Telco employees with a few days vacation coming might want to volunteer their service by going down there and helping residents and businesses get their telephone instruments connected and back on line pending restoral of service. Even if all you do is send a few cans of food and some toilet paper, **please do it Thursday if at all possible, and use an overnight courier to get it there Friday**. The folks are in very bad shape. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:48:07 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Disaster Reporting What with the two disasters on our hands -- the fire in California and the damage caused by Hurricane Andrew, I was wondering if people located in those areas who have power and telephone service and receive the Digest could keep us posted on the efforts to recover from these calamaties. My sympathies go to those living in those areas and hope that their losses are minimal which unfortunately aren't. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Notes: Very little word is coming in or out of Dade County, and the news that is reaching us is horrible. The town of Homestead, with 30,000 residents was wiped out of existence. Utility poles and wires are laying on the ground in a jumble, ripped and torn from their poles, etc. Utility service will not be fully restored for many weeks. I forward articles to comp.dcom.telecom using nntpxmit through several sites including cs.miami.edu, and they have not responded to telnet since Monday. I sincerely hope that telecom people everywhere will rally to the support of Dade County. The California disaster is of equal concern right now but to some extent was over- shadowed by the enormity of Andrew's fury this week. And now we have Louisiana to deal with ... so much to do. Please take a few minutes on Thursday and help out however you can: Florida, Louisiana, California. Thanks, and if you hear from folks in these areas, pass along news. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbutz@homxa.att.com Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:11 EDT Subject: Another AOS Experience leichter@lrw.com writes: > And this is right in the heart of AT&T land: Fire a gun in any > direction and you'll probably hit an AT&T facility! At a recent reunion of my college buddies at Puglia's family style Italian restaurant (home of Jorge the keyboard player, dancing permitted, but don't drink the house red) in Little Italy in Manhattan, I had the unpleasant occasion of running into one of these AOS monsters. A 0+ call gave me a bong tone followed by a mechanical, female voice announcing "ITI Telecommunications." 10288 was blocked as well. A call to 1-800-CALL-ATT put me in touch with an AT&T customer rep who picked up the ANI that was intentionally not posted on the phone, recorded the street address and cheerfully connected me to bong tone which allowed me to complete my call on the carrier of MY choice. AT&T and NY Tel must have an intra-lata call completion agreement, since my intra-lata call to "da Bronx" terminated with no problems. > I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense > like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? The number is 1-800-CALL-ATT. + To report an AOS that blocks carrier selection, select option 2, then option 0 for a customer rep. + To bill to card, select option 2, then option 1. Enter the number you are dialing, followed by your card number. Later, J Butz jbutz@homxa.att.com AT&T-BL ER700 System Engineering ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 23:09:02 EDT From: me@stile.stonemarche.org (Mark Eklof) Subject: New England Telephone Brings Back "Granite State Calling" This spring, there was mention in the Digest of New England Telephone's switch to flat rate in-state (New Hampshire) long distance calling. With the new system, I could call the adjacent town to the west of here for the same rate that I could a town on the other end of the state (about 3.5 hours of highway driving away). When they did this, they also changed the discount calling plan (formerly called "Granite State Service", and now called "CallAround 603 Plan"), with different time periods, and rates. The old plan allowed plan calls in the afternoon, while the new one gave no discounts during the day. I called NETel at the time, to complain of the loss of the daytime discount. Suprisingly, the person I talked to said that many people had voiced the same complaint (It wasn't suprising that others had complained, it was suprising that they told me that), and that they were "looking into" ways to address this. I figured that was a brush off, and there wasn't much I could do anyway. Apparently, I was wrong. I received the following letter today. ---------------------------------- New England Telephone August 24, 1992 Dear Mr. Eklof: Effective March 20, New England Telephone simplified and restructured in-state long distance rates, eliminated Granite State(SM) Service, and introduced the new CallAround(R) 603 discount calling paln. As a result, some customers expressed concern about the elimination of the daytime calling period associated with their Granite State Service. To alleviate these concerns, Granite State Service will be offerred to qualified residence subscribers who so request between now and October 9. As a Granite State Service customer of record during March, please take a minute to read the descriptions below. Then decide which plan best fits your calling patterns and life style. If you are unsure if you qualify, you may call your local Business Office for more information. ... [Details of the two plans ommitted. I can send them if there's interest, but the plan details and rates are the same as they were before. Also details of normal rates that would be in effect without the plans, or during the (different) periods the plans aren't active.] ... If you wish to re-subscribe to Granite State Service or request assistance in choosing a calling plan, call your Service Representative at the telephone number listed on the New England Telephone Itemization of Account page of your bill. Remember, orders for Granite State Service must be received by October 9, 1992. This will be your only opportunity to re-subscribe to Granite State Service. Orders for the service will not be accepted after Octover 9. If you re-subscribe to Granite State Service, we will reinstate your service without applying any installation charges. If you are happy with your current service arrangement, you do not need to contact us. We hope this offer expresses our appreciation of your business. Thank you for using New England Telephone. Sincerely, Allen F. Pattee Vice President - New Hampshire --------------------------------------- So, it looks like I'll be able to get the old service back, though if I were just moving in, I'd be SOL. I do plan to call them in the morning and tell them to switch me back to Granite State Service. Mark D. Eklof Brookline, New Hampshire, USA me@stile.stonemarche.org ------------------------------ Subject: Recommendations Wanted For Pager/Beeper From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 26 Aug 92 18:53:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) I am thinking of getting a pager (beeper). I would like to be paged when my answering machine gets a message. What are the recommendations to accomplish this? I now use two Panasonic KX-T1470 Answering Machines and would prefer not to get another machine as I am very pleased with the ones I have. They have all the features that I want, except that they will not dial a beeper number. As I already have telephones that handle multiple lines, I especially would like to avoid having to get another answering machine that would include its own phone that would only be usable on one line. Incidentally, the reason that I use two answering machines instead of a dual line answering machine is because a dual line answering machine can not answer both lines simultaneously. Ray Normandeau INTERNET:ray.normandeau@factory.com P O Box 854, Times Square Station, New York, NY 10108-0854 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:16:54 CDT From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Do-It-Yourself Car Phone Installation? I've been toying with the idea of picking up a used cellular phone for my wife's car, primarily for some peace of mind (both hers and mine) in case of breakdown. At this time, neither of us have one and I'm (obviously) not an expert on the subject. For various reasons, I want a permanently-installed model. Now the question: how difficult is it to install? I have extensive experience with car electrical systems, sound systems and the like, but the few articles I've seen on the subject make it sound like brain surgery; they blather on about how to choose a good installation outfit, but don't clarify what's so darned difficult about it. Two more questions: Does the antenna require any kind of adjustment (i.e. tuning) after installation? Finally, what sort of bureaucracy is involved in obtaining service? This sort of paperwork is usually done by the installation outfits, but as I said, I'm hoping to do this myself. Thanks in advance for the net.wisdom ... Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:00 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Another Valuable Service From Pac*Bell Here, right from the horse's mouth, is a new subsidized service to attempt to put the competition out of business (and exploit the network which Pac*Bell controls): "Pacific Bell plans to upgrade a small number of Pacific Bell Public payphones in its franchise territory to trial Public Coin voice Messaging Service (CVM). Our intent is to trial this service from a limited base beginning the first quarter of 1993 pending regulatory approval. CVM will allow a caller, encountering a busy or no answer condition, to send up to a one minute message to their called party for an additional fee above the cost of the call. The caller, after hearing a busy or set number of ring-no-answers, is presented with a voice prompt offering the service. The caller accepts the service by following the instructional voice prompts that are provided when the aforementioned conditions are encountered. Once the service is accepted, the caller is forwarded to a messaging system where the message is recorded and the call delivery is attempted at pre-determined intervals for a set period of time depending on the condition encountered by the caller (i.e. every 30 minutes for the next four hours for no answer, every 15 minutes for the next two hours on a busy). "During the trial, customers using Pacific Bell public payphones can leave a message for the party they are trying to reach whenever they encounter a busy or no answer condition. Customers can now exchange important information even without reaching the called party live. Messaging is an important tool for people on the go." Remember the discussion about whether a telco should charge for busy or no-answer condition? Looks like Pac*Bell has discovered a way to do just that (and make the customer think he got something for his money in the process). John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: ddssuprs!tom@uunet.UU.NET (Tom Gillman) Organization: Dickens Data Systems, Inc. Subject: Cell Phones in the Air Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:54:38 EDT I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info. Thanks, Tom Gillman | Internet: tom@dickens.com Systems Integration - Dickens Data Systems | uucp: ...uunet!ddssuprs!tom [Moderator's Note: Perhaps whoever sent the old thread on this topic to the other inquirer recently will send it to Tom also. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) Subject: Modem Noise on Line Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA Date: 26 AUG 92 09:30:37 EST Howdy All! I have a problem that I hope one of you wizards can help me with. I have a residence in which I have two phone lines. The wire coming to the house is a 'standard' four wire line (red, black, yellow, green). For one line I use red/green and for the other I use black/yellow. On one line I have my BBS attached and so the modem attached to that line is quite busy. The other line is for voice. The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of hissing and noise heard on the voice line. What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can use inside the house? Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the second line? Please advise. Regards, Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org FidoNet 1:101/440 (508) 664-6354 The Contract Professional BBS, North Reading, MA ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: How Do I Locate Graybar? Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:09:42 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a catalog? Mike Schuster NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: davecal@microsoft.com (David Caldwell) Subject: Slamming Prevention Date: 26 Aug 92 15:56:35 GMT Organization: Microsoft Corp. Well, I have just set up phone service for myself and requested my long distance carrier. So far, so good. When I called Southern Bell to make some changes to my service (they default you with their $2.50/month Maintenance Plan ... thanks, but no thanks!) I inquired about the status of my long distance carrier. They informed me that it could be changed by any LD carrier with my verbal consent to said carrier. Well after hearing all of the horror stories on this group about slamming I inquired about "locking" (their word, not mine) my account so that changes could only be made when authorized by me. They told me that I could pay 10.75 to have my account locked! I told them they could take their charge and shove it. I know that Southern Bell has switched people I know here to other LD companies based on "verbal confirmation" through the LD carrier. I am thinking that switching LD companies is a great source of revenue for my friends at Southern Bell. Any advice or ideas on how to deal with the phone company from hell? Thanks, David Caldwell davecal@microsoft.com ------------------------------ Date: 26 Aug 92 21:19:07 EDT From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Anyone Hear of PROVOX? I will be setting up an auto-attendant/voicemail system, and am looking at a software package from a company called Provox, in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. The product runs on a PC with Dialogic cards. Does anyone out there have any experience with this product? Can anyone recommend something similar from another vendor? Thanks, Larry Rachman, WA2BUX - 74066,2004@compuserve.com - Fax: 516-427-0656 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #664 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08082; 28 Aug 92 3:13 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13242 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:08:05 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27149 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:07:57 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:07:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208280607.AA27149@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #667 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Aug 92 01:07:52 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 667 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson More on AT&T and Hurricane Andrew (Ed Hopper) CWA Union Hall Aids Hurricane Relief Efforts (Nigel Allen) NYC Plans Attack on Pay-Phone Abuses (capek@watson.ibm.com) Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Gabe M. Wiener) 110 vs. 66M Blocks (Jonathan Edwards) A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Laura Fermi, 1965 Interview via P. Townson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: 27 Aug 92 17:46:23 GMT Subject: More on AT&T and Hurricane Andrew HURRICANE RELIEF *** Although 60,000 storm victims spent Wednesday night in shelters after Hurricane Andrew struck Louisiana, damage was considerably less there than in Florida. All AT&T employees in Louisiana are accounted for. Also, according to information received early today, none of the estimated 400 to 500 AT&T people in the area struck by Andrew, which was downgraded to a tropical storm today, lost their homes. There was no damage done to the network as the storm ripped through the oil towns and Cajun country of South Louisiana Wednesday. Calling volumes doubled Wednesday and are still up today at 15% above normal. Meanwhile, in Florida today, AT&T people from NCR, American Transtech and AT&T Universal Card Services mobilized to bring emergency supplies to AT&T people who have been provided temporary shelter at the company's Ojus facility outside Coral Gables, Fla. Ojus has been established as a central emergency relief office for employees. The storm, which has been called the most expensive natural disaster in this country's history, wreaked between $15 and $20 billion damage in Florida. Some of the 80 AT&T employees unaccounted for Wednesday have been located through efforts by the business units, although no exact figures were available this morning. While there were no network outages in Florida, Andrew destroyed the homes of an estimated 250,000 people, and AT&T moved quickly Wednesday to supply emergency phone service for victims. The company sent 200 coinless public phones to the Fort Lauderdale area and set up approximately 12 public phones at the Homestead Air Force Base in hard-hit South Florida. AT&T also shipped phones and equipment used for the Republican National Convention in Houston to the Louisiana disaster site. Various efforts are under way to raise cash and provide supplies for storm victims. The AT&T Foundation donated $100,000 Wednesday to the American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund. Employees who wish to make tax-deductible cash donations or equipment donations can do so through the following organizations: o The Pioneers in Florida are collecting bottled water, portable radios, batteries, flashlights, portable stoves and fuel, canned food, paper products, umbrellas, clothing, baby items, toiletries, pet supplies, etc. Supplies and tax- deductible cash donations (checks only, please), which will be used to assist AT&T and South Central Bell employees, should be sent to the address below. Checks should be made out to Telephone Pioneers of America/Andrew. Telephone Pioneers of America Florida Goldcoast Chapter No. 83 6451 N. Federal Highway Fort Lauderdale, Fla. 33308 o Donations to Florida storm victims can also be made to: The American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund c/o Michael Carroll P.O. Box 025230 Miami, Fla. 33102-5230 o Dade County Emergency Relief 800-682-3362 o Emergency-relief collections at various local AT&T building sites. Check with local management for details. After the storm struck, AT&T's Human Resource Division quickly provided guidance to managers to help affected employees in the following areas: o Reasonable additional time off with or without pay, subject to local management discretion, but not to exceed 30 calendar days in a 12-month period. o Flex time/flex place, subject to local management discretion, to give employees some work-schedule flexibility to handle personal matters or work closer to home to oversee home repairs. o Wage advances of up to four weeks. o Expedited processing of mortgage applications through Prudential Home Mortgage. o Assistance in forming car/van pools to help employees whose vehicles were lost or damaged. o Discounts on rental cars through Avis, Hertz and National. o Local employee-sponsored fund-raising activities to aid employees in need. ------- Ed Hopper AT&T - IMS Atlanta, Ga [Moderator's Note: As pointed out yesterday in these columns, the big need in south Florida right now is NOT for money -- they have no where to spend it! What they do need are all sorts of common household items and emergency supplies as per the list provided by the Telephone Pioneers above: baby powder, baby and pet food, flashlights, batteries, can-openers, toilet tissue, etc. I was gratified to get a dozen notes today from readers who took to heart what I requested yesterday: they found some cardboard boxes, loaded them with all sorts of household supplies and other odds and ends, then shipped it out by overnight delivery on Federal Express today to the Pioneer's office at the address shown above. How about the rest of you doing the same? If you need to work on it over the weekend, then send it Monday so the folks will have it Tuesday or Wednesday. If you prefer, you can send the same type of shipment to the attention of the City Clerk, City of Homestead, Homestead, Florida. Federal Express will know where to deliver it along with the truckloads of stuff arriving from big hearted people all over the world ... two of the notes I got today were from Digest readers in Europe. Thank you very much. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: CWA Union Hall Aids Hurricane Relief Efforts Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 19:23:26 EDT Here is a press release from the AFL-CIO which mentions that the union hall of Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Mississippi, is being used for hurricane relief efforts. Labor Assists Victims Of Hurricane Andrew Contact: Sharolyn Rosier of the AFL-CIO, 202-637-5010 WASHINGTON, Aug. 27/U.S. Newswire/ -- The AFL-CIO/American Red Cross Disaster Response Network has been activated to aid relief efforts for victims of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana and Florida. The Network of 144 local unions allows the Red Cross to use their halls in the event of disaster. The following union halls have been mobilized: Carpenters Local 1765 and Plumbers Local 803 in Orlando, Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 349 in Miami; Carpenters District Council in Hialeah, Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 985 in Baton Rouge, La.; and Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Miss. The halls are equipped with staff to assist with such services as housing, food, and damage assessment. AFL-CIO Community Services liasons who have more information on labor's outreach efforts are: -- South Florida -- Billy Tindle or Frank Culver at 305-324-2523 or 324-2525 or Marilyn Jacobs at 305-579-2267. -- Baton Rouge/Jackson -- Walt Norris (phone lines are down, please call Chris Marston at 202-637-5010.) "The union halls are the backbone of the hurricane response plan for the gulf coast and much of the eastern United States," said Armond Marscelli, manager of disaster operations at the American Red Cross. "Services are provided much quicker because the halls can be readily used as staging areas, watch districts and headquarters." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 00:47:14 EDT From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: NYC Plans Attack on Pay-Phone Abuses An article in the {New York Times} on August 23 says that New York City is moving ahead with a plan which would require the operators of COCOTs on public property to obtain a franchise from the city's Department of Telecommunications and Energy, and which would be granted only to those who comply with the (Federal, state and city) laws which regulate them. A survey conducted by the department shows that "as many as two thirds" of the pay phones violate the law in a number of ways -- by overcharging, blocking long distance carrier access, offering misleading or no information about rates, failing to indicate the owner of the phone, and so on. Apparently, none of the private pay phone presently on public sidewalks have permission from the city, although such permission is required. (NY Telephone routinely obtains such permission.) The present effort is apparently an escalation by the city in the level of enforcment: Now the companies must obtain the franchise, whereas in the past individual phones had to be granted permission. The article gives a number of examples of abuses which I won't repeat here; we're all familiar with the kinds of things which go on. The proposal is expected to be approved by the City Council in the fall and go into effect next year. [Moderator's Note: Chicago is doing the same thing. All pay phones including those of Illinois Bell will have to be registered starting next year if they are on public property. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Proper use of 66-block punchdown tool Organization: Columbia University Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:52:35 GMT How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the end gets trimmed? My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one to get it it down and one to cut? Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems to trim the cable.) Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ From: edwards@world.std.com (Jonathan Edwards) Subject: 110 vs. 66M Blocks Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:30:18 GMT What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks? I am wiring my house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET. All the wires will end-run to the blocks in the basement. Should I use 110 or 66M blocks? Jonathan Edwards edwards@intranet.com IntraNet, Inc 617-527-7020 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:24:00 -0400 From: TELECOM Moderator (telecom@eecs.nwu.edu) Subject: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep The article below is reprinted from the TELECOM Digest, Volume 10, Issue 12, Thursday, January 4, 1990. With the passing of two and a half years, there are many readers who did not see it. My thanks to Mark Brader (msb@sq.com) for suggesting this be reprinted. PAT Date: Thu, 4 Jan 90 0:31:10 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep There were simpler times in the history of telephony, and simpler problems to deal with. During the several years I lived in the Hyde Park neighorhood on the south side of Chicago during the 1960's, my favorite neighbor was Lauri Fermi, widow of Enrico Fermi, known for his work on the Atomic Bomb. Mrs. Fermi and I lived in the same apartment building on East 56th Street, directly across the street from the Museum of Science and Industry, and we chatted and dined together frequently. In the fall of 1965, on the occassion of the twentieth anniversary of the completion and first testing of the bomb, Mrs. Fermi told a fascinating story of that summer day, twenty years earlier. Her comments were tape-recorded, and are transcribed below: "The testing was of course kept closely under wraps, you know, the government was awfully sensitive about it. All the papers were giving reports that a monster-like weapon was in the final testing stages, but some of the newspaper accounts were ridiculous. Enrico was given his orders only two days earlier as to exactly where we were to be stationed in the test zone area. Even the local people in New Mexico were told as little as possible; I think the governor and some state officials were told, and sworn to secrecy. "In Alamogordo, we checked into the hotel then drove out to where Enrico had been assigned. It was set up that the scientists were deployed over about a two hundred square mile area; we were about fifteen miles from the target. "The test was set for 4:30 AM the next morning, so we returned to the hotel and went to bed early. We got up at 3 the next morning and drove out to the location, since it took about an hour to set up the test gear Enrico would use ... I suppose it was about 4:15, when a fierce rain storm developed. It lasted only five or ten minutes, but was quite a downpour, and Enrico remarked he hoped nothing would go wrong with the test because of it. "Well, the time came and went, everything was quiet, no bomb, nothing. About 4:45, Enrico decided we had better return to town and see what was what, and we drove back. He wanted to make a phone call and see if the test had been cancelled or not, and the only place open in town at that time of night was the hotel where we had stayed. There was a payphone in the lobby, and Enrico went in the booth, but he didn't get anywhere. I heard him flashing the hook and swearing softly, then he came out and said he could not get the operator. (Alamogordo had manual service at that time, just a small switchboard.) "We got in the car, and Enrico had me drive while he leaned out the window and kept looking overhead at the phone wires. He'd have me turn down one street, then turn back up another street, and finally he said pull the car over and stop. "Where we stopped was in front of a house on one of the residential streets there, but what looked odd to me was on the side of the house, there were hundreds of wires converging, coming in from a dozen telephone poles which all seemed to meet in the back yard or on the side of the house. And all these wires came down out of the sky you might say, and went in the side of the house in a big bundle. "The front porch light was burning, and when we went up on the front porch, the front door was open, but the screen door was latched from the inside. A radio was playing music very softly, and the room was rather dim with just a single light burning. A switchboard sat on one side of the room, and the signal lights on it were flashing off and on like Christmas tree lights. Over by the other corner was a sofa, and a woman was laying on the sofa, obviously sound asleep. This was right about five o'clock, I guess, or a few minutes after. "Enrico banged on the screen door a few times, then kicked it once or twice with his foot. All of a sudden, the lady woke up; she looked over at us very startled, standing at the door; she looked over at the switchboard; looked back at us; jumped up and rushed over to the board and sat down, pausing long enough to light a cigarette and she started frantically answering all the flashing signals. "We got back in the car, and drove out to where we had been before. We were there about five minutes, and the test was conducted. Everything the poets have said about the brilliance and beauty of that first explosion was true.... later, we got together with the others who had been assigned there and found out that it wasn't the rain that delayed things; it was that woman asleep; you see, the main people responsible were linked by phones through Alamogordo; they had to coordinate what they were doing and sychronize their work. All of them got the same thing on the phone we got: no answer from the operator for 45 minutes! "Really, I can't blame the lady much. The whole summer of 1945 was just horrid. When we arrived the day before, the temperature was over a hundred; the poor lady probably couldn't sleep at all that day from the heat, and still had to go to work that night exhausted. Then the rain cooled things off twenty degrees in fifteen minutes; that sofa was just too tempting for her; and probably every other night she only got two or three calls in the whole eight hour shift.... "No one ever said anything to her or the woman who owned the phone exchange there, so I suspect to this day, twenty years later, she doesn't realize she was responsible for causing the first atomic bomb explosion in the world to be delayed for a little over an hour ... but as I think back now, probably someone should have told her ahead of time about that very special morning, and sworn her to secrecy until the test was completed. "When I was there in town two weeks ago for the (twentieth anniversary) reunion, just from curiosity I went past that house; it took me awhile to remember where it was. No wires anywhere like before; and I asked someone there if the phone exchange was there. He told me the 'telephone lady' had been gone for years; Bell or someone had bought it and moved it to a building in the downtown area." ===================== End of Transcription ======================= And that was Laura Fermi talking about the summer of '45 in the desert of New Mexico, in the fall of '65 at a dinner. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #667 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09469; 28 Aug 92 4:07 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20200 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:59 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15822 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:51 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:51 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208280700.AA15822@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #668 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Aug 92 02:00:53 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 668 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (John Higdon) Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Nigel Allen) Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Carl Moore) Re: Weird Intercept (Arthur Rubin) Re: Weird Intercept (Carl Moore) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Carol Springs) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey) Re: 800 Portability (Alan L. Varney) Re: 800 Portability (David G. Lewis) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Mike Proicou) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Mark Boolootian) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Bud Couch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 23:44 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) writes: > Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough to > list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay? I don't have a phone book that old, but memory still serves somewhat. > The one I know in Palo Alto was for the main 32x exchange, known as > "DAvenport," from an old sign. Davenport? What's that have to do with > Palo Alto? Did the phone company just make that up? Funny you mention that. As you head north on Hwy 1 from Santa Cruz you come to a little town called "Davenport". It consists of a general store and gas station. I would guess that it is just over the mountain from Palo Alto (south and west). Of course, I have no idea what if any connection there would be. > And did the 424's, 85x's, 497's and so forth come from anywhere? Possibly the 85x exchange has a name because it dates back into that era, but the other exchanges are new and have no names. But for your amusement here are some in your area: 76x = REgent (Sunnyvale) 96x = YOrkshire (Mountain View) 94x = WHitecliff (Los Altos) 36x = EMpire (Redwood City) 34x = DIamond (San Mateo) In the San Jose area, for some unknown reason, different names were given to prefixes that had the first two digits, even though they were in the same town. Years ago Campbell had three prefixes: 377, 378, and 379. They were named ESsex, FRanklin, and DRexel. Two were in one CO and the third in another. Los Gatos had two: 354 and 356. Both were ELgato and were in separate offices and were served by the "Western California Telephone Company" which was later acquired and hosed by GTE. San Jose had 29x which were all CYpress except 296 which was AXminster and was served out of a Santa Clara office. 24x was CHerry except for 245 which was CHestnut and was actually a Sunnyvale prefix. 25x was split down the middle with about half being ALpine and half being CLayburn. ALpine was westside and Cupertino; CLayburn was eastside. My prefix was named ANdrews, but 262 and 263 were AMhearst and were used in Milpitas. > Where could I find out? I believe the San Jose public library has back issues of the telephone directory. You will need to find a 1961 or earlier edition. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 5:00:34 EDT In Volume 12, Issue 661, dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) asks: > Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough > to list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay? Pacific Bell probably has a historical department that could answer your question. If you are interested in looking at old telephone directories, your local library may have them on microfilm. (In Canada, the Metro Toronto Reference Library has a complete set of all Bell Canada telephone directories ever issued on microfilm.) It's interesting to look at a 1953 directory in which today's office-park suburbs show up as farming communities with manual telephone service. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 12:27:53 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names You could go to a library and look up newspapers on microfilm. Some libraries might even have old telephone directories on microfilm, as was the case in Wilmington, Delaware (where I located a 1960 directory on microfilm and figured from it that the 1965 area code split in Florida was 305/904). [Moderator's Note: The Chicago Public Library has directories from Illinois Bell and Chicago Telephone Company (IBT's 1920's predecessor) going back to 1879. They are all on microfilm, as is a complete set of the {Chicago Tribune} back to October, 1871. They have a few pre-fire copies of the {Tribune) between 1842 and 1871 also. I use the old issues of the papers a lot for reference. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Weird Intercept From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 27 Aug 92 15:29:41 GMT Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) In MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev. unisys.com writes: > I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this > number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're > sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are > using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." (There are > the standard SIT tones at the beginning.) This is odd since I'm > calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. Sounds like a PBX intercept to me. Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer. [Moderator's Note: IBT has a few numbers where they 'store' various funky intercept recordings for whatever reason: 312-856-1520 ==> 1525 always return messages like " ... can't be completed as dialed, please ask your attendant for assistance", " all circuits are busy now", and a particularly odd one used to be in that range of numbers which simply said "the voting has been concluded"(?), plus one that makes sense if you think about it, "the number you have dialed cannot be reached from outside the customer's premises". PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 92 16:52:34 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would still be in 213, not in 310. ------------------------------ From: drilex!carols Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:56:13 EDT In Volume 12, Issue 661, person@plains.nodak.edu (Brett G Person) writes: > Apparently, people [in Minneapolis are getting calls] from a new kind > of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc. It > sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer > that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's > office says that this doesn't violate any laws. > Any comments? Have any of you gotten phome calls like this? Thankfully, not any quite of this nature. But I did get a call the other day that started out, "Hello, there. This is Thomas Something-or-other, your neighbor, and I was wondering: Has anyone ever told you to ... go to hell?" "Well, I just wanted to tell you to ... go to heaven." It was, of course, a recorded pitch for some church; which one, I'm not sure, since I quickly hung up. The message served its purpose as an attention-getter. The recording had low enough background noise that it was hard to identify the call immediately as automated. Especially annoying was that I do have an upstairs neighbor named Tom, with whom I have had conflicts about noise in the past, so there was a considerable adrenalin rush for a second there. I wish now I'd stayed on the line long enough to see if they were taking information, and if so, to respond, um, appropriately. Carol Springs carols@world.std.com [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday morning like they do mine? PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:59:07 GMT In article plains!person@uunet.UU.NET (Brett G Person) writes: > Apparently, people there I getting alls from a new kind of > telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc. It > sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer > that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's > office says that this doesn't violate any laws. I have got calls from a local church, which uses an automated dialer to call in the afternoons and exhort people to attend church. I have also got a call from an automated dialer which is reminding me to vote for the Republican party in the next presidential election. I did not find either of these offensive, although I found them both rather silly wastes of telephone switching capability. scott [Moderator's Note: We have one working hard here at present exhorting whoever answers to be sure and vote Democratic. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? NOTE: The following is opinion -- the details are still being "worked out" in various industry committees. Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory. Since some of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800 databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see an "at once" scenario. A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new database for all 800 calls. Once that total change-over is complete, it will be possible to change the routing of a given number. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? See above NOTE. Correction of problems is a major concern of the industry. Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing against each other??? The only one that comes to mind is the default carrier assigned to equal access lines. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've mentioned, and others. But maintaining them ALL accurately is going to be much harder than building them ever was ... and, of course, you're likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what you're asking the system to do. Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:32:00 GMT In article wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? It's phased, but not the way you're thinking. At some point in time, LECs will begin doing SCP (database) queries of 800 numbers in parallel with six-digit translations in switches; these queries will do six-digit translations in the SCP. At first, these queries will not be used for call processing, just to test the system. After some soak period, the query responses will begin to be used for call processing and the six-digit translations in the switches will be deactivated. After some additional soak period, the SCPs will begin doing ten-digit translations (instead of six-digit translations). At this point, "800 number portability" is available for all 800-NXXs. > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? I believe so, save for some which may be reserved for testing or for network use. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? I believe the bid for 800 DBA (Database Administrator) is still open, but I'm not sure. The 800 DBA will effectively control the 800 number space, because the 800 DBA is the organization which updates the database. I don't know if the upstream information flows (customer -> 800 DBA) have been well-defined yet. (For that matter, I don't know how well-defined the downstream information flows -- 800 DBA -> 800 SMSs -> 800 SCPs -- are ... but given the organizations involved, I have a little more confidence in that area than in the upstream area ...) As to responsibility for routing problems, that's an interesting question. Issues of incorrect routing will have to be resolved by the originating LEC, the 800 DBA, the customer, and any and all involved 800 service providers. This is one of the operational issues that is critical to the success of 800 number portability, and probably one of the ones that some companies (among which my employer is one) have been insisting must be well-defined before 800 NP is implemented. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). Bellcore calls these "vertical services"; I believe the plan is that they are a "phase 2" implementation of the 800 database service. Disclaimer 1: This information is drawn from memory of another AT&T person's presentation on the 800 number portability implementation plan. I accept full responsibility for any errors ... is there anyone out there, say, from Bellcore SS7 Project Management who might be able to correct any of them? Disclaimer 2: My views, not AT&T's, etc., etc. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 09:08:45 MDT From: proicou@merlin.plk.af.mil (Mike Proicou) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Organization: Parallel Processing Group, Phillips Lab In article dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > What is happening is that the contracts between the DOE sites and AT&T > are up for renewal and apparently Sandia is going with another company > for their long distance carrier. > My employer, Brookhaven National Laboratory, is negotiating a contract > right now and I don't know who the players are at the present time. Nahh, that's not it. AT&T through Bell Labs through Sandia Corp. is the operating contractor for SNL. All of the DOE labs and plants are GOCO (government owned-contractor operated) facilities. BNL is operated by something like Associated Universities, Inc. isn't it? Los Alamos is operated by the University of California. Oak Ridge by Martin Marietta Energy Systems. The word in town is that DOE is pushing for the contractors to operate the labs for profit (instead of the cost + $1). In exchange, DOE wants the contractor to accept liability for cleaning up any environmental problems. Doesn't sound like a bargain to me. I'm across base at the Air Force's Phillips Lab, so this is all just stuff in the papers and rumors. Mike Proicou (505) 846-2227 Phillips Laboratory/WSP Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-6008 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 08:50:21 PDT From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes) writes: > I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close. My father has > worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and > indirectly most of the population of Albuquerque, NM -- my home town -- > would be effected by its closing. It should be noted that there is more than one Sandia lab: Sandia, Livermore is right across the street from LLNL. I have not heard rumours of a shutdown (and I'd be very surprised if it actually came to that). LLNL is in the process of renegotiating its contract with the University of California. This occurs every five years (at least for LLNL). If the UC were to opt to no longer manage LLNL (which was a real possibility for awhile), we would begin the search for another organization to manage us. I seriously doubt we would shut down. Mark Boolootian booloo@llnl.gov +1 510 423 1948 ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:05:06 GMT In article oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes) writes: > haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) writes: >> I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve >> as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy >> Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is > I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close. My father has > worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and > I suspect that AT&T's decision to not renew the contract to operate > Sandia is related to the large number of lay off's that have been > occuring at the AT&T division around here, the automation of operator > services, and the other steps that they seem to be taking to > streamline operations. I really doubt that AT&T's decision to drop the management of Sandia is in any way related to the "automation of operator services". Since your father worked there, I assume you know what they did, but maybe a lot of netters aren't aware: the Department of Energy label is a bit of a smokescreen. Sandia Labs was operated by (originally Western Electric Government Operations) AT&T to do weapons work, i.e. "The Bomb". No, I think that AT&T simply saw that, with end of the Cold War, the government teat labeled "defense" was drying up, and big bucks were no longer guarenteed. I thought that Lawrence-Livermore and Sandia had been combined under some sort of common management awhile back, but I could be wrong on that. Does anyone if this management change affects Lawrence-Livermore? Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew ... standard BS applies ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #668 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13851; 30 Aug 92 18:02 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07156 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:22 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16892 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:12 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:12 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302109.AA16892@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #669 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:09:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 669 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Mark W. Schumann) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (John Higdon) Re: 800 Portability (Alan L. Varney) Re: 800 Portability (David G. Lewis) Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Walter R. Trachim) Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (John Higdon) Re: Proper use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Julian Macassey) Re: 66 and 110 Punchdown Blocks (Pat Turner) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 18:58:23 GMT Here in California, recorded message calls must be preceeded by a live person who: 1. Identifies him or herself. 2. States the nature and duration of the message. 3. Asks wheter you are willing to listen to the message. 4. Disconnects if you refuse. These rules do not apply to calls from outside the state of California or to calls placed by businesses to preexisting customers. If you receive a recorded message call which fails to do all of the above and wish to make a complaint, your local Business Office will need to know the name of the individual or business making the call. I've received several calls that do not comply with these requirements, and have, where the caller is identified, turned them over to the local business office. Have never gotten a call that complies with the requirements. Harold ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 13:31 EDT From: catfood@wariat.org (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Publi Access UNI* Site I would think that anyone calling you could be cited for harrassment if you asked him/her to stop calling and were ignored. IMHO, if the caller chooses not to listen to you (by automating the call), that is the caller's problem. The first time you get one of those calls, ask the computer to refrain from calling ever again. The second time, you can prosecute. :-) Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA Preferred: mark@whizbang.wariat.org | Alternative: catfood@wariat.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:53 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota On Aug 28 at 2:00, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like > that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday > morning like they do mine? PAT] As a matter of fact, a Saturday morning phone call OR a Saturday morning visit from the Jehovah's Witnesses would be handled about the same way. My front door is equipped with the doorphone option on my Panasonic hybrid. Someone comes to the door, I reach over and "answer the phone", and tell whoever it is to "shove it under the door" and go away. Then I hang up and go back to sleep. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? NOTE: The following is opinion -- the details are still being "worked out" in various industry committees. Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory. Since some of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800 databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see an "at once" scenario. A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new database for all 800 calls. Once that total change-over is complete, it will be possible to change the routing of a given number. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? See above NOTE. Correction of problems is a major concern of the industry. Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing against each other??? The only one that comes to mind is the default carrier assigned to equal access lines. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've mentioned, and others. But maintaining them ALL accurately is going to be much harder than building them ever was. And, of course, you're likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what you're asking the system to do. Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 13:32:00 GMT In article wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? It's phased, but not the way you're thinking. At some point in time, LECs will begin doing SCP (database) queries of 800 numbers in parallel with six-digit translations in switches; these queries will do six-digit translations in the SCP. At first, these queries will not be used for call processing, just to test the system. After some soak period, the query responses will begin to be used for call processing and the six-digit translations in the switches will be deactivated. After some additional soak period, the SCPs will begin doing ten-digit translations (instead of six-digit translations). At this point, "800 number portability" is available for all 800-NXXs. > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? I believe so, save for some which may be reserved for testing or for network use. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? I believe the bid for 800 DBA (Database Administrator) is still open, but I'm not sure. The 800 DBA will effectively control the 800 number space, because the 800 DBA is the organization which updates the database. I don't know if the upstream information flows (customer -> 800 DBA) have been well-defined yet. (For that matter, I don't know how well-defined the downstream information flows -- 800 DBA -> 800 SMSs -> 800 SCPs -- are ... but given the organizations involved, I have a little more confidence in that area than in the upstream area...) As to responsibility for routing problems, that's an interesting question. Issues of incorrect routing will have to be resolved by the originating LEC, the 800 DBA, the customer, and any and all involved 800 service providers. This is one of the operational issues that is critical to the success of 800 number portability, and probably one of the ones that some companies (among which my employer is one) have been insisting must be well-defined before 800 NP is implemented. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). Bellcore calls these "vertical services"; I believe the plan is that they are a "phase 2" implementation of the 800 database service. Disclaimer 1: This information is drawn from memory of another AT&T person's presentation on the 800 number portability implementation plan. I accept full responsibility for any errors... is there anyone out there, say, from Bellcore SS7 Project Management who might be able to correct any of them? Disclaimer 2: My views, not AT&T's, etc., etc. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 09:52:55 -0400 From: walt@unhsst.unh.edu (Walter R. Trachim) Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool Organization: UNH Network Services, Durham, NH > How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the > end gets trimmed? > My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and > then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never > seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? In my experience, it depends on a number of things: 1.) the quality of the cross-connect you're using, 2.) whether or not the block is new, e.g., how many times connections have been made on the positions you're working with on the 66 block and whether or not there are indents under the pins, and 3.) the sharpness of the blade. As far as punching more than once on a wire, that depends on how well the wire was punched after the first hit. Sometimes it will go down on one try. But more often than not having to whack on it more than once is the rule rather than the exception. > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one > color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems > to trim the cable.) If you look on the yellow side of your tool, you should see the word "CUT" in bold letters at the blade end. If you install you 66 blade with the uneven side out, the lip of the blade should be on the yellow side for cutting. Same goes if you're using a 110/88 blade; it has a hook on one side, and that's used for cutting the end off of the x-connect. Walter R. Trachim University of New Hampshire - Office of Telecom and Network Services Telecommunications Center, Durham, NH 03824 walt_trachim@unh.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 11:00 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes: > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? That is sometimes necessary, but ... > Does any one color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side > on mine seems to trim the cable.) The tool is shipped with the CUTTING end inside the handle. You are apparently using the NON-CUTTING end. Loosen the big screw near the blade, pull the blade out, swing it around, push it back in, and tighten the screw. You will see that one side of the blade now has a sharp ridge that will trim the copper wire. It will be obvious which way to hold the tool (you do not want to cut the business end of the wire, but rather the excess). John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool Date: 30 Aug 92 16:22:05 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 4 of 6 > How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the > end gets trimmed? > My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and > then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never > seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one > color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems > to trim the cable.) Your description is not clear. So lets make some assumptions. You are using a springloaded punchdown tool. The tool has a bit on the end of it that is reversable. You usually reverse these by loosening a screw or a collet. One end of the bit is for punching and cutting, the other end is for punching only -- used when looping wire across several blocks. The cutting end has a knife blade on one side. If that blade is blunt or you are using the end without the blade. The wire will not get cut. Get a new bit, they cost about $10.00, worth it every time. > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? A good tool with a sharp bit will punch and cut with one simple stroke. If it takes two, sharpen the blade or replace it. > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one > color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems > to trim the cable.) The colours are an indication of the manufacturer. If you can't see the blade, you don't have one. Take out the bit and reverse it, or buy a new bit. Some punchdown tools have a legend "Blade" on the handle to help orient the user. If this is not clear, stop a telco installer - the guys and girls with the macho tool belts. Ask how to use and adjust a puncdown tool. Easier to use than a revolver -- much more fun. Both look good on your hip. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:13 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: 66 and 110 Punchdown Blocks Gabe M Wiener writes: > How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the > end gets trimmed? I can think of three likely reasons you aren't getting good results: 1) Dull blade (You may be able to inprove this a little with a whetstone but usually blades used by non-pros get nicked from being dropped and such.) 2) Wrong wire, 22-26 AWG PIC or PVC wire works best. Broadcasters will often use them for stranded wire and 20 ga wire. 3) You are aware that the blade has two ends, one of which cuts and terminates, and the other which just terminates. The inpact is supposed to be adjustable, though I've never noticed a difference from adjusting this control. > My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and > then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never > seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. One impact should be enough > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? Not that I know of. > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one s the cutting side if the cutting end of a > blade is used. Jonathan Edwards writes: > What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks? I am wiring my > house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET. All the wires > will end-run to the blocks in the basement. Should I use 110 or 66M > blocks? If you are going to use ethernet, I would opt for the 110 if you can borrow the tools to install them. I am assuming you are familar with the 66 blocks. The 110 blocks were developed by AT&T as part of their Premise Distribution System (PDS). 110 Blocks are composed of two parts, a wiring block built in units of four strips, each holding 25 pair. The wiring is positioned on the wiring block and a connector block is punched down of top of them. Connector blocks are available with capacities of two, three, four, and five pair, and contain the actual insulation displacement clips. The building wiring or cable from a PBX or other equipiment goes under the blocks and jumpers are run on top of the connector blocks. Both the wiring block and the connector block are color coded. [Moderator's Note: Two sentences here were scrambled and unreadable. PAT] 110 Blocks are designed for 22-26 AWG PIC and PVC wire. In this respect they are not as versatile as 66 blocks. They are however, supposed to be better for high speed data and use much less space. Northen Telecom has a similar product called BIX. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com [Moderator's Note: This article arrived with several control characters imbedded in it and various instances of letters left out of words entirely. It has been reconstructed as I think he meant it with the exception of a couple sentences I simply could not figure out. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #669 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14972; 30 Aug 92 18:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07066 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:24 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07838 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:16 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:16 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302142.AA07838@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #670 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:42:20 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 670 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (Android Rubin) Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (Pat Turner) Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (John Gilbert) Re: PacBell Message Center Woes (John Higdon) Re: PacBell Message Center Woes (Sam Drake) Re: Voice Message Service (John Higdon) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Laird P. Broadfield) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Pat Turner) Re: 110 vs. 66M Blocks (David Ptasnik) Re: 800 Portability (Steve Forrette) Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Michael Rosen) Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Will Martin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: arubin@Apple.COM (Android Rubin) Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? Date: 30 Aug 92 20:54:33 GMT Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA In article schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) writes: > Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is > this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a > catalog? Graybar 2345 Paragon Dr San Jose, CA (408) 441-9009 Andy arubin@apple.com ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 21:10 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? > Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is > this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a > catalog? You should have looked in the phonebook first. Graybar Electric has a office in Manhattan. The phone number I have is (212) 219 8840 They are set up to do counter sales, and will set up an account for almost anyone. (volume-wise at least, I'm sure you have to be in D&B, or otherwise have good credit) They will also take cash, check, or credit card at least in the southeast. They do have a catalog, but it's quite large, you may want to ask for a mini-catalog in your area of interest. Similar companies would include Anixter, Alltel, and North Supply. Alltel, if I remember correctly, includes prices in their catalog. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:31:40 GMT > Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is > this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a > catalog? Greybar "Your One Source Supplier" has regional warehouses and sales offices throughout the country. They do have a catalog. In Chicago they are at: 900 Regency Drive Glendale Hts. Il 60139 (708) 893-3600 (800) BUY-ELEC (Chicago area only) (708) 893-3650 FAX Some of the 100+ other places: Boston 617-482-9320 NY 212-219-8840 LA 213-265-7000 Atlanta 404-355-1040 Miami 305-325-0910 Houston 713-224-6831 John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 00:14 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: PacBell Message Center Woes stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu (Jeff Stieglitz) writes: > Just what is the problem with Pacific Bell's Message Center? I have a number of associates who have (for whatever reasons) Pac*Bell's Message Center. On the basis of their experiences I have opted to pass on the service for myself. The Message Center has been and still is plagued with difficulties of every description. I remember some inside scuttlebutt about the firm who was awarded the contract. Officials of the company supplying the VM equipment felt that they had it made in the shade when Pac*Bell selected their wares for The Message Center, but a number of Pac*Bell types shuddered in disbelief. The vendor selection was apparently based upon considerations other than performance and quality. IMHO, Pac*Bell is going for the "GTE Service Award" with this one. The Message Center regularly loses messages, does not answer the phone when it is supposed to, and has, according to my associates, done a number of other very quirky things. It is a breeze to hack, so your messages are not very secure; the amount of recording time you can store is severely limited; it is unreliable in recording; it is unreliable in retrieval; and it is more expensive than an answering machine in the long run. My advice would be to by a machine. Pac*Bell seems to be completely unable to do anything about it -- probably because the system is fatally flawed to begin with. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: Oddly enough, Ameritech's system operates quite well using equipment from a company in Texas called Tygon, which coincidentally happens to be an Ameritech subsidiary. Everyone has their own taste of course, but technically our telephone 'voicemail' is a decent product. I have it at home. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: PacBell Message Center Woes Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:03:26 -0800 From: Sam Drake Here in Northern CA, the Message Center was sick a lot last week, too. Rather than having the problem you mentioned, here the system was UP but didn't seem to be getting ANI from the main phone system. So if you called to get your messages it didn't know what number you were calling from and asked you to key it in. Worse, if someone called your number, rather than getting your recording / beep, they got a message center recording asking them to enter my "mailbox number" ... THEN they got my recording and the beep. I had the message center for four months, and had two major problems with it. Last week's failure was the final straw; I cancelled and plugged my "old fashioned" answering machine back into the wall. Pfui. Actually, the final straw was when I called Message Center repair to complain. The person I talked to actually told me to call all my friends and tell them that my "mailbox number" was equal to my "phone number", so my friends would know what to do if they called me and got the semi-broken Message Center. As {Consumer Reports} might say, I judged this suggestion Not Acceptable. Sam Drake / IBM Almaden Research Center Internet: drake@almaden.ibm.com BITNET: DRAKE at ALMADEN ------------------------------ Organization: Green Hills and Cows From: zygot!john@apple.com (John Higdon) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 15:01:13 PDT Reply-To: John Higdon Subject: Re: Voice Message Service On Aug 27 at 15:37, Scott Hinckley +1 205 650 0400 writes: > Around here only the COCOTs offer that leave a message on busy service. > Of course they charge much more for it ($1.00 I believe). I did not see a price for the Pac*Bell proposal. Do you know that it is actually cheaper? You bring up an interesting point, however. Notice how as with the information providing business, the field has been tried and tested by true entrepreneurs who had to put up real risk capital to try out their ideas. Once a market seems to be viable, then the telco muscles its way into the market with its network control and ratepayer subsidization. Then it offers a better product at a cheaper price, putting the competition out of business. Of course it does this with free money and its superior network access. Sidebar: Free Money: If the venture is successful, then no venture capitalists must be paid off. If it fails, then the telco goes to the PUC with a rate increase to cover its losses. Win/win. It sure is a good thing for the LECs that there are plenty of suckers out there willing to try out new technologies and markets. That way, the telcos can sit back, watch for new markets that look attractive, and then take over the ones that appear to hold promise for high profits. Note: The above correspondent asked that I submit his comment. It is herewith submitted at the top of this message in its entirety complete with my remarks. A two for one bonus! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Date: 30 Aug 92 02:47:10 GMT In oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov writes: > In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill > St. Louis) writes: >> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will >> work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) >> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will >> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? > Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an > MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If > you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for > them. The RJ45 will not work. Ummmm, careful there. I'm not sure (since he mentions a "notch") that he means an MMJ. There's also the "keyed RJ45" still floating around out there. Whether it's RJ45keyed *or* MMJ, the answer is still "no", though, the regular RJ45 plugs will not physically enter the jack. (This is an entirely different problem from the fact that everone seems to have chosen their own standard for not only what to carry on each pair, but even which pins go to which pairs, and even which pins *are* paired. Anyone who can explain the logic behind the AT&T pair arrangement wins a prize.) Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 21:11 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? > Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an > MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If > you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for > them. The RJ45 will not work. > The jacks are the same, except for the notch. The difference is in > the cable. A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so > that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end. A notched > cable is wired straight. Actually two different connectors are being discussed. The MMJ is a six conductor modular plug whose top "key" (with the locking lever) is offset so it is asymetrical when viewed from the front. As the first author said it uses RJ type modular plugs. The RJ 45 is a eight conductor version of the RJ11, with an enlarged "shell" and is available in both keyed and unkeyed versions. The latter is usually used for voice telecommunications, and often for data as well. The unkeyed versions will fit either jack. As the second author stated analog RJ45 cables and unigender connectors are crosspinned (1-8, 2-7, 3-6,..). Dcom cables are straight pinned. RJ11/12/14's will plug into a keyed or unkeyed RJ45 jack, usually w/o any problem. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 17:29:50 -0700 (PDT) From: David Ptasnik Subject: Re: 110 vs. 66M Blocks edwards@world.std.com (Jonathan Edwards) wrote: > What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks? I am wiring my > house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET. All the wires > will end-run to the blocks in the basement. Should I use 110 or 66M > blocks? The technicians at the University of Washington (where I am an analyst) won't let me have a punch tool, they say that it would be to horrible to imagine. They are probably right. Still, I asked them the same question one day, as a group of them were roundly cursing the new 110 blocks. The 110 blocks take up a lot less wall space. As we were wiring outlets every 15 feet with four sets of four pair, this was VERY important. They claim, however, that the 66's are a lot easier to punch, and that you can punch more wires onto the same post (for those occasions where several single line phones share a line) than you can with the 110's, and that the 66's give you a good connection more reliably. 110's also use different punch tools for most efficient use (I think you are supposed to be able to punch five wires at a time on a 110)(when it works right). They also claimed that it was much easier to hook a test set up to 66 blocks for trouble testing (clip leads instead of a special connector). Overall the 110 review from this crew on that day was extremely negative. I suspect that a negative reaction to a "new" thing was part of it. Techs seem to be a pretty conservative lot. Your mileage will vary. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:17:16 GMT In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) writes: > Correction of problems is a major concern of the > industry. Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases > with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing > against each other??? The only one that comes to mind is the default > carrier assigned to equal access lines. Problems with the 800 database will be of much larger scale than with the equal access default. In most cases, incorrect settings of the equal access PIC result in billing problems only. Call completion is so uniform between the carriers for 1+ calls that spurious PIC changes are often not noticed for some period of time (like when the bill arrives). However, any problem with the 800 database is likely to bring all calls to the affected 800 number to a screeching halt, as no carrier other than the correct one is likely to know what to do with the call. At least this will remove the motive for carriers to slam. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:40:50 GMT I was watching Nickelodeon for Ren and Stimpy last weekend and noticed that in between features they have some sort of call in contest for kids watching. I only saw this twice, and both times the kids were calling in on AT&T Picturephones. They even said, "we've got Kim on the line with her AT&T Picturephone," or something to that effect. It was a jerky picture, probably taking multiple still-frames every few seconds. Is Nick doing some kind of promotion with these phones that everybody calling has one? Oh, I thought it was cool how they piped the Picturephone picture onto the screen. Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 8:01:03 CDT From: Will Martin Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News Regarding the TV Jukebox channel discussion: Here in St. Louis, this is an over-the-air service on Low-Power TV Channel 58. (I suppose you can also get it through some or all of the cable services but I don't have cable so don't know for sure.) Anyway, I'm glad the topic came up, since I have several questions about it which I've never known where to ask! 1) Is this a nationwide service, fed from a satellite, so that everyone all over the country (or continent, or wherever) is seeing the same video at the same time, and there is one master "jukebox" feeding these videos in response to te 900-number calls? Or is this a localized service in which each region has their own "jukebox", so that what I see here in St. Louis may be entirely different from what is seen in another region? 2) Is there one single 900 number for the whole nation, going into that "central" site mentioned above, or different 900 numbers for each area? Or does a single 900 number feed into separate local "jukeboxes" depending on the geographic location of the caller? 3) Does this system use laserdiscs of the videos or what? Can anyone provide a summary of the hardware that drives it? 4) I note the three-digit codes for specifying songs skip over intervening numbers in the index displays -- for example, it could go 789, 790, 792, 794, etc. Are the skipped numbers actually invalid, or do they still point to previously-advertised selections which are still in the system? Is it possible to get these people to send you a "master list" of all the three-digit codes and what songs they point to if you call one of the 800 numbers they run? Regards, Will wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #670 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16851; 30 Aug 92 19:16 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16980 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:25 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14741 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:16 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:16 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302226.AA14741@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #671 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:26:13 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 671 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: GTE California Changes (Richard Nash) Re: GTE California Changes (Gordon Burditt) Re: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) (Leonard Erickson) Re: Monitoring Radio Broadcasts in England (John Pettitt) Re: Monitoring of Royal Telephone Calls (Richard Cox) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Leonard Erickson) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Charlie Mingo) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (William Sohl) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 10:02:35 -0600 From: rickie@trickie.uucp (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: GTE California Changes Jeff Sicherman writes: > In article HOLDREGE_MP PacifiCare@mcimail.com> writes: >> John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in >> Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the >> incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas. >> A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing >> effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North >> Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. > Does this mean they will be programming the computers to ignore and > throw away trouble tickets ? Most network operations, surveillance operators have a pre-programmed hot-key on their workstations that brings up the ticket and automatically closes it with a "no trouble found". :) :) All they have to do while watching TV on the big impressive network status screen, is wait for the beep! Of course some types have unofficially programmed the workstations to completely do this, recognizing key trouble phrases such as NDT (no dial tone) and dispatching accordingly. A cross reference of trouble phrases to standard results has been built up over the years and much like the old artificial intelligence program ELIZA, can make about the same apparent intelligent decision. SNITS, Switching Network Intelligent Testing and Surveillance program is written in different flavors, (to accurately reflect the locale jargon). :) :) :) -- Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: GTE California Changes Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 08:41:33 GMT > Probably no one. But then I doubt that you will notice any service > level reduction. It could not get much worse. I have reported trouble > in the Los Gatos CO on a Friday night, but of course it is Monday or > Tuesday before GTE can fly someone up from southern California to fix > it. John Higdon, you need to stage a coup on a GTE central office. Move yourself and your office into one. Change around a few street signs. Re-paint the outside of the building. Change the locks. It will probably be at least a month before they notice that they can't find the CO, and at least another year before they admit it. If you point the street signs so they think that your current home is the CO, well, they might be fooled indefinitely if you leave all your telecom gear in place. You do have to be careful, though. You need to keep generating and ignoring fake trouble tickets, because if you spend a few minutes a day fixing stuff, there won't be enough real ones. That few minutes a day paying for free phone service will be worth it, and you'll be providing service instead of feeding the Department of Excuses (today's excuse: Lunar Flares!). Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 11:45:20 GMT jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) writes: > The message finally got through and they fixed it on Friday. While I > had their attention, I asked if they could please change my security > code from 1234 to something a bit more secure. "Sorry, it's > hardcoded" was the reply. I don't believe it. And I am surely not > going to pay for any calls when someone discovers this. Ask them to change it again. And insist on *written confirmation* that they can't change it. Then if you do get nailed, you'll have hard evidence that you *couldn't* have prevented it. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 22:47 PDT From: jpp@StarConn.com (John Pettitt) Subject: Re: Monitoring Radio Broadcasts in England In a recent Digest Mr. Chew asks if it is legal to monitor radio conversations in the UK. The answer is NO. What is more should you accidentally hear somebody elses conversation divulging the content is also illegal. The Wireless Telegraphy Act(s) (there are several I believe) prohibit doing just about anything in this area (unless you are GCHQ the UK equivilent of the NSA :-) Now in practice I have never come across anybody who has been prosecuted under the WT act. (I was arrested once for having a CB radio but that is another story :-). [I wonder the reference to GCHQ and NSA will cause this post to be read in those organisations - I you are a spook reading this why not send me some mail and say hi :-) :-) :-) ] John Pettitt jpp@starconn.com Archer N81034 apple!starnet!jpp Fax: +1 415 967 8682 Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX [Moderator's Note: Actually, no keywords are required. The Digest has a number of subscribers in federal agencies including NSA. All they have to do to see your message is read this issue when it arrives in their mail. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:08 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: Monitoring of Royal Telephone Calls Reply-To: mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk Laurence Chiu writes: >> the current scandal is the publication of recording of intimate phone >> conversations between Princess Diana and some unidentified "friend" in >> which the subject matter is embarrassing to say the least. >> The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just idly scanning the >> airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up the cell-phone >> frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that the UK >> authorities had decided not to take any action against him. If we are to believe what the British papers tell us, two separate people "just happened" to buy a scanner, and recorded separate parts of that conversations [not last week but some considerable time ago] and then by coincidence the transcripts appear in the press, followed almost immediately by the official statement that the persons making and publishing the contents of the recordings would not be prosecuted. It would be most surprising if those papers had carried that material without some form of advance guarantee that no action would be taken against them. I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. Richard Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 222 747111 Fax: +44 222 711111 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 11:53:56 GMT voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell)> writes: >> It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any >> mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it. >> This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even >> covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time >> to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one >> else. > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it > would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, > that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have > legitimately obtained. Check the Communications Act of 1933. That's where this comes from. And I think it's a matter of them *allowing* you to listen to private communications that cross yourproperty via radio. But you aren't allowed to distribute the info to others. It's stood up in court for a *long* time. And it is a situation that is not all that black and white. I believe that some folks have actually argued in court along the lines of "if I'm not allowed to listen to it, make them stop sending it to me!" With the exception of the nonense about cellular phone monitoring that crept into ECPA, this policy still holds pretty well. The only real change was that you are not allowed to decrypt transmissions that have been encryupted for purposes of privacy. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) [Moderator's Note: The argument which goes 'make them stop sending it to me and bombarding me with radio waves' has been tested in court on various occassions and always found by the court to be specious and puerile. Its like arguing about income taxes on the basis of whether the IRS is legally allowed to do it; ie, the irregularities under which the income tax came into being, the vote in Ohio, etc. The court says 'YOU LOSE!' PAT] ------------------------------ From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:00:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not > royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of > intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some > unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to > say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just > idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up > the cell-phone frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that > the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him. From what I gather from the British papers, there is no prohibition on eavesdropping on cellular or cordless calls. There is some sort of restriction on "using" material heard over the air, but it is not being enforced in this case. I remember thinking when recently reading _Diana: Her True Story_ that the royals seem to use cordless phones in strong preference to corded, even for the most intimate of conversations. Charles would reportedly take the phone into his bath to have a private chat with his mistress, Camilla Parker-Bowes. (Diana would discover this by pressing the redial button after he came out, and getting the P-B residence.) Also, the royals seem to use something they call a "scrambler," which is supposed to make their calls uninterceptable. I suspect it is nothing more than an audio-inverter, since there is no key used to control it (just tell the other party to "go to scrambler"). British laws concerning wiretapping in general seem to be rather loose. Recently, members of the press recorded conversations between the Minister of National Heritage (David Mellior) and his mistress, by tapping into an extension socket at the flat the mistress was using. They apparently had the *landlord's* permission, but not that of either party to the conversation. According to the {Sunday Times}, this activity broke no laws. ------------------------------ From: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET (22501-sohl) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts; Cordless, Cellular, etc. Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:46:14 GMT In article lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu > (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: >> What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band >> radio and heard a newsworthy event? Could he or she legitimately be >> punished for reporting this information? Reporters do this all the time, although they probably do not rely on only what they heard to generate the story. Our local town weekly newspaper office has a scanner on all the time. They use it to learn what is happening and then often follow up with a story on the incident. I personally don't ever want to see any more restrictions on listening to what is being freely broadcast into the airways. I especially don't ever want to see any restrictions on the manufacture, sale and/or possession of any type of radio receiving equipment. This country does NOT need the "electronics police" to be looking over anyone's shoulder to be sure their radio equipment doesn't receive certain frequency bands, etc. Laurence Chiu writes: > Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not > royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of > intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some > unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to > say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just > idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up > the cell-phone frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that > the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him. While I'm no authority, I have heard that many other countries place severe restrictions on listening to certain types of broadcasts (eg. police, government, etc.) and some have restrictions on ownership of certain types of radio receiving equipment also. The bottom line in my opinion is that anyone that is concerned about other people listening to any radio communication they may be involved in had better resort to encryption to insure the security of their radio communications. After many years of effort here in New Jersey we finally got a 50 year old law changed that made it illegal to possess a radio (ie. scanner) in an automobile that could receive police, fire, etc. Because the law was so broad in scope and the current scanner frequency coverage so vast the law effectly made it illegal to have any type of scanner in a car since the police frequencies are all over the spectrum. We even had some ham radio operators prosecuted because their ham radio transciever included a receive capability that included police frequencies. The new state law does not make possession or use of a radio illegal, the law prohibits misuse of any information heard. Last night on New York TV channel 5 (Fox network) there was a brief news item (10pm news) where they showed how easy it is to listen to cordless (as well as cellular) telephones with a typical inexpensive (under $200) scanner. They did have an FBI person indicate it is illegal to listen to cellular, but they also pointed out that there is no prohibition against listening to cordless phones. From my perspective, they, at least, did not try to make any case against the manufacture, sale or possession of scanners in the news report. The news item seemed to be targeted as an informative piece to caution folks that their communications over cordless (as well as cellular) phones may be overheard by evesdropers. Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!dancer!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: Adrienne Voorhis Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 9:44:59 EDT Recently I, ( Adrienne Voorhis) asked: > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I appreciate the responses I received and found them helpful, but I don't think they sufficiently answered my question. First of all, I am not a First Amendment absolutist. I am aware of and fully support just about all of the restrictions to the "freedom of speech" clause that the Supreme Court has promulgated, such as libel laws. Second, I am not questioning that the state can preserve the confidentiality of these broadcasts. I merely question how, on the one hand, the government can classify these broadcasts as being in the "public domain" by freely allowing private citizens to monitor them, yet on the other hand prohibit them from ever being discussed. Steve Forrette responded: > I do know that there is a common misconception that the various > amendments prevent any restrictions whatsoever on certain activities. Agreed. > There are many cases where "lawfully obtained" information can be > legally discussed: > - The tried and true "fire in a theater" example. > - Trade secrets that you legally obtain in the course of employment. These examples demonstrate only that the First Amendment is not absolute. I don't think they really answer my question. There is no prohibition against telling people there is a fire in a theater, only against *yelling* "fire" in a crowded theater when the person knows that it's *false*. This is merely a "time, place, and manner restriction" on knowingly false and dangerous speech designed solely to create a public safety hazard. Here, I am talking about presumably true information that a private citizen is being prohibited from discussing, even for legitimate purposes of public debate. The trade secrets example is more to the point because it shows that speech can sometimes be restricted based on content. However the analogy fails because the restriction is only enforceable because the employee voluntarily agreed in advance not to disclose this information as part of a written contract with his employer. A news reporter scanning the airwaves has not entered into any such agreement. Michael A. Covington responded: > Hmmm? Never heard of confidentiality? Of course I have. However, I am also aware that even when the press publishes confidential information -- even secret goverment information -- they cannot be punished for it as long as they committed no crime in obtaining it and reasonably believed the information is correct. The government went after Daniel Ellsburg for disclosing the Pentagon Papers, not the {New York Times}. > The law simply imposes a kind of confidentiality on people who, > through technological pursuits, come into possession of other people's > private messages. Just like telephone repair personnel, mail > carriers, etc. I agree that the law should be able to classify certain information as confidential and prohibit private citizens from using electronic devices to obtain it in the first place (such as the person who uses electronic eavesdropping equiptment to overhear a private conversation inside someones home). I also agree that the state can prohibit those who service communications media, such as telephone repair personnel and mail carriers, from disclosing this information outside the scope of their employment, to ensure the privacy of the media itself. But these legitimate restrictions all treat the communications as confidential in the first place, unlike the one I question that gives private citizens the right to monitor them. > The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 goes further: it > forbids _listening_ to private radio communications (cellular phones, > ship-to-shore phones, etc.). But it also makes it clear that I believe this act is defensible, because it *classifies* certain communications as confidential before it restricts their dissemination. I don't question that the state can say you can't report conversations concerning private matters that you shouldn't be hearing in the first place. The whole purpose of the "freedom of speech" clause is to allow the citizens to freely discuss almost any matter without fear of government reprisal. The government can obviously create certain carefully deleneated exceptions, such as those I have agreed to above, based on overriding public policy concerns. But it is fundamentally unfair, and I believe inconsistent with the First Amendment, for the state to say to private citizens and the press "Go ahead and listen," but then say "You can never talk about it." Don't worry, Pat. I don't plan to continually stand on a soapbox and reply to future posts with impassioned comments on freedom of speech. I am simply curious if any TD subscribers are aware of a reasoned basis, or court approval, for the particular restriction on freedom of speech that this particular restriction imposes. Adrienne Voorhis Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx, New York Just MY opinion.... [Moderator's Note: I do not believe you are correct in saying you can 'state there is a fire in a theatre as long as you do not shout it.' If this were true, then you should be able to make false utterances to 911 with impunity. As a matter of fact the law in most (all?) states says that to declare an emergency exists when there is no emergency is a crime. To call 911 because you like to see and hear fire trucks racing down the street is a crime; your free speech rights don't take priority here. In actual practice here in Chicago, ONE false alarm is usually written off as 'mistaken citizen trying to be helpful', but subsequent false alarms will get you sued by the City of Chicago. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #671 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18385; 30 Aug 92 19:55 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15978 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:03:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26642 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:02:55 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:02:55 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302302.AA26642@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #672 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:03:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 672 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Weird Intercept (Robert S. Helfman) Re: Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens) Re: Weird Intercept (Mark Rudholm) Re: Weird Intercept (John Higdon) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Aubrey Philipsz) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Anthony Clifton) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Laurence Chiu) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Julian Macassey) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Leonard Erickson) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Marc Unangst) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Hans Ridder) Re: Modem Noise on Line (John Rice) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:21:27 GMT In article cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB) writes: > All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would > still be in 213, not in 310. I don't know what question prompted the above reply. The 663- (once-upon-a-time NOrmandie prefix) is mid-Wilshire-up-to- Hollywood, right around Normandie Avenue -- very definitely nowhere near the 213/310 boundary. ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 30 AUG 92 05:20 Subject: Re: Weird Intercept a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes: > In MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev. > unisys.com writes: >> I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached >> this number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says >> "We're sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone >> you are using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." >> (There are the standard SIT tones at the beginning.) This is odd >> since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. > Sounds like a PBX intercept to me. As far as I know, our PBX never gives voice intercepts (but it is very fond of reorder). Also, the intercept does have the standard SIT tones. The problem only occurs if I try and dial it as a normal PacBell call, that is, by dialing 9 for an outside line, then 1-213-663-xxxx. If I dial it via our long-distance network, or via MCI or Sprint, it works fine. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com >>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<< Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:37:10 PDT From: aimla!ruby!rudholm@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Rudholm) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept In TELECOM Digest V12, I668, Message 5 cmoore@BRL.MIL writes: > All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would > still be in 213, not in 310. 663 is in 213 but much of the city of L.A. is not in 213 (parts are in 818 and 310). But prefixes that are _labelled_ as "Los Angeles" by TPC are all in 213*. Some prefixes that are within the city but are labelled something else are for example 310-444 (West L.A.) and 818-778 (Van Nuys). *There are a couple of exceptions such as some cellphone prefixes and the choke exchange (520) which is dialable from 818, 310, or 213. Mark D. Rudholm rudholm@aimla.com Philips Interactive Media ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 23:23 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Weird Intercept MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com writes: > I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this > number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're > sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are > using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." This non-sequiter type of intercept is quintessential GTE incompetence. For instance, in Long Beach one of our Centrenet lines had the following recording in response to the simple dialing of '0': "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. You must first dial '950' and a carrier access code before the number". What? This is baloney. Not only does it not work, it could never work. It is complete and total nonsense. Mind you this is a "professionally" done recording, not some blathering by a CO dweeb, so the content at least came from Thousand Jokes. Get someone at GTE to fix it? HA! Now mind you that I understand that the wrong recording could simply be an erroneous channel assignment on the drum announcer. But the recording itself is complete nonsense. It has no application anywhere. It indicates a complete lack of understanding of even GTE's procedures. So why was it made in the first place? Heaven only knows. > This is odd since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. Yeah, well good luck trying to get it fixed. It sounds like you have a residual problem from the 310 cut. As you will recall, GTE made major news botching that operation up (of course, it was all Pac*Bell's fault to hear it from General). BTW, 663 IS still in 213. Call GTE repair about six times. That might do it. You will notice that I never had to ask if you were in GTE territory. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: The phraseology in the intercept you mention is not the greatest, but there is some truth to it. Usually the four digits following 950 are a portion of the same carrier access code one would dial as 10xxx; for example I believe MCI has 950-0222. When you dial a 950 number of this sort, usually after it connects you hear dial tone again (from the carrier) and you continue by dialing the number you wish to reach and your PIN. So if some customer wished to have no LD carrier assignment for whatever reason and dial everything via 950 with a PIN, the intercept you described would make sense if they attempted to one-plus dial. I repeat, the wording is not the best. PAT] ------------------------------ From: aub@access.digex.com (Aubrey Philipsz) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:26:30 GMT In article ddssuprs!tom@uunet.UU.NET (Tom Gillman) writes: > I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on > aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info. I have been told by someone in the airline industry that there has been a ruling on this which now allows for cellular use while the aircraft is on the ground; this was sort of confirmed recently when the Captain of a USAir flight borrowed my cell phone to allow an irate passenger to make a phone call when the aircraft had been holding, waiting for ATC to clear it to take off, for about an hour and a half. Use of cellular inflight falls under the much more broad restriction on transmitting devices. The basic reason is that electronics in an aircraft are pretty important to the safety of the passengers and crew. The draconian measures may seem excessive, but this is a "better safe than sorry" situation. I will note that there IS interference with navigation systems from radio signals, it really does happen, and it is a bit unnerving to have to shoot landings with instruments that you suddenly can not trust. Of course, there is always the question of operating a cell phone at 30,000 feet; sounds a BIT higher than the antenna altitude restrictions for cellular. Aub ------------------------------ From: aescherm@iastate.edu (A Person of Awareness) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:14:44 GMT The reason that you can't use a cell phone on an airplane is so you can't call for a rescue team to save you from the food. =-) Although, it WOULD be fun to order from Dominos while in the air. "Yeah, that's right I'm only a mile or two away. My address? Oh well, let's just say I'm passing through." =-) Anthony Clifton ------------------------------ From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 01:21:35 GMT Slightly diverging from the topic here, but I was wondering about the air-phone service that is now fairly common on US carriers. While on a trip to the US each time I flew (usually United) the air hostesses would always invite us to use the service, especially convenient since the phones were located in the seat in front of us (at least on some of the smaller planes like 737's). This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II where air phones figure prominently in the plot. In some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he checks the pager and calls her back on the plane. Is this possible or some Hollywood license? I never noticed any numbers on the air phone which indicated you could call one. Just wondering ... Laurence Chiu lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Date: 30 Aug 92 15:54:35 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes: > I have a residence in which I have two phone lines. The wire coming to > the house is a 'standard' four wire line (red, black, yellow, green). > For one line I use red/green and for the other I use black/yellow. On > one line I have my BBS attached and so the modem attached to that line > is quite busy. The other line is for voice. > The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of > hissing and noise heard on the voice line. The reason for this problem is the cheesy wire you describe above. This wire is known as "Quad Wire". It is not designed to isolate signals. The wire you need for this is called "twisted pair". For your installation, it would be usually called "Three pair". Three pairs of twisted wire. The colour coding on twisted pair is always white/blue stripe & blue/whire stripe etc. Most business telephone installations use twisted pair. The phone company uses twisted pair between your home and their central office -- yes this is why you can't hear everyone else's modems and phone calls. > Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone > company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the > second line? Yes, rewire the house with three pair or use three pair to wire in just the modem. You can do this ($), the telco can do this ($$$), or you can call in an electrician or independant phone installer (Called Interconnects) ($$). The big question is "Why are people still doing installations with quad wire?" Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 12:48:08 GMT shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes: > The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of > hissing and noise heard on the voice line. > What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can > use inside the house? Go down to Radio Shack and get one of their "special" adapters. The one you want in this case is one that plugs into a wall jack and provides 3 output jacks: L1, L2, L1+2. The L1 and L2 jacks have *only* the center two wires connected. This tends to be necessary with modems because many of them have "feature" that shorts the second pair of wires (the black/yellow pair) together. If that doesn't work, you'll have to go for desperate measure like replacing the regular four-conductor phone wiring with *real* twisted pair wiring. If you check, you'll discover that your internal house wiring *isn't* twisted pair! Thus, all the crosstalk. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:10:16 GMT Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI In article shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes: > The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of > hissing and noise heard on the voice line. It sounds like you are a victim of a pretty bad crosstalk problem. Most likely, it is the fault of your inside wiring, not the phone company. To determine where the problem lies, disconnect your voice line at the demarkation point, but leave the modem line connected. Then, plug a voice phone into the voice line at the demark while the modem is active. If you still hear crosstalk, then the problem is with the telco's wiring. Otherwise, it lies within your house, and you're going to have to either fix it yourself or pay the telco to fix it for you. If it turns out to be with your wiring, the problem is most likely that inappropriate cable was used for at least part of the wiring. Flat "silver satin" or "quad" cable should not be used for anything other than short runs between a phone jack and a telephone or other telecom equipment. This is because quad does not properly shield the two pairs from each other, resulting in mutual coupling and crosstalk in anything resembling a long run. If quad was used for wiring between the network interface and a phone jack, or if it was used to extend an existing cable run, you almost certainly will get crosstalk. The solution is to find all the quad in your house that was used inappropriately, rip it out, and replace it with "twisted-pair" cable. As the name implies, this is cable where each pair of wires is twisted together, thus shielding the pair and lessening the chances it will interfere with an adjacent pair. Since you're pulling new cable, you might as well plan for the future and pull more pairs than you need; four-pair cable isn't that much more expensive, and will save you a lot of trouble if you ever add lines. Marc Unangst mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ From: Hans Ridder Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:58 GMT You will probably hear from many folks that this type of wire ("quad") allows crosstalk between your phone lines because it doesn't have twisted pairs. I had quad in my last home, and used the BK/YL pair for my modem line, without *any* crosstalk. Actually, I did have a crosstalk problem but I was able to completely eliminate it. Mine was caused by four-wire modular (flat) line cords, not by the quad. > What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can > use inside the house? Assuming you have modular jacks and that you have both lines appearing at every jack in the house, here's what I did: First unplug all your phones *at the wall*. Then plug your modem and one phone into your two-line splitter plugged directly into the wall jack. Then make a test call. (Make a connection with your modem, and then pick up your voice line and then break dial tone by dialing a "1" or something.) In this configuration, my problem was cured. At this point, you'll want to re-install your other phones. You'll either need to use a splitter at each jack, re-wire the jacks to only have the one desired phone line, or use two-wire modular cords. The thing you are trying to avoid is having both lines running together over the same flat cord. If the above test doesn't cure your problem, then you'll want to rig up a temporary connection directly at the network interface (or "protectors") *making sure* you have the inside wiring disconnected. If you still get crosstalk, then you need to call telco. If so, then the problem is definitly your wires (or *something* inside your house.) > Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone > company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the > second line? You shouldn't need to have a separate run for your second line, but it might come down to that if you can't get your wire to behave. The trick is figuring out if the wire is the problem. If you are handy with a screw driver, wire cutters, etc. You should be able to do all these things yourself. Hans-Gabriel Ridder Digital DECwest Engineering ridder@rust.zso.dec.com Bellevue, Washington, USA {pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:11:56 GMT Some suggestions: Before you call 'TPC' you might want to disconnect both lines at the DMARC (telco box where the lines enter the house) and run a temporary wire from the modem to one line, and a phone to the other. Then test to see if the noise problem still exists. If so, then the problem is in the drop wiring or Telco Outside Plant Cables. Call repair and report that you have "cross-talk" between your two lines. If they suggest that you have inside wiring problems, explain the previous test. If not, then you may have a cross connection between the two lines inside your house. With standard 'twisted pair' inside wiring, this should not happen and no modem noise should be heard. If you have a number of phones, first try to disconnect all but one and see if the problem persists (the cross may be in one of the phones). If not, then the best way to trouble-shoot the problem is probably to physically trace out all of the connections. Find each terminal block where the lines are connected and look to make sure all of the colors match up. You may have to literally disconnect all of the lines and re-connect them one at a time, testing for the problem each time you re-connect another leg. The problem from a trouble-shooting standpoint, is that if the house is an older home, phone extensions are often 'daisy-chained' from one jack to another, as they were installed (at different times). There may be no logic as to how the connections were made. (This is often a good time to re-wire, bringing each extension/jack to a common hub. This makes future trouble-shooting or expansion more convenient). Hope this helps. John Rice K9IJ | "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was | MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially | Not my Employer's.... rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #672 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19721; 30 Aug 92 20:35 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14300 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:42 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18185 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:33 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:33 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302345.AA18185@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #673 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:45:24 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 673 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Question About PBX Phone (Tony Harminc) Re: Question About PBX Phone (Michael A. Covington) Re: Question About PBX Phone (Leonard Erickson) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Holt Sorenson) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Ron Heiby) Re: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review (Bob Clements) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Robert S. Helfman) Re: FAXes Over Internet (Guy Hadsall) Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (Bud Couch) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Syngen Brown) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Michael Rosen) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Todd Inch) Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar) (H Hallikainen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 00:44:12 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) wrote: > I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex > system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on > business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like > that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or > usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line > devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've > got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works > fine. Probably this just means that the phone is wired for A-lead control, i.e. the second pair in the modular cord is connected to an additional set of normally open contacts on the hook switch. This is used on old (1A2 etc.) key systems, but if plugged into a jack with a second line on it will short that line when the phone is picked up. The worst case is, as was mentioned recently, if a Princess phone with lighted dial was installed at one time, and the dial light transformer is still connected to the second pair. Then you may have a fire. You could easily disconnect and tape the red/black leads inside the phone to be safe. Tony H. ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:53:04 GMT In article dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) writes: > I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex > system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on > business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like > that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or > usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line > devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've > got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works > fine. Maybe it's the kind of phone that has a pair of contacts (for turning on a light, or something) across yellow and black. This would short- circuit a second line if you had one. Hayes modems have the option of working this way. + Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA + Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 08:58:50 GMT dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) writes: > I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex > system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on > business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like > that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or > usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line > devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've > got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works > fine. It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires together. If you have two-line wiring, this'll "busy out" the other line. If you have one of those transformers mentioned recently, it'll short *that* out. (not good!) It's easy enough to check. See where the *outer* pair of wires connects inside. Then, while the phone is not connected to the wall, take it off hook. If the resistance between those wires drops to nothing, it's wired that way, and you should disconnect one of the wires where it enters the phone. Some modems have A/A1 supervision as a "feature". I was getting *quite* upset about the way one of our phone lines was failing to work until I traced the problem to the modem! Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: hps@sdf.lonestar.org (Holt Sorenson) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 02:59:07 GMT In article Jeff Garber <0005075968@ mcimail.com> writes: > On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los > Angeles) the topic was 911. Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati > area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was > having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told > him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually > played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my > own ears. The man died, although he was not suffering from a heart > attack, and it was determined that he would have died even without the > delay in reaching help. I never heard what he actually died of. I recently witnessed an accident as I was traveling the loop that surrounds Ft. Worth/Dallas TX and I exited immediately to find a pay phone. Approximately 30 seconds elapsed from the time I saw the accident to the time I began to dial 911. The operator informed me that they had already recieved a call from a cellular phone and that help was on the way, so I know that here in 817, 911 accepts cellular calls. Holt Sorenson ------------------------------ From: heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:51:44 GMT > [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call > 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency. I'm surprised that our Moderator didn't mention it, but in the Chicagoland area, they have put signs up all over the place that one should dial "*999" to report any sort of emergency from a cellular phone. I've used it several times to inform the authorities of stranded motorists, non-working traffic signals, possibly-drunk motorists, downed trees or power lines, and speeding peace officers. In Buffalo Grove, where 911 service was installed a year or two ago, they have found that the system "isn't getting enough use"! They tell us that people are only using it for truly life-threatening emergencies. We have been told, through the town newsletter, that we should use 911 *any* time we want fire/police/ambulance dispatch. So, the way I read it, if I have a fender-bender and need a police officer to come by to see what happened, from a non-cellular Buffalo Grove phone, I'm to dial "911", rather than the police non-emergency number. I think it's wierd, but who am I to argue? Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod [Moderator's Note: Who are you to argue? You are a citizen with an above average knowledge of the telecommunications network. Don't fall into that all too common trap of criticizing some bureaucrat only to be attacked in return, 'how would you know anything about this?'. That is BS! Continue arguing that 911 is *only* for dire emergencies when immediate police intervention is required. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:51:00 EDT From: clements@BBN.COM In V12,I641,M2, Mark Lottor gave us a review of the Sony IT-A4000: > The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now. It is a speakerphone > and digital answering machine. [...lotsa good stuff deleted...] In summary, > it's a nice phone. It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you > know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do > something differently. However, it easily beats having a machine with > tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service. It sells for around > $199. I would add just a few comments: 1) I'm glad to see that the price has come down, if that's accurate. I had to pay over $300 for mine. 2) I would have preferred this unit without the built-in phone, which must add a fair amount to the price. I've got plenty of better phones. 3) It isn't very good at ignoring no-message calls if the line it's on doesn't have CPC pulses. I run mine behind my Panasonic PBX, which doesn't give a CPC pulse on hangup, and I get a lot of silent messages and dialtone/busy messages. I've used other machines that were much better in that situation. 4) This one surprised me, and is the main reason for my posting: There's no way to stash your outgoing message in memory while you use a different one for a while. I'd never really thought about it, but with a cassette-based OGM you can set one cassette on a shelf for a day if that's appropriate, and then put it back in the machine later. On Rolm PhoneMail you can do the same thing - have a "regular" OGM and an "alternate" OGM that you change more frequently. But with this Sony machine, you have to re-record your "regular" OGM from scratch. There's no concept of saving an OGM. I say it "surprised" me but that's only because the thought that you might not be able to do this never crossed my mind. Just my additional two cents. Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com ------------------------------ From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:11:31 GMT In article Jim.Rees@umich.edu writes: > In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill > St. Louis) writes: >> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will >> work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) >> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will >> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? > The jacks are the same, except for the notch. The difference is in > the cable. A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so > that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end. A notched > cable is wired straight. Not necessarily true. DEC uses their cables as null-modems by having the 'twist' in them. The wiring for RJ-12's is: White = DSR Blk = Rcd Red = Grnd Grn = Grnd Yel = Txd Blu = DTR So if you have a 'twist' cable connecting two devices, the effect is a null-modem (DSR <> DTR, Rcd <> Txd). I believe the RJ-45 setup is the same, plus RTS <> CTS. ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:10:14 EDT From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Re: FAXes Over Internet Someone a long time past (not in geological terms) "wondered" the same question; what was to be created from this initial "wonderment" was a listing of 'nets that would be willing to receive routed email, convert it to ASCII, then make a LOCAL phone call to the requestors FAX number. I have made myself, and my personal PC/Faxboard available to all email requests for the WASHINGTON DC metropolitan area. Please also note that given the legal *sling* I could potentially place myself in I reserve the right to return the email without transmission. NO COMMERICAL FAXES. Only personal (including *your name* address, etc) to potential employers, congressmen (people), etc that *include* correct fax numbers will be sent. I am not, nor do I or the rest of us wish to become FAX directories so please include the correct fax number. FORM is up to the sender; please put the FAX number in the header. Guy Hadsall Washington DC ghadsal@auvm.american.edu ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch) Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:52:28 GMT In article smp@cathedral.cerc.wvu. wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) writes: > Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a telephone cable > to make a longer one? Essentially what I would emagine would be similar > to the two male connectors fused together. Well, there is always the old WECO 710 splicing connector, but it requires a rather elaborate tool to use, since it uses an insulation-displacement mechanism. I think that the tool runs about $300, and I don't think that AT&T will sell the connectors in quantites of less than 25. Personally, I'd use a pair of needle-nose pliers (and some wire strippers if you don't have the touch to strip wire with them), a soldering iron, a little solder, and a roll of electrical tape, but then again, I *have* been called a dinosaur (along with some other names!). :-) Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies ------------------------------ From: syngen@dir.ulcc.ac.uk (Syngen Brown LNT) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Date: 30 Aug 1992 10:45:55 GMT Organization: London Network Team Reply-To: s.brown@lon.ac.uk In article mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk writes: > In the UK, some people did call it an "octothorp" at first. But no > "e" on the end !. We *don't* call it the pound sign, however, for > fairly obvious reasons (like we have a pound sign all of our own !) > The common name for it here, is "hash": but BT, when they introduced > facility codes for PABXs and Network Services, decided they would give > it their own name. They sold phones with the "thorps" missing from > the octothorp symbol: and then told us all to call that key the > "square". This wasn't solely a BT invention. According to CCITT Rec. E.161: "The symbol will be known as the _square_ or the most commonly used equivalent term in other languages". My feeling is that this is a potential source of confusion; imagine the scenario in which a user is requested to press the square key -- yes, but which one? Syngen London Network Team, ULCC, 20 Guilford St, London WC1N 1DZ, UK +44 71 405 8400 Ext. 406 s.brown@lon.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:33:24 GMT Is it possible to make a calling card call and not have to wait for the to enter your card number? I'd love to be able to just dial it all straight and not have to wait those extra few seconds. Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Organization: Maverick International Inc. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:36:46 GMT In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > One question that I have not been able to answer myself is why it > helps to hit # after entering an additional destination number for a > calling card call (that is, after hitting # to terminate the first > call). I can't think of a situation where it would be expecting more > than 11 digits, but it definately waits for more. Many international calls require more than 11 digits. ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?) Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 22:44:02 GMT Years ago when we used an answering service, we got a call back from Graybar confirming some order. The answering service told us the call was from "gay bar". Harold [Moderator's Note: Did the answering service people look sort of askance at you after that whenever you were in their office? :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #673 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27184; 1 Sep 92 1:43 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05559 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:31:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00398 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:30:57 -0500 Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:30:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209010430.AA00398@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #674 TELECOM Digest Mon, 31 Aug 92 23:31:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 674 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Mark Brader) Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Michael Schuh) Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Bob Riegelmann) Re: A Bad Time To Fall Asleep (Ken Jongsma) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Blake Farenthold) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Robert L. Ullmann) Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (Jack Adams) Is AT&T's SDN (Software Defined Network) Any Good? (Jesse W. Asher) Re: Funny Answering Service Error (John Higdon) Re: Funny Answering Service Error (Anthony Clifton) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 03:53:00 -0400 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep Our Moderator writes: > My thanks to Mark Brader (msb@sq.com) for suggesting this be reprinted. You're welcome, Patrick, but I now wish I hadn't. You see, a couple of hours after I sent that suggestion, I looked at the applicable section of Richard Rhodes's superb book "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" (Simon & Schuster, 1986, ISBN 0-671-44133-7). It implies, on pretty good evidence, that there is something wrong with Mrs. Fermi's story. Let me summarize the timetable: > "The test was set for 4:30 AM the next morning, so we returned to the > hotel and went to bed early. We got up at 3 the next morning and drove > out to the location ... The chronology that she gives after that is: 4:45... they return to town to telephone, but can't get the operator. 5:00 or just after... Fermi finds and wakes up the operator. They are back at their observation point 5 minutes before the explosion. > .... later, we got together with the others who had > been assigned there and found out that it wasn't the rain that delayed > things; it was that woman asleep; you see, the main people responsible > were linked by phones through Alamogordo; they had to coordinate what > they were doing and sychronize their work. All of them got the same > thing on the phone we got: no answer from the operator for 45 minutes! So this would imply that the operator's nap started at about 4:15, if not earlier. Okay, now to Rhodes. On page 664 of my copy: # [Robert] Oppenheimer, [Gen. Leslie] Groves, [Kenneth] Bainbridge, # [Gen. Thomas] Farrell, [Richard] Tolman and an Army meteorologist met # with [the meteorologist for the test, Jack] Hubbard at McDonald Ranch # at four that afternoon [the day before the test] to consider the # weather. ... They decided to wait and see. They had scheduled # a last weather conference for the next morning at 0200 hours; # they would make up their minds then. The shot was set for 0400 # and they let that time stand. As a source for at least part of this paragraph, Rhodes cites "The Day the Sun Rose Twice" by Ferenc Morton Szasz (Univ. of N.M. Press, 1984). Now on page 666: # Thunderstorms began lashing the Jornada [del Muerto] at about 0200 # hours ... Winds gusted to thirty miles an hour. Hubbard hung # on at Zero for last-minute readings--only misting drizzle had yet # reached the tower area--and arrived eight minutes late for the # 0200 weather conference at Base Camp, to find Oppenheimer waiting # for him outside the weather center there. Hubbard told him they # would have to scrub 0400 but should be able to shoot between # 0500 and 0600. Oppenheimer looked relieved. # # Inside they found an agitated Groves waiting with his advisors. # "What the hell is wrong with the weather?" the general greeted # his forecaster. ... Groves demanded to know when the storm would # pass. Hubbard explained its dynamics: a tropical air mass, night # rain. Afternoon thunderstorms took their energy from the heating of # the earth and collapsed at sunset; this one, contrariwise, would # collapse at dawn. Groves growled that he wanted a specific time, # not an explanation. I'm giving you both, Hubbard rejoined. ... # # Oppenheimer applied himself to soothe his bulky comrade. Hubbard # was the best man around, he insisted, and they ought to trust his # forecast. The others at the meeting--Tolman and two army meteor- # ologists, one more than before--agreed. Groves relented. "You'd # better be right on this", he threatened Hubbard, "or I will hang # you." He ordered the meteorologist to sign his forecast and set # the shot for 0530. Then he went off to roust the governor of New # Mexico out of bed to the telephone to warn him he might have to # declare martial law. For all of this material, Rhodes again cites Szasz, but he notes that Szasz in turn cites Hubbard's *contemporary* personal journal. This is pretty solid evidence, unless Hubbard had some reason to falsify it. The signed forecast would be even better evidence: has anyone seen it or seen it reproduced somewhere? According to Rhodes, Hubbard gave it to Bainbridge at "about 0508", following which the master switches were unlocked and the bomb fired with a 20-minute delay. There is further evidence that the telephones were not all down during the period that Mrs. Fermi mentions. From page 667 of Rhodes: # The meteorologist prepared his final forecast at S-10000 [the command # center, 10000 yards south of Zero]. He called Bainbridge at 0440. # "Hubbard gave me a complete weather report", the Trinity director # recalls, "and a prediction that at 5:30 am the weather would be # possible but not ideal. ... I called Oppenheimer and General # Farrell to get their agreement that 5:30 would be T = 0." Hubbard, # Bainbridge, Oppenheimer and Farrell each had veto power over the shot. # They all agreed. Rhodes cites a different source for this: "All in our Time" by Jane Wilson (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1975). There is a further problem with Mrs. Fermi's story, which is this: the Trinity test site is 60 miles from Alamogordo! From her account it seems to be at most a 25-minute drive from the telephone exchange to the observing point, which she says is 15 miles from the site. (Unfortunately, while Rhodes mentions something about what Fermi did during the test, he doesn't mention where he did it.) I am left with three possible interpretations. One is that Mrs. Fermi's story simply never happened. A second is that it happened exactly as she said, except that after 20 years she got some of the times wrong, while Hubbard participated in a cover-up, and Wilson's source was also misleading. And the third, which I think most likely, is that Fermi's drive into town did happen, but the operator's nap did not really affect the timing of the test. In this interpretation, not all the telephones for everyone went through that operator; perhaps it was only the lines between the test site and the hotels where the scientists were staying, say. (Also, maybe the operator was not in Alamogordo but in a smaller town closer to the site, such as Tularosa or Carrizozo.) Maybe what someone really said was that they had been afraid that the test would have to be cancelled because certain people couldn't be telephoned, and then it was all right. I dunno. I'd like to believe the original story. But the evidence ... Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com [Moderator's Note: Well, my observation back then (1965) was that she was, to put it kindly, starting to get forgetful, particularly after a large pasta dinner and a couple drinks. The Windermere Hotel's dining room ('The Anchorage') did not serve skimpy meals or drinks ... PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 11:45:05 PDT From: schuh@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Schuh) Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep I enjoyed the article. Thanks for re-posting it. Fermi's method of locating the exchange reminds me of an anectode Feyman mentions in one of his books, using the denisty of phone lines to find the way back to town. Also, if all atomic/nuclear weapons could be stopped by napping operators, then we might never have had a cold war. Interesting concept ... Thanks again. Mike Schuh schuh@mdd.comm.mot.com [Moderator's Note: But then again, maybe it never happened at all, or maybe it happened, but a little differently than related. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bob@sunspot.noao.edu (Bob Riegelmann) Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep Organization: National Solar Observatory/SP, Sunspot NM, USA Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:51:17 GMT In article TELECOM Moderator (telecom@eecs.nwu.edu) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 6 of 6 > Mrs. Fermi and I lived in the same apartment building on East > 56th Street, directly across the street from the Museum of Science and > Industry, and we chatted and dined together frequently. Then you must have lived close to my graduate advisor, Russ Donnelly. And knew one of my best friends, their son, Jim, (who was still in diapers I expect.) [Moderator's Interjection: I lived in the Windermere Hotel, 56th and Stony Island Avenue, and ate in the hotel dining room 'The Anchorage' most evenings.] > In Alamogordo, we checked into the hotel then drove out to where > Enrico had been assigned. It was set up that the scientists were > deployed over about a two hundred square mile area; we were about > fifteen miles from the target. I now live in Sunspot, 5000 feet straight up from Alamogordo and in the hills. > "Where we stopped was in front of a house on one of the residential > streets there, but what looked odd to me was on the side of the house, > there were hundreds of wires converging, coming in from a dozen > telephone poles which all seemed to meet in the back yard or on the > side of the house. And all these wires came down out of the sky you > might say, and went in the side of the house in a big bundle. This fits with the service I get here in the hills. No Class here for a long time to come. > "Really, I can't blame the lady much. The whole summer of 1945 was > just horrid. When we arrived the day before, the temperature was over > a hundred; This also fits well, the temps in Alamogordo lately have been in the 90's. When it gets really hot, I flee home to the hills, where I can see alamogordo, but the daily highs are in the 70's. > "When I was there in town two weeks ago for the (twentieth > anniversary) reunion, just from curiosity I went past that house; it > took me awhile to remember where it was. I could go ask, the house is probably still there. Small world, huh? Thanks for posting this, it made my day, I'll forward it on to Jim, if he hasn't seen it. Bob Riegelmann bob@sunspot.sunspot.noao.edu P.O. Box 58 Sunspot, NM 88349-0058 [Moderator's Note: I would suggest including the lead article in this issue with any distribution of the original article however. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 09:13:03 EDT From: Ken Jongsma x7702 Subject: Re: A Bad Time To Fall Asleep I used to live in Alamogordo a few years ago. The town is not that much larger today than it was in Mrs. Fermi's story. Twice a year, they allow the public to drive out to both the detonation site and the ranch house where the scientists were staying. Both locations are within the White Sands Missile Range and are usually not accessable by the public. I was fortunate enough to have been doing some test flights on the range one day and asked for permission to overfly both places. Ground Zero is about the size of a round football field. It's been fenced in and leveled, with a black monument commemorating the event. On the public access days, they allow a convoy of civilian vehicles to leave from Alamogordo and drive about two hours to the site. They usually have a mockup of the actual bomb there as well. The ranch house has not been used in many years and is pretty much weathered and falling apart. When you first ran your story a few years ago, I contacted the International Space Museum in Alamogordo and the Atomic Energy Museum in Albuquerque. Both were very pleased to receive FAXed copies of it for their historical records. Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org Smiths Industries jongsma@benzie.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com [Moderator's Note: Alamogordo now has a population of about 24,000 I believe. I think a half century ago the population was less. Perhaps you also should send the lead story in this issue to the same places where you sent the original. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 10:55:08 CDT From: blake@pro-party.cts.com (Blake Farenthold) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Corpus Christi, Texas' pro-party bbs +1 512 882-1899 > This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II.... What a classic for telcom continuity blunders. You caught only one ... > In some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he > checks the pager and calls her back on the plane. No can do. (Actualy I'm suprised SHE was able to call at all, whenever I really need the airphone all I get is a synthasized voice saying processing call please wait for about half an hour) Of course they are GTE air phones, I should have known not to count on them. The other telcom blunders I remember in Die Hard 2 are: Pac*Bell (Pacific Bell, serves California) payphones in what was supposed to be the Washington DC airport. Faxing fingerprints for identification. I can't even read half the typwritten stuff that is faxed to me ... nuch less make out the details of a graphic as fine as a finger print. ------------------------------ From: ariel@world.std.com (Robert L Ullmann) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: The World in Boston Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:51:57 GMT lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > of the smaller planes like 737's). This led me to think about the > movie Die Hard II where air phones figure prominently in the plot. In > some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he checks > the pager and calls her back on the plane. Is this possible or some At the risk of somehow accepting-by-failure-to-rebut the other 100-odd totally hilariously stupid technical errors in the "plot"; no, you can't call an Airfone. That said: I watched it a couple of days ago on cable, and if you just watch the "human" story as a shoot'em-up, it ain't bad at all. Hell, all TELECOM readers should watch it just for the amusement of wondering what you could make as a consultant if Hollywood cared one whit for technical accuracy. This movie has almost as many technical idiocies as SPACE*1999 but not quite. Start with the idea that airplanes are somehow "stuck" at the outer marker when the radio goes down, continue through the idea that a pilot of a commercial passenger airplane would try to land without visual on the runway lights, and end with the idea that you can tap into and simulate an airport control tower by attaching alligator clips (or equivalent) to the cables and then hacking through them with an ax. In between, forget that blanks _sound_ different to any expert, and forget that if you toss anything larger than a small chicken through a turbine engine, it disintegrates. (The engine, not the chicken. Well, it too .. ;-) Robert Ullmann Ariel@World.STD.COM +1 508 879 6994 x226 ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 13:15:48 GMT In article , drz@po.CWRU.Edu (David R. Zinkin) writes: > Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different ^^^ Software Defined Network (As of 1986ish!) > from standard long distance service? I believe SDN is a trademark of AT&T (possibly even registered). I'm a little hazy on this, but I believe SDN provides a multi-location customer (read as big businesses) with an economical alternative to a private voice network of dedicated trunks. Using the intelligence of AT&T's NCPs and LD net, all sorts of virtual numbering schemes are possible (Corporate universal numbering plans for instance). In article , johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: >> Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different >> from standard long distance service? > It's Software Defined Network. In Olden Days when long distance rates > were much higher than now and switching was relatively much more > expensive than it is now, large companies usually rented lots of fixed > leased lines among their various facilities to carry intra-company > traffic. This saved money relative to toll rates and also sometimes > avoided problems of not being able to get through at peak hours. So far so good ... > {STUFF DELETED}. Once such hack is the "virtual private > line" which is a long distance ringdown circuit -- whenever you pick Are you sure about this? > up the phone at one end it quickly calls the other end to give you > pretty much the same effect as a leased line but at lower cost since > they don't need to provide bandwidth when you're not asking for it. > SDN is basically a bulk calling plan for large businesses that > replaces networks of leased lines. It's a little more technical than a "calling plan". It involves called number routing manipulation based on all kinds of things (Day of week, time of day, your telephone number, etc.). The routing is performed according to logic which resides in the Network Control Points (NCP) which are simplisticly speaking, large databses of these routing logic algorithms. > One dials 10732 to make an SDN This depends on your dialing plan of your LEC switch. > call (and gets a message saying to call your account rep if it's not a > line assigned to an SDN account) but as far as I know the calls are > carried just like other AT&T calls. In most applications of SDN, a second dial tone is played and the number dialed is captured and sent to the NCP in the form of a query. Based on your number, the number you dialed, and a lot of other stuff (mentioned above), your call is routed to its destination via the AT&T public switched telephone network. Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} | (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: jessea@homecare.com (Jesse W. Asher) Subject: Is AT&T's SDN (Software Defined Network) any good? Organization: G.O.D Inc. Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 01:28:49 GMT Does anyone have any information on how good AT&T's SDN offering is? Would it be useful for providing switched DDS lines? Is this really a rip off? Thanks. Jesse W. Asher Phone: (901)762-6000 Varco-Pruden Buildings 6000 Poplar Ave., Suite 400, Memphis, TN 38119 Internet: jessea@homecare.COM UUCP: ...!banana!homecare!jessea ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 23:52 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?) On Aug 30 at 18:45, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Did the answering service people look sort of > askance at you after that whenever you were in their office? :) PAT] Back in my "big business" days, we had a young man in our service department who was apprenticing to be an installer. As is custom, he usually got stuck with much of the "gofer" responsibilities, such as making trips to distributors to pick up supply orders. He was newly married and his wife was a very young, insecure person who checked up on her hubby several times a day. Late one afternoon, she called for her man, only to be told by the service manager that he had not yet returned from Graybar. The next day, word was all over the shop about how when our young apprentice returned home, he was given all manner of hell about drinking on the job, and worse, doing it in a gay bar. In his honor, we all referred to Graybar as "gaybar" from then on. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: aescherm@iastate.edu (A Person of Awareness) Subject: Re: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?) Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:28:06 GMT Speaking of miscommunications: I worked for US West Paging in Iowa this last spring and we had a radio so we could act as an intermediary point between the police department and the towing company that does their impounds. I listened to a conversation one night that I will relate: Base: [name deleted], you might want to grab the private tow at 10th and Locust. It's a 79 Gray Dodge Van. Mobile: What color did you say it was? Base: Gray Mobile: What color, didn't get that? Base: Graaaaay GRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!! Mobile: Sorry still didn't get the color. Base: It's ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy GRAY!!!!! Mobile: You say it's a GAY van???? At this point I was laughing so hard my headset fell off and I almost disconnected some poor woman trying to reach an insurance company. Anthony Clifton ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #674 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02745; 1 Sep 92 3:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29624 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:56:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16942 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:55:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:55:58 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209010655.AA16942@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #675 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Sep 92 01:56:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 675 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Major Phone Outage in Omaha (Jack Winslade) Hurricane Andrew Notes (David E. Bernholdt) A Non-Horror Story (Roy M. Silvernail) Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Rick Broadhead) AT&T to Cut Six Offices (Washington DC Times via Paul Robinson) Ohio Bell Announces DMS-100 for Cleveland East (Michael J. Logsdon) Which Uses Less Resources: Off Hook or On Call? (Paul Robinson) ATM Introduction Wanted (Kevin Beauchamp) Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? (Scott Brenner) Computer/Phone Interface (David Gingold) Merlin+ Station Wires (Gabe M. Wiener) Advice Sought on Pay Phone Ruckus (Brian Capouch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 23:03:33 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Major Phone Outage in Omaha Reply-To: jsw@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha At about 10:45 AM this morning, a major malfunction in US West's 135th St. office resulted in the disruption of 3/4 of the phones served from the CO, according to the {Omaha World-Herald}. At press time, the exact cause was not known, but a US West spokesman stated that it was probably a problem with the switching or computer equipment. Television station WOWT reported that 'It was a computer error and not a cable cut' and that service was restored in the late afternoon. (The map shown by the station GREATLY exaggerated the area of the outage, showing large areas to the east and south of the area served by that office.) The 135th St. office serves some 33x and all 69x prefixes in the Omaha area. I've been told by an 'insider' that it is a #5 ESS . Ironically, both the west Omaha US West office (which includes residential service reps) and some of AT&T's offices are served out of 135th and were shut down. Non-emergency lines to the Douglas County Sheriff's office were out, but 911 was said to be in service during the outage. The CLID log on DRBBS shows a call from the 330 office at 10:24 AM with no other calls from the affected COs since. Calls from the surrounding offices appear to be coming through with no trouble. Good day. JSW ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 15:13:23 EDT From: David E. Bernholdt Subject: Hurricane Andrew Notes Not terribly telecom related, but since people have asked for info about South Florida, here's a second-hand account ... The secretary in our Project, Judy, has a sister in Homestead, in the center of the area devastated by Andrew. She and her husband left here Wednesday to go down there and help out; they returned Saturday morning -- they said they had to get some rest or they wouldn't be able to get to work today. Despite the fact that they are supposedly only allowing residents into the area, they arrived in Homestead unchallenged, though there were checks at a few offramps from the highway. (They were expecting checks and had prepared by contacting State Police, etc. in advance.) The place is (hardly suprisingly) a complete mess. She had pictures of her sister's block and in some places you couldn't even see the street for all the rubble. Though the TV reports are likely to show the places where the houses were of lesser construction and have totally collapsed, she says that many more houses were effectively just as bad because the roof had been ripped off, allowing wind and water to get inside the house. Pictures of her sister's block showed houses with the exterior walls remaining but no roof. There were four families, including Judy's sister, actually living in their houses in that neighborhood. Some other people would come in during the day and leave at night. They live close to Homestead Air Force Base. Despite reports that it was leveled, they did manage to clear some of the runways and are flying in and out frequently (lots of helicopters, apparently). What little they could see of the base (mostly housing) suggested it was in a similar condition to the houses in their neighboorhood -- windows blow out, many roofs blown off, exterior walls usually standing. They have no power. Water available, but the pressure was so low you had couldn't raise the hose more than three feet. Their telephone was working, but there were relatively few in the area that were (despite the fact that the area has underground cables). They foud the phone quite useful because it meant they didn't have to drive -- most cars were destroyed by the storm, including Judy's sister's. Newspapers are publishing, but they don't deliver. TV and radio are broadcasting, but you have to have batteries or a generator to run them. Generators are like gold -- Judy said she had heard of $500 units being sold for $1800-3000. I don't know about gasoline to run them. Fortunately, they brought a generator and some gas for her sister. As they were driving down Wednesday, and again heading up on Saturday, they saw convoys of ambulances, fire equipment, and semi tractors -- a dozen or so at a time -- barrelling down the highway behind a State Trooper using lights and sirens. Unfortunately, though, the aid does not seem to be disbursed very well. People have no way of finding out where it is being distributed, and if they did, most cars are inoperative or don't have gas. They only aid they saw was private citizens who had loaded up their cars and were cruising through neighborhoods offering it to people. The only law enforcement the came in contact with was 3.00 AM Friday They stopped to make sure Judy and company were armed. They said to be sure to shout "duck" to the neighbors before you shoot (it is a fairly densely packed area), and to choose you words carefully when the cops come back to investigate any shootings. The cops were a little bit miffed that they weren't allowed on the street earlier. Apparently, they had been held in a staging area waiting to respond to reports of looting. They'd rather just patrol. The insurance adjusters had also not yet been seen in her sister's neighboorhood, though Judy heard many were handing out initial ($2500) checks as soon as they had verified that you had an insurance policy with them. Judy said she slept about six hours in those three days, and they had two hot meals. The rest of the time, they just worked on cleaning up the mess. People were very helpful to each other. Judy said if it weren't for her job, she'd go back in a flash. They need lots of help down there, and it sounds like it will be quite a while before any sort of normalcy is restored. [Moderator's Note: This will go down in history as one of the worst natural tragedies ever to strike the USA. And help, in the form of practical household goods is still in short supply. Apparently they will not have electric service restored for *several months* if not a year or more as transmission lines are totally down. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: A Non-Horror Story From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:51:46 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN I just moved into a new apartment in Minneapolis. The building is some 28 years old, and I wondered what the telephone service would be like. The manager gave me a look at the demarc, and I shuddered. It's one of those old panels with screw-studs. (I don't know the exact term, but you use a can wrench on them) The incoming cabling is a rat's nest, and absolutely nothing is labelled. The guides on the terminal frame are numbered, but the numbers don't match reality. Hoping for the best, I called US West. The local service number goes through an ACD, and handed me to a representative in fairly short order. She took my name, my new service address, and asked whether I had service in my name before. Then she offered me a measured-service line and a flat-rate line. Other than mentioning measured service first, I got no pressure to select that service. I was offered the standard custom calling options: Call Waiting, Call Forwarding, Three-Way Calling and Speed Dial. I declined all but Call Waiting, since my building's security system uses the telephone as a doorbell. Final cost for the line is 23.80/month, including LineBacker (because I didn't put the wiring in myself, I don't want to have to pay to get it fixed) and Tone Calling. She then asked if I had a computer or FAX machine. I had heard from a friend that there was some special on second-line installations, and asked. I found that the second line is $16.25 to install (first one is $18.75), but that she could waive all but $2.50 of that installation. I accepted and ordered a second line with tone calling only for $19.25 a month. When the day came, I checked the apartment, and found line 1 working, but nothing on line two. I presumed that a field man would have to visit the demarc from hell for that, and met him when he arrived. I told him that line 1 worked, but not line two, and he answered "did you want a second line installed?" This caught me off guard. He went on that there was a $58 charge to install the second line to my jacks. I told hin the jack work had already been done. Then he asked me if I had a two-line phone. I assured him that I did, and showed him to the demarc. After talking with the installer a bit, I found out why we miscommunicated at first. He said most people that order two lines want separate RJ-11 jacks. He didn't expect me to understand RJ-14. After he realized I wasn't the usual dunce, we got along fine. The installation proceeded smoothly. He quickly located and hooked up my second pair, and we tested them from the apartment. He almost gave me the ANI number, but didn't. (it's six digits with a four digit security code, changed every three months ... that's all he would say.) Footnote: Later, when I was setting up the phones and the modem, I had trouble with the second line. I finally traced the fault to an old ITT 2500 desk set I have. When the modular kit was put on this phone, the black/yellow pair was tied together on the G network terminal! Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:11:35 EDT From: YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET Subject: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Organization: York University I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. For example, I am sure there would be great support for a group such as misc.disaster.coordination and/or misc.disaster.reports, which could be used by anxious friends and relatives to find out about friends and family in disaster areas, to disseminate information on relief efforts, provide addresses of those agencies accepting donations, and to report on the situation in affected areas. It is my feeling that the Usenet community would benefit from newsgroups that would act as a central clearinghouse for information of this sort when a natural disaster strikes, anywhere in the world. Are there any folks out there who have experience in creating a new newsgroup, and are willing to moderate a discussion and run a vote for the creation of newsgroups dealing with disaster assistance? Does anyone think this is a good idea? I don't have the time to get fully involved at this stage because of other demands on my time, but I am hoping that someone is willing to take this idea and work with it. Rick Broadhead ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@MCIMail.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 17:36:12 EDT Subject: AT&T to Cut Six Offices AT&T to axe six offices in aim to serve 'efficiently'. By Kent Gibbons The Washington (DC) Times, Saturday Aug 29, 1992, Page B5 AT&T plans to shut six of 18 customer service shops in November, although one in Silver Spring [Md.] will remain open, the company said yesterday. The closings will affect 860 union workers and 83 managers, all of whom will be offered other work within the company if they qualify and are willing to relocate, American Telephone & Telegraph Co. Spokesman Mark Siegel said. The offices, where AT&T employees field questions about service and billing are being closed to serve customers more efficiently, Mr. Siegel said. He would not elaborate, saying that would reveal to competitors secrets about AT&T's call traffic. But he said the offices to be closed were targeted on the basis of their staffing, technology and operating costs. A union official said the plan "may satisfy some ill-conceived management scheme, but hundreds of working people, thousands of family members, and communities in six states will suffer." The official, Communications Workers of America Vice President James Irvine, said thousands of AT&T union members have become "high-tech migrant workers, following their jobs from one closing office to the next." Job security was a key issue in union contract talks with AT&T this year. Union employees who are not placed in other jobs will be given job retraining, counseling, outplacement help and up to 104 weeks' severance pay depending on length of service with the company, Mr. Siegel said. Offices to be closed are in Columbus, Ohio; Mobile, Ala.; Parsippany, N.J.; Radnor, Pa.; St. Cloud, Minn.; and Wauwatosa, Wis. Remaining offices are in Silver Spring [Md.]; Atlanta; Bloomington, Minn.; Charleston, W.Va.; Dallas; Itasca, Ill.; Kansas City, Mo.; Phoenix; Pittsburgh; Pleasanton, Calif.; Providence, R.I.; and San Antonio, Texas. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:13:39 -0400 From: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon) Subject: Ohio Bell Announces DMS-100 for Cleveland East Reply-To: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon) We have just received a letter regarding the impending cutover to DMS-100 on 10/24/92 for (216) 321/371/397/932 xxxx. What do I need to change for our SRX business switch in this Ohio Bell Eastern Cleveland suburb? Mike Logsdon University School am339@cleveland.freenet.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 20:58:39 EDT Subject: Which Uses Less Resources: Off Hook or On Call? I'd like to start some discussion and some thinking over an issue which we had a bit of some hot discussion. If you have to make a number busy, for example, when changing the paper in a fax machine -- especially if you have multiple fax machines on hunt group so that a busy line rolls over to the next unused line -- that you want a line to be busy. (When someone sends to a fax machine and it's busy, they retry in a short while; if it doesn't answer, they figure it's out of order. (At least, I do.) So what is the least use of the telephone system for keeping a line busy? I said that you are better off, say, calling a silent line or calling the line itself and listening to its own busy signal except that some systems drop you on a call to a busy number after a time. Someone else said to just leave the phone off-hook. I pointed out this ties up a dialing sender. They claimed, yes, but only for the 30 seconds it allows you to dial, and is less resources than a call set-up and tear-down among the battery hold, etc. Someone want to settle this? Paul Robinson Tdarcos@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Subject: ATM Introduction Wanted From: kbeau@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Kevin Beauchamp) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 12:15:28 -0600 Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada I would like an introduction to Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) technology. I would like a general overview of the technology, and perhaps a glossary of related terms. How does ATM interface with Ethernet? Will ATM interface with FDDI? What is the relation of ATM to SONET? ISDN? What is the projected maximum bit rate? When will product be available? How expensive will it be vis-a-vis FDDI? Can someone on the net help me out? Thanks, Kevin Beauchamp kbeau@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner) Subject: Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? Organization: AT&T Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 13:44:20 GMT I have an OKI 891 transportable cellular phone that has a 12V NiCd battery (number RP 9021A/64-21055, if it matters). The charger for this battery (model RP9022A) doesn't have any warnings against leaving it plugged in all the time. My question is: would this be all right (leaving it plugged in)? On a related matter, why does my FM radio at work seem to get much better reception when the cell phone battery charger is plugged into the same power strip? a T d H v A a N n K c S e Scott D. Brenner AT&T Consumer Communications Services Basking Ridge, NJ scott@cimu03.att.com -or- sbrenner@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: gingold@strident.think.com (David Gingold) Subject: Computer/Phone Interface Date: 31 Aug 92 13:52:55 Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA I'm looking for hardware which will interface either a PC or a Mac to a phone line. It should be able digitize and play back sound and send and receive DTMF (Touch Tone) signals. A built-in DSP chip would be nice but is not strictly necessary. I'm willing to write my own software. Can anyone provide tips on what equipment is available and what is good? dg ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Merlin+ Station Wires Organization: Columbia University Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:57:07 GMT Merlin Plus stations take four pairs. Does anyone know what the breakout on these pairs is? Someone told me that it goes: blue/white = voice orange/white = line data green/white = control leads brown/white = thru-phone page Any accuracy to this? He didn't seem positive. Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 317 Aug 92 15:58:27 -0500 (CDT) From: Brian Capouch Subject: Advice Sought on Pay Phone Ruckus We are a small (1000FTE) rural-based college. A couple of years ago our local telco installed a 5ESS, putting an Optical Remote Module into it on our campus. At that time, after a pretty hard sell from both the local company and AT&T (who reportedly were financing the install) we signed up for Centrex. This setup replaced our aging PBX. We don't have phones in students' rooms. For at least the last decade, there have been two phones in each hall: a campus phone that would allow calls to any number in the same exchange, and a pay phone owned by the phone company. This summer, the head honcho at our carrier gave our administration an ultimatum: the pay phones weren't generating near the revenue they could. Lots of our students rent private lines from this same telco, and it bothered them that our students could call those lines from the "free" phone in each hall instead of using the pay phones. So we either had to block all calls not aimed at our Centrex lines or they would yank every one of our pay phones. I need to see what alternatives we might have, or to find out that we have none. The phone company rep will only talk to one person on campus, and she has told him that unless each phone generates $35.00 a month they would be losing money on it. Thanks for any help that might be forthcoming. Brian Capouch Saint Joseph's College brianc@saintjoe.edu [Moderator's Note: You can have the pay phones converted to semi-public; meaning you pay some fee to telco each month for having them there. The telco then has to leave you alone since you are paying for the phones. But I do think you would be wise to keep the centrex phones limited to calls on your system only. You are giving away a lot of local service which could generate quarters in the coin box. You might also (and I would be inclined to) call telco's bluff; tell them to come and get the phones out by a certain date or you will personally remove them. Before you do that, contract with a manufacturer of private pay phones (sometimes called COCOTS) and buy a few dozen of them at a good rate and then you get to keep *all* the money they take in. By programming the new COCOTS you purchase so they give free calls on campus and charge a reasonable fee for off campus use (and a very low rate for long distance calls) you can beat telco at their own game. If you own the COCOTS there will be no middleman looking for a profit. You can program them for something like 25 cents per minute on all LD calls and 15 cents a minute on local calls ... run them through your centrex lines on the trunks the hall phones are on now; that way you won't even need to pay the miserable telco for the extra lines. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #675 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19360; 2 Sep 92 0:32 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00136 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:16 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15278 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:04 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:04 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209020337.AA15278@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #676 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Sep 92 22:37:10 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 676 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines (Derek Andrew) Summary: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (J. Porter Clark) Pulse Diling Through to a PBX Extension (Michael M. O'Dorney) Automatic Call Router (Javier Henderson) North American ISDN Users Forum (Steve Rogers) Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (Javier Henderson) Call Home Country Codes From UK and France (Fred E.J. Linton) Area Code 700 Number For ANI Read-Back? (Bill Mayhew) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andrew@jester.pa.dec.com (Derek Andrew) Subject: Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines Reply-To: andrew@jester.pa.dec.com Organization: University of Saskatchewan Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 22:49:38 -0600 I recently posted a request for information on the various tapeless answering machines on the market. This is a summary of what I have learned. Panasonic, AT&T, GTE, Sony and Phonemate were the only manufacturers that I found anything on. The following features appear to be common to all machines. o battery backup o on the machines that include a phone, the phone usually has some speed call buttons, and maybe other features like redial. o when the machine supports day/time stamping, it appears to be the day of the week and the time of day. o all machines seem to support remote operation, but only the AT&T and MAYBE the Panasonic machines allow selective deletion of individual messages REMOTELY o NOBODY, but NOBODY supports Caller ID. AT&T 1337, 1339, 1539 $100-$200 The features of these models are the same but... The 1339 has the additional features of Day/Time stamping and voice prompts; the 1539 is the 1339 with a built in phone. o Capacity for seven minutes of messages. o Allows selective deletion of individual messages, (other vendors allowed deletion of only ALL messages). o Battery backup. o It has the standard play, fast-forward, back, pause, and delete buttons. Complaints o The toll saver feature will cause the machine to answer after two rings if there are *any* messages -- even if you have heard them before -- rather than just *new* messages. All messages must be deleted to reset it. o The OGM still sounds like it was recorded on tape. o The fast-forward button doesn't react very quickly, you have to pause about a second between presses. o It won't record a blank message if the caller hangs up before the beep, but it will record the sound of the phone being hung up if the caller stays on after the beep. o If the last message is a blank, then you have to start the play sequence over again and fast-forward to it in order to delete it, since the machine gives you no time to back up. Panasonic KX-T8000 o Eighteen minutes of messages o maybe has remote selective deletion of messages PhoneMate ADAM (All Digital Answering Machine) >$200 o Variable speed playback. o Will call another number when it receives a message. o Ten minutes of messages, expandable. o LCD display o Day/time stamping. o variable speed message playback o commands to skip forward or back to next message, and forward or back within message during playback. o phone included o smart enough not to record pauses Complaints o Poor sound quality. o Message playback is LOUD GTE 9821 < $100 Although there is a new model out, the 9831, I received no responses from any owners. Indications were that the owners of the 9821 would never buy another GE machine again. A vendor told me the 9831 allows ten minutes of messages and supports call screening. o two minutes of messages. o simple phone included Complaints o no way to screen calls o must listen to calls on the handset o You can't back up or go forward -- to review a call, you have to review ALL of your calls o bug: if someone talks to the full two minutes, it crashes the system, eats your outgoing message, and from then on it answers the phone, beeps at the person on the other end, and won't take messages. Sony IT-A4000 o Phone included. o Variable speed playback. o Time/date stamp. o Voice prompting. o three separate mailboxes. o Will call a phone number when it receives messages. Complaints o Poor sound quality (like the ADAM) o Cuts of messages from cellular phones (verified by manufacturer.) Another owner has not experience this bug. The following article is copied from a previous posting in the TELECOM Digest. I have included it here for comparison to the others. Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:02:08 PST From: Mark Lottor Subject: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now. It is a speakerphone and digital answering machine. It has a very hi-tech design and a real nice backlit LCD display. The answering machine has three outgoing messages, which can be your own or ones from ROM. The first is the normal please leave a message message. Another is for when your recording memory is full. And another is for when you put the machine in announce only mode. When leaving a message, a caller can push *1, *2, or *3 to have the message tagged for a particular recipient. The phone does not tell them to do this, you put it in your message if you want to, otherwise things go into box one by default. The phone has three LEDs on three buttons; the corresponding one blinks when a message is left "in" a particular "mailbox". Also, the display shows how many messages are in each box. Then the recipient can just hit one of the buttons to play back that box. However, don't get the impression that this is a voice-mail system. Messages are time and dated. A memo button lets you record from the local speakerphone mic or the current phone call into message area three. The phone can also be set to call another number after a message is received. It will try calling every 30 minutes until you answer (or read the new messages). It plays a recorded message (your own or from ROM) and waits for your password to access it. You could potentially record touch-tones into your "remote access" message if you wanted it to call your pager, although I haven't tried this. The remote mode is voice-synthesized but has only minor prompting. You can do most functions from the remote mode, including turning the machine on/off, call transfer on/off, change transfer number, and change OGMs. However, you can not delete individual messages, only complete mailboxes (you can play, delete, and skip individual messages from the front panel). It is slightly annoying when you call it because it doesn't tell you if there are new messages or not; you need to try the play command (or use toll-saver mode). Also, it will only listen to DTMF commands when it is finished prompting you, which can be annoying but the wait is never more than a second or two. The sound quality of digitized messages is OK but not great. However, it does hold up to 16 minutes worth of messages. The phone has CPC, toll-saver modes, and speed dials. The LCD display shows time, modes, number dialed, minutes talking, and number of messages. It can only be set to answer after three or five rings, or TS mode. In summary, its a nice phone. It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do something differently. However, it easily beats having a machine with tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service. It sells for around $199. This article has been prepared from information obtained from the following helpful individuals: Dan D Grove David Whiteman J. Brad Hicks Jim Berilla Justin Leavens Laurence Chiu Mark Lottor Mark Wuest Michael Schuster Steve Atlas Tom Scheer Vance Shipley Willie Smith Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0 Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808, 52 11 23N 106 48 48W ------------------------------ From: jpc@avdms8.msfc.nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) Subject: Summary: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? Organization: NASA/MSFC Date: 31 Aug 92 17:32:13 GMT Last week I inflicted this message upon the world: > Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a > documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals. > If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with > respect to the other? > I know this has been a controversial topic in the past, with one > vendor doing one thing and another the opposite, but what is the > current thinking? I received several responses. I like Fred Bauer's explanation the best: From: Fred Bauer > According to the EIA Standards, RS-422-A is a _Mark Negative_ system, > which means that the A lead will be negative with respect to the > B lead when sending a binary One. Note that this definition applies > only to the _Data_ signals. For the Control leads, A>B means on. For the > timing signals, a negative-to-positive transition on the A lead should > be coincident with the data transitions. The definitions for control > leads and clocks are taken from RS-530, as RS-422-A only specifies the > electrical characteristics of the signals, not what they are used for. > The same definitions apply in the C.C.I.T.T. equivalent, V.11. > Some confusion may be caused when interconnecting RS-422 devices to > MIL-188-114C devices. The MIL standards specify a _Mark Positive_ System. > I am not sure as to the exact specification, as I don't have a copy > handy, but I believe that the polarity of the timing signals may > be reversed also. Fortunately, I'm not dealing with a MIL-188-114C system. I upgraded my mini-inews shortly before I posted my original query, and I soon regretted it. The "From:" line came out wrong and people couldn't send replies to it. Sorry about that, folks. All fixed now, I hope. As a result of this problem, a couple of people posted followups: Hans Ridder tnixon@hayes.com (Toby Nixon) There was some discussion along the lines of "What controversy?" I can remember a time in which about 90% of the industry was polarized the way it is now and 10% the other way. Apparently, this is no longer a practical concern and everyone is consistent. J. Porter Clark jpc@avdms8.msfc.nasa.gov or jpc@gaia.msfc.nasa.gov NASA/MSFC Communications Systems Branch ------------------------------ From: Michael M. O'Dorney Subject: Pulse Dialing Through to a PBX Extension Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 8:51:36 PDT In 1967, I called Columbia University (New York City) from Buffalo. I was using a rotary dial phone. I called a conventional ten digit number (212-xxx-xxxx) and received a recording to dial an extension and then a dial tone. I dialed the extension (I was answering a job and had the extension number) and was connected to the extension. This was either the biomedical engineering department or the electrical engineering department number. Does anyone know how this was done, how did the system pick up dial pulses reliably, was this Bell hardware or third party (or home-brew) by the school's department. I later heard that this system was called "direct inward dialing" and not "centrex", although later on, centrex and DID were used interchangeably in marketing hype from NYTelephone. (I do not know when "centrex" as a term was created.) Michael M. O'Dorney | Voice: 206-237-1274 (work) Boeing Commercial Airplanes | P.O. Box 3707, M/S 96-02 | Internet: mmo2273%aw2@orcas.fsl.ca.boeing.com Seattle WA 98124-2207 | Boeing net: mmo2273@aw2 [Moderator's Note: I'll tell you who else used to accept dial pulses through their WATS extender: United Airlines on their Unitel network, a system which connects all UAL facilities across the continent. I have no idea how they could do it, but you could call into the WATS extender (which by the way went with *no password required* for several years) and rotary dial all over the immediate, local area network of United. Pulsing could not be done throughout the entire Unitel network however; tones were required to hop off-net and continue dialing through a remote PBX to an outside line in a distant city. UAL finally wised up, getting rid of progressive dialing in lieu of 'enter only the end destination number, we will route it' and also requiring passwords. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu Subject: Automatic Call Router Organization: Pomona College Date: 01 Sep 92 14:10:37 PDT Radio Shack has a device that accepts one phone line, and can automatically route voice calls to a phone and modem calls to a modem. It works by using a feature offered in some areas, with which you get a second 'phone number' for your line, that when dialed produces a different ring. RS sells its box for $119. My question to the net is, are there any other similar devices elsewhere that can be purchased for a lesser price? Thank you. Javier Henderson jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Aug 92 15:50:38 CDT From: srogers@tad.eds.com (Steve Rogers) Subject: North American ISDN Users Forum Dear Telecommunications and Messaging Industry Professionals: We are pleased to invite you to attend the October 28, 1992 meeting of the North American ISDN Users' Forum (NIUF) Messaging and Answering Group. This meeting is part of the October 26-30, 1992 NIUF being held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Gaithersburg, Maryland. The NIUF has created a strong user voice in the implementation of geographically consistent ISDN and ISDN applications and has helped to ensure that the emerging ISDN environment meets users' application needs. More specifically, the NIUF Messaging and Answering Group focuses on how messaging and answering applications can be realized in an ISDN environment. Applications include defining ISDN interfaces for Voice Mail, Electronic Mail and Fax Mail, Transparent Networking of Voice Mail Systems (VMS), Centralized VMS, Unified Message Retrieval, and Unified Message Notification. At this meeting you will have an opportunity to preview a prototype ISDN application which provides an integrated desktop, including a single user interface for notification and retrieval of voice, email and fax messages. This service demonstrates functionalities addressed in the following NIUF applications: Unified Message Retrieval (Application #160009.0) and Unified Message Notification (Application #810035.0). Included as one of the TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92) applications, this service is being developed specifically for use with standardized ISDN utilizing X.25 packet messaging over the ISDN D-channel. TRIP '92 will bring together members of the telecommunications industry to showcase real life uses of ISDN and the national scope of the ISDN network. We encourage participation from messaging vendors, enhanced service providers, RBOCs, and businesses with their own messaging needs. With your involvement, we can make these and other ISDN applications a reality. For more information about the North American ISDN Users' Forum and registration material, please contact: Dawn Hoffman National Institute of Standards and Technology Building 223, Room B364 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Phone: 301-975-2937. Sincerely, Glenn Ehley, Siemens Stromberg-Carlson Chair, NIUF ISDN Implementors' Workshop ------------------------------ From: jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu Subject: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Organization: Pomona College Date: 01 Sep 92 14:14:51 PDT I live in the LA area, and use Pac Tel for my cellular service. Calls to 911 are free, and you're connected to a CHP dispatcher (I assume that most calls for help in this area are from stranded motorists). This dispatcher will connect you to other agencies as needed. Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not. Javier Henderson jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu ------------------------------ Date: 01-SEP-1992 17:10:26.50 From: Fred E.J. Linton Subject: Call Home Country Codes from UK and France France Telecom this summer was distributing a "Pays Direct" (Home Direct) prefix list, as follows. In all cases, one must await a new dial tone after dialing the initial "19". Service Number ------- ------ ATT USA DIRECT 19 00 11 BRAZIL DIRETO 19 00 55 CANADA DIRECT 19 00 16 COLOMBIA DIRECT 19 00 57 ESPANA DIRECTO 19 00 34 FINLAND DIRECT 19 00 358 HK <<< DIRECT 19 00 852 ITALIA IN DIRETTA 19 00 39 JAPAN DIRECT 19 00 81 MCI CALL USA 19 00 19 NEDERLAND DIRECT 19 00 31 NZ DIRECT 19 00 64 OTC AUSTRALIA DIRECT 19 00 61 PORTUGAL DIRECT 19 00 351 SINGAPORE DIRECT 19 00 65 SPRINT EXPRESS 19 00 87 SVERIG DIREKT 19 00 46 UK DIRECT 19 00 44 DEUTSCHLAND DIREKT 19 00 49 DENMARK DIRECT 19 00 45 IRELAND DIRECT 19 00 353 The UK's BT (British Telecommunications plc) offered a similar listing: Country number Name of Service ------- ------ --------------- Australia 0800 89 0061 OTC-Australia Direct Austria 0800 89 0043 Austria Direct Bahamas 0800 89 0135 Bahamas Direct Bermuda 0800 89 0123 Bermuda Direct Brazil 0800 89 0055 Brasil Direto Canada 0800 89 0016 Canada Direct Chile 0800 89 0056 Chile Directo Columbia 0800 89 0057 Columbia Direct Denmark 0800 89 0045 Danmark Directe Eire 0800 89 0353 Eire Direct Finland 0800 89 0358 Suoraan Suomeen France 0800 89 0033 France Direct Germany 0800 89 0049 Deutschland Direkt Hong Kong 0800 89 0852 Hong Kong Direct Indonesia 0800 89 0062 Indonesia Direct Italy 0800 89 0039 Italia In Diretta Japan 0800 89 0081 Japan Direct Japan (bis) 0800 89 0080 Japan Straight (IDC) South Korea 0800 89 0082 Korea Direct Malaysia 0800 89 0060 Malaysia Direct Netherlands 0800 89 0031 Nederland Direct New Zealand 0800 89 0064 NZ Direct Norway 0800 89 0047 Norge Direkte Portugal 0800 89 0351 Portugal Direct Singapore 0800 89 0065 Singapore Direct Spain 0800 89 0034 Espana Directo Sweden 0800 89 0046 Sverige Direkt Thailand 0800 89 0066 Thailand Direct Turkey 0800 89 0090 Turkey Direct USA 0800 89 0011 AT&T USA Direct USA (bis) 0800 89 0222 MCI CALL USA USA (ter) 0800 89 0877 Sprint Express USA (quad) 0800 89 0456 Phone USA (TRT) [Submitter's query: Who is TRT? Used to be the name of AT&T Mail's Telex Service.] Fred E.J. Linton Wesleyan U. Math. Dept. 649 Sci. Tower Middletown, CT 06459 E-mail: ( or ) Tel.: + 1 203 776 2210 (home) or + 1 203 347 9411 x2249 (work) ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Area Code 700 Number For ANI Read-Back? Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date:Tue, 01 Sep 1992 01:31:15 GMT I was told that there is a 700 number that reads back your own number. A check of telecom back articles at our site doesn't pull up any references. If it exists, could somebody pass the number along? Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (140.220.1.1) [Moderator's Note: None that I know of. 700-555-4141 tells you which long distance carrier is assigned to your line however. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #676 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21122; 2 Sep 92 1:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23585 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:33:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12898 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:32:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:32:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209020432.AA12898@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #677 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Sep 92 23:33:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 677 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (Bill Nickless) Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia (David E.A. Wilson) GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL (Thomas K. Hinders) New Cell One/Boston Service in NH (Douglas Scott Reuben) Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (John Galloway) Bell Canada Does it Cheaper (Alayne McGregor) Trinary FAX Number? (Nigel Allen) CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings (Phillip Dampier) Wiring Advice Sought (Joe Konstan) Finding Exchange Names (Rudolph T. Maceyko) ISDN and Dialing 911 (Johnny Zweig) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 22:44:21 -0500 From: nickless@antares.mcs.anl.gov Subject: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago I've called *999 several times on the highways around Chicago to report drunk drivers and stranded motorists. Somewhere in the back of my mind I think it's only for the highway system. I called *999 from Indiana on my way to Michigan once, and they said they'd pass it on to the Indiana authorities. Bill Nickless System Support Group +1 708 252 7390 ------------------------------ From: david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) Subject: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 04:42:37 GMT At June 30 this year Australia had 441,256 mobile phones in operation, up 51% over the previous year. It is not just yuppies either, many blue- collar workers are finding it an essential tool of their trade. The breakdown by capital city is: Sydney 131,116 Melbourne 102,906 Brisbane 52,887 Perth 28,214 Adelaide 22,117 Hobart 3,431 Australia has had cellular mobile phones for the past five years and now has 25.1 mobile phones per 1000 people, more than either the US, UK or Scandinavia after five years. Scandinavia has had mobile phones for ten years and now has 58 mobile phones per 1000 people (after five years it had only half Australia's current figure). The mobile network covers 350,000 square kilometres making it the largest geographic coverage in the world. David Wilson (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ Date: 01 Sep 92 06:55:10-0900 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL I heard a report on the radio (WMAL in Washington DC) that GTE is testing a new service in Tampa FL area. This unnamed service would permit you to use a cordless phone like a cellular phone. Calls would be cheaper and can be made in environments were cellular calls can't get through (tunnels, basements etc). The example cited was carrying a cordless phone while shopping, at work etc. It wasn't clear (a LOT wasn't clear) whether you used your existing phone number, or subscribed to another. The presenter of this info was reporting on stock market activity and not a techo-wiz. Thomas K Hinders Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f) ------------------------------ Date: 01-SEP-1992 16:37:31.67 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: New Cell One/Boston Service in NH I was just up in Laconia, NH, and noticed that there is now service in the area, ie, from Concord to Albany (New Hampshire) to south of Laconia to Franklin. Suprisingly, the service is provided by Cell One/Boston, owned by SWBell, who provides cell service for the Boston Metro area. It is surprising because there is an intermediate system in Nashua, NH, so the Boton and Concord/Laconia systems of Cell One/Boston are not adjacent. The system is in effect a separate system, and is not (presently) linked to the Boston system, at least in a way that the casual user will notice. The NH system is run off of a Motorola EMX swtich (as is the Boston); indeed, it may even be that Cell One/Boston "partitioned" one of their Boston swtiches to run service in Franklin/Laconia NH. Metro Mobile does this with their Springfield switch -- e.g., although it can not pass calls between its Springfield (south central Mass) switch and its Pittsfield/Franklin County (north central and western Mass) system since they are now owned by a Bell outfit (Bell Atlantic), both systems are run off of the same physical switch. Cell One/Boston, up against similar regulatory constraints, may be doing the same thing. Anyone know about this? The SID code for the new system is 01485 (yes, it is different from Boston which is 00007), and the roam port number is (603) 229-7626. Since it is an EMX-based system, it will respond like the rest of the Motorola linked systems in the northeast -- your features like Call-Forwarding and Three-Way calling will work, if your phone is busy (and you have no Call Waiting) callers will hear a busy, you can place seven digit calls while roaming, etc. Moreover, the (603) 229-7626 port will respond to call-forwarding set in ANY other system. Thus if you are a Wilmington, DE customer who sets CF in Wilmington (or anywhere else in the "system"), someone dialing the NH port will get transfered as if they had dialed your number directly in Wilmington. (Some exceptions for CF via *71 to voicemail, though ...) Cell One/Boston, as well as all "New England Network" customers, pay the highly attractive roam rates of $.44 peak/$.29 off peak, and no daily charge. Cell One/Boston customers will NOT, however, get their Boston rates, as this is a "separate" system. Calls are not delivered between systems (due to regulatory problems, although this is easily cured via a "*28/*29" system using IXCs to pass calls between the two). However, when Nationlink/Roam America starts up in a few weeks, callers will be able to reach Cell One/Boston customers in NH. Since all features will work as well, the system will thus become "somewhat" transparent to Boston customers who use the Nationlink service. Finally, Cell One/Vermont just got Nationlink/Roam America, and thus a Cell One/Boston customer can get calls practically all the way from eastern New Hampshire all the way up I-89, through Vermont, and to the Canadian border. (They will pay a $3.00 per day/$.99 per minute roam rate in VT, though ...) As to when Boston will connect with its neighboring system in CT and Western Mass (Metro Mobile) who knows ... Metro Mobile is so busy trying to put Cell One/Litchfield (CT) out of business (and themselves in the process, it seems) that they don't seem very interested in doing anything else of use to their customers. After all, ever since the ENTIRE technical staff in one of their switches (Norwalk?) quit in protest a few months ago, handoffs from CT -> Cell One/NY haven't been working. For some reason, they can't figure out how to fix it after all this time! :( :( Anyhow, enough digression; I'd be interested to hear from anyone who uses the NH system about coverage, technical problems, etc. I don't get around that area too often so any input/info would be appreciated! Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: infmx!johng@uunet.UU.NET (John Galloway) Subject: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line Organization: Galloway Research Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 01:56:01 GMT I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number, when you have your number forwarded to a land line. This seems like a real rip off since in this case the only resources being used are the land line connected switches, which likely have plenty of bandwidth, there is no cellular communication occuring (that I can see anyway, am I mistaken?). I had planned to get a cellular, then only give out that number. When I get to an office or am at home, I just forward the cellular to the number where I am -- simple. I only give folks one number and it either goes to where I am, or to my home phone with an answering machine. But, as I now realize, this would be very expensive. You can only control forwarding from the phone being forwarded, so executing this plan with (for example) my home phone as the base doesn't work, since I can not un-forward or re-forwad it remotely. RATS!! (Call your cellular carrier and complain TODAY! :-) internet jrg@galloway.sj.ca.us John R. Galloway, Jr 795 Beaver Creek Way applelink D3413 CEO...receptionist San Jose, CA 95133 Galloway Research (408) 259-2490 [Moderator's Note: *Which* Cellular One? *Which* GTE? Cellular One in Chicago does not charge for forwarding calls to landline numbers, nor does Ameritech, the 'B' carrier here. And regards forwarding of calls, Illinois Bell now allows us to *remotely* change our forwarding at no additional cost. I will comment more on this in the next issue. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 17:56:34 -0400 From: mcgregoa@cognos.com (Alayne McGregor) Subject: Bell Canada Does it Cheaper In , John Higdon writes: > "Pacific Bell plans to upgrade a small number of Pacific Bell Public > payphones in its franchise territory to trial Public Coin voice > Messaging Service (CVM). Our intent is to trial this service from a > limited base beginning the first quarter of 1993 pending regulatory > approval. CVM will allow a caller, encountering a busy or no answer > condition, to send up to a one minute message to their called party for > an additional fee above the cost of the call. Bell Canada has had this feature for quite some time now -- except it only charges you the quarter that you would have paid anyway to reach the person. Alayne McGregor mcgregoa@cognos.com alayne@ve3pak.ocunix.on.ca ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Trinary FAX Number? Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 1:50:27 EDT The fax number for {Advertising Age} magazine in New York City, (212) 210-0111, looks as if it could be in base three. ------------------------------ From: Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 00:30:19 -0500 Subject: CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings STATEMENT FROM CWA ON AT&T SALES OFFICE CLOSINGS WASHINGTON -- "Once again, AT&T has put the whims of its top managers above the well being of its workers and the communities where they live and serve," charged Communications Workers of America Vice President James Irvine. "Their decision to close six customer service offices later this year may satisfy some ill-conceived management scheme, but hundreds of working people, thousands of family members, and communities in six states will suffer." "AT&T allows its managers to make decisions of this magnitude without regard for the impact that it will have on the families and communities affected," Irvine continued. "The union has argued against these kind of consolidations and re-organizations in the past, because they ultimately work against AT&T's best interest." "People are told that they can uproot their families and follow their work, but that is very difficult for them. And thousands of our members have become high-tech migrant workers, following their work from one closing office to the next. Then the next manager decides to redesign the business for no good reason, and people are uprooted and displaced again. It just doesn't make sense." AT&T will announce next week the closing of six of its fourteen customer sales and service offices. The closing offices employ about 860 workers represented by the Communications Workers of America. The offices, which will close on December 1, 1992, are located in Columbus, OH; Mobile, AL; Radnor, PA; St. Cloud, MN; Wauwatosa, WI; and Parsippany, NJ. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 16:00:29 PDT From: konstan@elmer-fudd.cs.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) Subject: Wiring Advice Sought I'm moving to a house where we'll be having two phone lines (is this bottom 10% for Telecom readers?). Since we are renting, and neither want to pay for nor have to undo wiring changes, I'd like to do the minimum possible to use my single line phones properly. Three cases: 1. I do have one room where I want to use both lines. I already have an adapter that puts out line one, line two, and BOTH. That seems to be sufficient there. 2. For rooms where I want only line-one, should I just use a normal RJ-11 cable (four wires through) or should I make one that only passes through the middle wires? One of the phones has a lighted dial, but I don't think it expects power from the extra wires (AT&T Trimline). 3. For rooms where I want only line-two, is the easiest solution to just make a cable that's wired one -> two, four -> three without wiring two and three through? I have the crimpers and plenty of cable to make whatever will work best. The phones are old 2500 sets, an AT&T 5500, the trimline, and a "decorative" phone. Also, are there any useful standards for marking these special cables (something that other people might recognize)? Thanks, Joe Konstan konstan@cs.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: rm55+@pitt.edu (Rudolph T Maceyko) Subject: Finding Exchange Names Date: 01 Sep 92 15:48:57 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh A few weeks ago, I sought a list of exchange names in area code 412. I asked at the Pennsylvania Department of the Carnegie Library in Pittsburgh and lo and behold, under a very small stack of papers was a list of exchange names! I was surprised that it was so readily available. The librarian couldn't tell me how old it was, but it has "7-70" printed at the bottom of it, so I'm assuming that's a date, even though it seems too recent. (I'm told, however, that the names weren't completely abandoned here until about 1973 or so.) I have typed in the list, if anyone is interested. It also includes some exchanges from area code 814. By the way, the Carnegie doesn't keep telephone directories, even on microfilm. But they do have the City Directory, going way back to 1893 (?) or so (I didn't look at them since I had already found what I wanted). Rudy Maceyko Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ------------------------------ From: zweig@cs.uiuc.edu (Johnny Zweig) Subject: ISDN And Dialing 911 Reply-To: zweig@cs.uiuc.edu Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 16:02:08 GMT I was chatting with a couple of friends last night about the rumored criminal case in which somebody died because Garth Brooks concert tickets went on sale and nobody could get a dialtone to call 911 with the switches saturated with thousands of eager ticketbuyers, and it occurred to me that the obvious solution to the problem may be forthcoming. The obvious solution, to me at least, is to have line cards that are smart enough to tell that someone is dialing 911, and some priority-based emergency override in the switch so that an emergency call goes through at the cost of possibly not giving a line to (or even taking bandwidth away from) a non-emergency call. My understanding is that current switches are designed to have the line cards just digitizing the customer's loop signal and send keypresses on to the switch for processing (it isn't clear to me if keypresses are decoded before or after digitization -- I could see arguments for either way of doing it). The problem is that the system needs a distributed way of detecting the emergency call -- there must be some resource that belongs to a line permanently, so that mobs of concert fans can't use it all up. Since line cards are the only piece of central office equipment a line is always connected to, that seems the logical place to put the emergency detection smarts. Then I considered that ISDN line cards might well be intelligent enough to more sophisticated processing of the signal coming from a customer's line. The must clearly be enough stuff for it to demultiplex out the D channel and send signalling information to the switch. It thus seems that the protocol that operates between the line card and the switch could be set up to allow an emergency override, so that dialing 911 on one's ISDN phone caused the call to go through no matter what kind of nasty stuff was going on in the switch. All that is needed is some way for a line card to demand attention somehow. Since the phone units are smart, they could generate a special signal to put on the D channel, regardless of whether there is switch capacity to give dial tone. So my question for the list is: Do you suppose that ISDN can and will create an environment in which everyone in town flooding a switch with requests will not cause people to be unable to dial 911 due to lack of dialtone? Johnny Emergency ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #677 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12839; 3 Sep 92 2:55 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02744 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:52:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26413 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:51:56 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:51:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209030551.AA26413@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #679 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Sep 92 00:52:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 679 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson MCI Mail Automatic Autoforwarding (MCI Press Release) (Paul Robinson) Hardware/Software Position Wanted (Amir S. Hatefi) My Trimline Phone is Broken! (Roy M. Silvernail) FCC Docket 92-136 Available via Anonymous FTP (Paul W. Schleck) AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Justin Leavens) American Phone on British Phone System (Nancy J. Airey) Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Alan T.C. Penn) Baudot Codes (Thomas E. Lowe) Conference: Commercializing Internet (Matt Lucas) How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages (Paul Robinson) Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line (Paul Gloger) Looking For Off-Hook Specs in RJ12 or RJ13 Connections (Scott A. McMullan) Modem Access From Europe to North America (Rom M. Kieffer) Unadvertised SW Bell Offering (Charles Mattair) Travelers Offers Toll Fraud Insurance (Andy Sherman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 21:28:01 EDT Subject: MCI Mail Automatic Autoforwarding (MCI Press Release) MCI MAIL INTRODUCES AUTOMATIC FORWARDING CAPABILITIES TO ENHANCE MESSAGING FLEXIBILITY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jane Levene (914) 934-6480 Internet: 2671163@MCIMAIL.COM Corporation (MCI), today announced a new electronic mail feature which allows customers to automatically forward their incoming MCI Mail messages to any destination including other MCI Mail users, X.400 recipients, and any fax, telex or postal address for a specified period of time. This new feature, AutoForward, is available immediately and gives MCI Mail users more control in managing their correspondence. The new functionality allows MCI Mail customers to have multiple AutoForward settings to control the starting/ending dates and the specific recipients or destinations for their autoforwarded messages. Customers with active settings are notified immediately when they log on to MCI Mail. Settings may be edited for future reactivation, cancelled to immediately terminate an active setting, or deleted entirely from a user's account. "The AutoForward feature is designed to make it easier for people to manage their day-to-day correspondence whether they are in or out of the office", said Jerry DeMartino, Vice-President of Sales and Marketing for MCI International, a subsidiary of MCI. "It is particularly useful for business executives, and people on vacation or personal leave who may not have immediate access to a PC. Customers can AutoForward messages to fax machines at their hotels. And market research suggests that AutoForward can be used to distribute market survey results and customer feedback. Other uses for AutoForward are limited only to our customers' imaginations." MCI Mail customers can use the Autoforward feature by typing CREATE AUTOFORWARD at the Command: prompt. MCI Mail will prompt the user to provide a start and end date, as well as the name they want to give their AutoForward setting and the recipients to whom they want their AutoForwarded messages delivered. Once the user has entered their setting information and confirmed that the information is accurate, the setting will become active based on the Start Date and Time provided by the user. For further details, customers may type HELP AUTOFORWARD at the on-line Command: prompt. MCI Mail provides a complete range of messaging services including electronic mail, EDI, X.400. fax, telex, hardcopy postal and courier delivery worldwide. Customers can access MCI Mail through a toll-free number in the U.S., through packet switched networks in over 90 countries, or via MCI Mail Global Access, currently offered in 27 countries. MCI offers a full spectrum of domestic and international communications services. In addition to electronic mail, other international services include worldwide direct dialing, MCI CALL USA, MCI WORLD REACH, 800 services, telex, private voice and data networks and television transmission. MCI offices in over 50 countries, Guam and Puerto Rico are positioned to provide and support the full range of global telecommunications services. -------------- [Moderator's Note: With all these improvements MCI Mail is making to their system, I wonder why they still have not managed to bring their service into compliance with Internet mail standards. There is not a week goes by that mcimail.com does not dump out at least one and as often as not two or three issues of TELECOM Digest undelivered due to a bad name on the list or some other problem. The rule is supposed to be that delivery of the same email to multiple names is not affected because of one bad name: you skip that one and deliver to the others. Several dozen readers at mcimail.com don't get their copy because MCI dumps the whole load. Of course then I have to pull the bad name from the list and resend the issue to everyone there. My solution soon will be to discontinue delivery of the Digest to MCI Mail and send subscrib- ers there a note suggesting they bring pressure on MCI Mail honchos to join the rest of the email world in conforming to standards set up to serve everyone. I've tried calling MCI Mail about this; I get nowhere fast. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hatamian@gandalf.rutgers.edu (ShAhin) Subject: Hardware/Software Position Wanted Date: 02 Sep 92 15:39:57 GMT Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Hello everyone, A friend has asked me to post this for him. Please respond directly to him by phone or to me via email. Thanks, S ----------- Hi, I am looking for a position in the area of computer software/hardware and netwroking. I have a MSEE with emphasis on Computer Architecture. Also, I have two years experience in designing both hardware and software for microprocessor based medical instruments. I also have about six months of experience in design and implementation of Ethernet LANs using NOVELL3.11. Please for further info and/or a resume call me at: (201) 848-0446. Thanks. Amir S. Hatefi ------------------------------ Subject: My Trimline Phone is Broken! From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 00:38:53 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN One of my best-ever garage-sale aquisitions is an old (and ugly yellow-green) ITT Trimline-type phone. Got it for $1, with no cord. It's been a faithful bedside phone for years, now, and gives me something to do with that little transformer I unplugged from the basement six houses ago :-). After this move, it's given up. The microphone isn't working. I checked the mic with my ohmmeter, and it shows a good connection. Changes resistance with audio, so I don't think the mic has gone. But I find no voltage across the mic when the phone is off-hook. Perhaps one of you might have an idea, or even a schematic they could pass along? The phone says "ITT 180447" on the flex-circuit in the handset. I don't really want to tear into it with no roadmap. E-mail preferred, and thanks in advance. Roy M. Silvernail (in the throes of a mail crisis, so try.... roy@tfsquad.mn.org) ------------------------------ From: pschleck@cwis.unomaha.edu (Paul W Schleck KD3FU) Subject: FCC Docket 92-136 Available via Anonymous FTP Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 12:20:33 CDT Just a short note to let everyone know that a copy of FCC PR Docket 92-136 (Ammendment of Part 97 of the Commission's Rules to Relax Restrictions on the Scope of Permissible Communications in the Amateur Service) is available via anonymous FTP from ftp.cs.buffalo.edu in file /pub/ham-radio/pr_docket_92-136. As any reader of rec.radio.amateur.policy knows, the subject of permissible communications in Amateur Radio is a matter of some dispute. Historically, amateurs had great latitude on content, the FCC only being concerned with the pecuniary interest of the operator himself, rather than that of incidental 3rd parties who may benefit from that communication. In 1972, however, in response to an inquiry (isn't it always some poor sucker asking a leading question of the Commission that causes them to do really undesirable things?) the FCC decided to take a much more restrictive view of business communications, making illegal any communications that could POSSIBLY benefit third parties. The docket attempts to restore the rules to their pre-1972 state. This has put a serious crimp on many types of public-service communications (the Idiatrod dog race in Alaska is a prime example) as well as up-and-coming amateur packet networks (remember the Desert Storm message of 1990?). Some of the interesting questions raised by the docket (and subsequent discussion on rec.radio.amateur.policy) include: 1. Are amateur operators responsible enough to insure that the service isn't exploited by commercial interests? 2. Would simplified rules concerned only with operator compensation be a help or a hindrance? Would this open the door to commercial exploitation? 3. Is the Amateur Radio Service an experimental service, a communications service, or both? Where do we draw the line between the two? 4. Is the transmission of "incidental music" (such as when making a telephone call via radio patch and you get hold music, or some occasional background music during FCC-authorized retransmissions of "NASA Select" shuttle audio/video) something that should be permitted, with restrictions, or prohibited? 5. What consitutes "regular use" of amateur radio for communications and when should such communications be relegated to alternative services such as cellular phone? 6. Should transmissions by a compensated control operator, when such transmissions are for the purpose of classroom instruction at an education institution, be permitted? (Currently the only exception is for the transmission of bulletins and Morse Code practice, with certain scheduling and frequency-use requirements). Interested parties should submit comments to the FCC by October 1, 1992 and reply comments by December 1, 1992. Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU pschleck@unomaha.edu ------------------------------ From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers Date: 02 Sep 1992 15:10:13 -0700 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA I heard someone else mention this briefly before, and I didn't understand what they were talking about then, but it seems as though AT&T is offering customers $40 to switch to AT&T. I received a mailing from AT&T, and I was immediately annoyed by this check-looking thing I saw inside (it looked like one of those things that are usually marked 'You may already have won'). Strangely enough, this was a real check for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance' or something like that. Anyway, I guess the deal is that if you cash the check, you agree to switch over to AT&T. I'll take $40 over my MCI totebags and Sprint AM/FM radios anyday ... For $40, I'd switch my _mother_ to AT&T. Justin Leavens University of Southern California Microcomputer Specialist ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 16:41:06 EDT From: jean@hrcce.att.com (Nancy J Airey) Subject: American Phone on British Phone system Organization: AT&T Some time ago I picked up a phone connector at an electronics gadget store that is supposed to "convert" an American "modular" phone to a British modular plug. The American end is the "typical" one I'm used to seeing. The "British" end is somewhat larger but has a similar type of "push in" connection. (Love the technical terms!) I am planning on giving a "nice" phone to some friends over there for Christmas. Now I know that I could not select any phone that has features requiring electrical connections and expect a direct connection, but what is the likelihood that making a connection for the other end is going be a hassle? Are modular wall outlets common? For any British folks reading this -- what would be a "nice" feature set on a phone for you to get as a gift? I haven't been in a lot of private homes, and am not sure if things like programmable speed calling, speakerphone etc. are appealing -- or would the cutesy phones (Mickey Mouse, Kermit the Frog) be more appreciated? Is this going to work on touchtone -- or will it have to be set to dial-pulse? Feedback appreciated. att!hrcce!jean ------------------------------ From: Alan TC Penn Subject: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 17:15:12 PDT I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The function of this device is to route the incoming phone message directly to either an answering machine or a modem. |--------- answering machine | ring A Wall jack ------- device -------- | |--------- modem ring B With this device, I can utilize my one phone line to have two different phone numbers for different applications. ------------------------------ From: telb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lowe) Subject: Baudot Codes Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 18:34:38 GMT I need the five bit codes (mark/space) for the baudot protocol. If anyone has them, I would appreciate a copy. Thanks. Tom Lowe AT&T Bell Labs tlowe@attmail.com or tel@homxa.att.com 908-949-0428 Fax: 908-949-6825 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 15:22:34 -0400 From: matt lucas Subject: Conference: Commercializing Internet Reply-To: ml3a@andrew.cmu.edu Organization: TeleStrategies Inc. TeleStrategies is hosting "Commercializing Internet: Issues, Opportunities and Entrepreneurial Strategies" on September 15-16. The following topics will be discussed: - New opportunities for computer vendors, information service entrepreneurs and telecommunications carriers. - NSF acceptable use. - RBOC, IXC and entrepreneurial strategies for multimedia and gigabit networking. - Creating public network services from the emerging national research and education network. Also, there will be a one day pre-conference tutorial "Understanding Internet for Non-Engineers" on September 14. For more information call (703) 734-7050, ask for Matt Lucas, or Eva Waskall. Or, if you e-mail your postal mailing address to ml3a+@andrew.cmu.edu I will send you a brochure. Matt ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 17:49:26 EDT Subject: How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages For persons wishing to make their Internet address public, you may register it with the "Internet White Pages" which are maintained by the Network Information Center (NIC), the same people who register and assign Internet domains. You send them an E-Mail message giving your name, your E-Mail address, your mailing address and telephone number. Within a week they will send you back a code which is your initials and a 1 to 3 digit number. There is no charge to be listed or to obtain this identification code. Here is one example. One of my accounts which has Internet access is TDARCOS on MCI Mail, so I can list that. For example, my name is Paul Robinson, and my identification code assiged by the NIC (which is called a 'NIC Name') is PR 142. If you were to use the telnet facility to call up the address shown below, you would find my name and internet address (TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM). Before I had an MCI account, I used a local BBS to access Internet (I still do). So on the NIC listings, I showed my Internet address as: paul.robinson@f417.n109.z1.fidonet.org (which I still use and is still valid.) The address to E-Mail requests to be listed in the NIC "Internet White Pages" is: HOSTMASTER@NIC.DDN.MIL ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 01:25:57 PDT From: PGloger.es_xfc@xerox.com Subject: Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line The {Wall Street Journal} on Friday, August 28 (or maybe Thursday the 27th) carried an article primarily about computer fraud, which included one interesting tale of a computer/phone fraud. I'm reporting from memory here since I have been surprised to see no mention of this story yet here in Telecom. The gist of the story was that several employees of a large company set up a 900 phone line outside of work, then went back to work and programmed a company computer to repeatedly phone their 900 line, quickly racking up huge 900-line charges. The company evidently paid the 900 charges only for a while at most, since the story became sufficiently known to be written up in the WSJ. An ironic added touch is that the large company in question was AT&T. Definitely an imaginative way to rip off one's employer. (No, none of us think rip-offs are good. Yes, all of us expect 'most large company phones to be blocked against outgoing 900 calls.) Paul Gloger [Moderator's Note: I certainly hope the employees in question were fired immediatly when their fraud became known; and I hope that once they had been discharged AT&T then referred their names to the U.S. Attorney for criminal prosecution. Did the article discuss this? PAT] ------------------------------ From: mcmullan@sd-sun1.vf.ge.com (Scott A. McMullan) Subject: Looking For Off-Hook Specs in RJ12 or RJ13 Connections Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 7:21:59 EDT As far as telecom hardware goes I'm about as green as it gets, so please feel free to correct me where I'm wrong. In RJ12/RJ13 phone connections I believe there is a separate circuit that is used to control the "off-hook" lights in other phones on the system. I need to know how much power goes thru that circuit in a "normal" (I know, there's no such beast) system. I'm trying to design a piece of hardware which will be controlled by the relay in a modem which exists to complete that circuit, and I can't find the ratings on the contacts of that relay. Please e-mail replies if you can, and I'll summarize if there's interest. Scott A. McMullan GE AOD, Valley Forge (215) 354-5160 :) All opinions expressed are mine, I cannot speak for my employer or others. :) Try my BBS at (215) 789-5748 9600 baud ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 8:40:59 -0600 (MDT) From: RM_KIEFF@rom.tcpl.ucalgary.ca (ROM M. KIEFFER) Subject: Modem Access From Europe to North America Greetings, One of our employees will travel to the Netherlands in the near future from where he will need to access various computing devices back at the office in Canada, with his Macintosh powerbook and built-in modem. This gives rise to several questions: - since European jack wiring is different from North American standards, what kind of cable will I need to build/acquire to make ends meet? - is it legal in to connect private modems to the public carrier? - and, are the European digital dial tones the same as the North American ones? (I have thought about packet carriers instead of long distance calls, but the services at the NA end of the link cannot be reached/used that way.) I would appreciate hearing from the European readers about these questions, either direct to me, to summarize to the net, or via the standard distribution. Thanks, Rom ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 09:31:42 CDT From: mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Unadvertised SW Bell Offering Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX SW Bell has been advertising Call Notes (SM) as a new service. This is your typical Teleco based answering machine clone with little if any product discrimination. However, the ad leads you to believe SW Bell must have forward on busy/no answer to provide this service. Call the local order office and ask. Sure enough they do but to quote her: "We can sell it if you ask for it but we can't offer it to you." If anyone's interested, $0.75/mo for each service, $1/mo if you subscribe to both. Charles Mattair (preferred) mattair%synercom@hounix.org Fast, Cheap, Good. Choose Two. (anon) (or) mattair@synercom.UUCP Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer. [Moderator's Note: IBT offers forward on busy/no answer and likewise they do not market it to residential users but will sell it if you ask for it. The only problem is that it is not user programmable: it is turned on at all times to one selected number which must be another number in the same CO. So they say. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 11:26:37 EDT From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Travelers Offers Toll Fraud Insurance Organization: Salomon Inc Today's {Communications Week} reports that the Travelers Corp. has begun offering a program to insure users against toll-fraud losses of up to $1 million per year. The policies will cover fraud from hacked DID access and fraud from hacked voice mail access. While loss of income or business interruption will not be covered, calls appearing on the insured customer's phone bill will be covered. Coverage will be sold in $1,000 increments from $50,000 to $1,000,000. A $50K policy will cost $2500/year and have a $5000 deductable. A $500K policy has a $24,500 premium and $50,000 deductable. A $1,000,000 policy will cost $49,400 with $100K deductable. (If you do the math, you see that the premium is about 5% of coverage amount and the deductable is 10%.) According to Travelers, this is the first offering of insurance for toll fraud, although several carriers and manufacturers offer programs to protect users against losses incurred with their equipment or on their networks. Andy Sherman Salomon Inc - Unix Systems Support - Rutherford, NJ (201) 896-7018 - andys@flatline.sbi.com or asherman@mhnj.sbi.com "These opinions are mine, all *MINE*. My employer can't have them." ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #679 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14193; 3 Sep 92 3:48 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29290 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:42:05 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09919 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:41:55 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:41:55 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209030641.AA09919@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #680 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Sep 92 01:42:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 680 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson PBS Videoconference Announcement (Tom Flavell) Warning: Deceptive Use of This Account by Phreaker/Cracker (SDF Admin) Bad Connection to MCI (John M. Sullivan) Multi-Frequency Signalling Queries (10u6579@csdvax.csd.unsw.oz.au) V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Michael C. Berch) GTE Spacenet to Join Advanced Retail Communications Project (Paul Robinson) Caller ID is Now Working in Indianapolis, Indiana (Bill Kessler) UK - US Compatible? (Robert A. Carolina) Unusual Part Search (Kevin Wang) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tflavell@pbs.org Subject:PBS Videoconference Announcement Date: 3 Sep 92 12:41:18 EDT The following program will be broadcast on many PBS stations in October. Please check with your local PBS station Education Services Director to see if this will be broadcast in your area: TELECOMMUNICATIONS: BRINGING THE WORLD INTO THE CLASSROOM, a professional development videoconference for educators and school boards will be presented on October 22, 1992, from 2:00-4:00 PM Eastern Time by the National School Boards Association's Institute for the Transfer of Technology to Education, the PBS Elementary/Secondary Service and The National Foundation for the Improvement of Education. The videoconference will originate from INFOMART, Dallas, TX, site of the annual "Making Schools More Productive" NSBA conference. This live, interactive videoconference will investigate issues in telecommunications use in schools from a variety of perspectives -- from policymaker to practitioner. The videoconference will feature NFIE's 1992 award-winning Christa McAuliffe Educators -- Bonnie Bracey, Arlington, VA; Misty Brave, Kyle, SD; Carol Gilkinson, Covina, CA; Marilyn Schlief, Garden City, MI; Jim Zimmerman, Urbana, IL -- who employ some of the most innovative applications of technology in schools today, such as: *Connecting Students from Around the Globe Via Lumaphones and slow-Scan-Video: Voice and picture messages are carried over telephone lines from Michigan to Japan connecting students and teachers in the Garden City Public Schools with their Japanese contemporaries. *Teaching About Cultures Close to Home: Technology is being integrated into multicultural curriculum programs in Little Wound School in South Dakota to educate and instill value of traditional native American customs. *Achieving Real Life Studies of Our Earth: Students in Arlington, Virginia are taking part in the National Geographic Kids Network to share current information in an international telecommunications-based science and geography curriculum studying acid rain. *Opening Up the World of Science: Students are utilizing a variety of technological tools including computers, video disc, scanners, telecommunications, and robotics to complete classroom assignments and discover the world of science. *Creating a Global Perspective, Community, and Classroom: Students in Covina, California are being introduced to Prodigy and E-mail and other educational technology to engage students in collaborative efforts to examine worldwide problems, increase cultural awareness, and promote a global perspective. By offering this videoconference, educators in your area will learn how (and be able to ask questions of) these motivated, innovative teachers are applying telecommunications-based programs in new and exciting ways. Their insights and experiences will prove invaluable to educators who are striving to change education. Date/time and related videoconference information is as follows: TITLE : TELECOMMUNICATIONS: BRINGING THE WORLD INTO THE CLASSROOM NUMBER/LENGTH : 1/120 minute videoconference DATES/TIMES : October 22, 1992 1:30-2:00 PM/Eastern Time Test Time 2:00-4:00 PM/Eastern Time Videoconference TRANSPONDER INFO: Will be announced to registered sites DESCRIPTION : The videoconference will examine issues in telecommunications use in schools from a variety of perspectives - from policymaker to practitioner. The 1992 NFIE Christa McAuliffe Educators will demonstrate projects currently in place in their respective districts and help participants explore the challenges and opportunities presented in implementing telecommunications-based programs in today's classrooms. Telecommunications issues for schools, including planning and policy issues, governance, curricular issues, technical requirements, and financial impact will be addressed. PRODUCER : Produced by the National School Boards Association's Institute for the Transfer of Technology to Education, with support from the Regional Bell Operating Companies RIGHTS : Unlimited broadcast and duplication rights. COST : $150 per downlink site. This is a non-exclusive offering. PRINT MATERIALS: A reproducible resource guide and a local promotional packet will be distributed to all sites registered through PBS. FOR INFORMATION: To register contact Tom Flavell at PBS Elementary/Secondary Service at (703) 739-5402, or fax (703) 739-8495. ------------------------------ From: shadmas@sdf.lonestar.org (a real lamer) Subject: Warning: Deceptive Use of This Account by Phreaker/Cracker Reply-To: sysadm@sdf.lonestar.org Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas - 214/436-3281 Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 06:40:55 GMT # # ## ##### # # # # # #### # # # # # # ## # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # ###### ##### # # # # # # # # ### ## ## # # # # # ## # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # #### The person previously using this account (and now barred from it) has apparently been deceptively posing as a PBX equipment buyer named "Tom Downs". This is *NOT* the name of the user. He is also known to have used the alias "Patrick ONeal". This person is a teenage or early 20's "phone phreak" known (primarily to other phreaks) as "shadow master". It is expected that his intent as posing as a PBX buyer is to obtain information on PBX systems which are large (easier to conceal diddling), remotely configurable, have outdial capability (to thwart CLIDs and call tracing during "phreaking"), and voice mail (phreakers communicate with each other via stolen VMB's). If you have a system of this type, and have revealed it to this person, it is quite probably has been cracked already. He apparently has acquired access to phone company databases and other sources of information to seek out places to break into. Even casual posters to Usenet should beware if they manage or deal in such equipment. This is certainly not the first or last time for such an event. It would be prudent to exercise caution in dealing with ANYONE who posts and mails from public access systems such as this one. This will be the final posting from this account, and it is being used for this purpose since we expect it increases the chances of this posting being seen by people who had formerly been in contact with this person. The actual identity of this person will be made available to any authorized law enforcement agency in the case any criminal proceeding ensues. In utmost sincerity, The sdf system administration group. ------------------------------ From: sullivan@riemann.geom.umn.edu (John M. Sullivan) Subject: Bad Connection to MCI Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:23:30 GMT A friend of mine just moved to a new apartment yesterday, here in Minneapolis. Her phone was connected by US West on schedule. She had requested MCI Dial-1 service, and had told MCI about her new number so that her account billing and F+F circle, etc would be transferred over. But she couldn't dial 1 + area + number yesterday. I suggested trying 10222 + 1 + area + number, but this behaved exactly the same way. After a ring or two, we heard the message "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check the number and dial again. 2EB" (no doo-wee-dee tones at the beginning)` This same message was heard when dialing 1-700-555-4141. I then tried placing a long distance call with ATT (10288) and Sprint (10333). Both of these worked fine. This, and the "2EB" code in the message, led me to believe that the problem was MCI's. But my friend had called MCI earlier, and they said it must be that US West hadn't set up the long distance right. She had called US West, who had promised to get the repair department to select MCI for Dial-1 by noon today. She had been told by MCI to try dialing 10222 + 00 to get an MCI operator, who could put through the call, which had worked. I tried calling MCI last night, and tried to explain that the 2EB message must be theirs, and that I wasn't interested in the Dial-1 service, but only in being able to use 10222 + 1 +. The woman finally agreed to get my local USWest customer service rep on the line three-way. They were both agreeing that my problems were due to USWest not having put in the Dial-1 choice properly, and I couldn't convince them otherwise. At one point the conversation went: USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two? me: Yes. USW: Is she [MCI] still on the line? me: I don't know. MCI: Oh. What? USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two? MCI: What's a pick code? me: You know, like one-oh-two-two-two. MCI: Oh, I've never heard it called a pick code. [Neither had I] Does anyone out there know what's going on here? What message should I hear when dialing 1-700-555-4141 if no carrier is selected for Dial-1? (If I dial 10-xxx-1-700-555-4141 for a random choice of "xxx", I hear a very long pause with some touchtones in the background, and finally "doo-wee-dee Your call failed. Please try again".) Thanks for any info. John Sullivan ------------------------------ From: 10u6579@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au Subject: Multi-Frequency Signalling Queries Date: 2 Sep 92 23:09:54 +1000 Organization: University of New South Wales Hi, I have a query about multifrequency signalling used in the telephone system. Is there any standard set of frequencies used for signalling worlwide? Where can I find out specific info on signalling in Australia, the local Telecom office library won't let me in as I am not a staff member! Is inband signalling still popular or is it all done on special signalling circuits. If you can help clear up my confusion please E-mail to: Henry, 10u6579@csdvax.csd.unsw.oz.au University of NSW, Sydney Australia. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 16:32:08 -0800 From: mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) Subject: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? I borrowed a MultiTech V.32 modem to do some testing, and while waiting for something to complete I thumbed through the manual and came to a curious appendix at the end: "CCITT V.25bis Operation". After explaining the differences between normal commands and V.25bis commands, there was a section entitled "Delayed and Forbidden Numbers", which I quote below: "V.25bis provides the facility to delay failed call retry attempts by putting numbers that failed to connect on a special Delayed Numbers list. Subsequent dialing of these numbers will be delayed (time specified by a country regulation) and an appropriate message displayed. If the number is retried more than the maximum allowed number of times (also specified by country regulation) it is placed on the Forbidden Numbers list, and no further retries will be allowed. [...] Numbers are removed from the Forbidden Numbers list after a certain time has passed (also by country regulation). Some country regulations have numbers remain on the Forbidden Numbers list permanently. [...]" I looked at this for a while, and thought it might be some sort of inside joke among modem manufacturers, and then I came to the per-country regulations and operations guide: "SWITZERLAND [...] b) Delay and Forbidden List behavior 1. Two minute delay between four retries. 2. After four retries the number is put on the forbidden list 3. The number remains on the forbidden list forever." Austria and France are similar; Belgium, Italy, and Singapore use a 120-minute timeout for removing a number from the Forbidden List. OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded. But ... a Forbidden Numbers list? With numbers that stay on it FOREVER?? Have these people totally taken leave of their senses? If I dial up my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again? I assume that either I am not reading something right, or that V.25bis is optional/voluntary, or outdated, or something, but I really can't imagine what reasonable thoughts were occurring in the heads of the people that thought up this scheme. Does anyone have any ideas about what CCITT was trying to accomplish here? Michael C. Berch mcb@presto.ig.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 21:01:20 EDT Subject: GTE Spacenet to Join Advanced Retail Communications Project News Briefs, August 27, 1992 {Washington Technology Magazine} Vol. 7 No. 10, Page 3 GTE Spacenet to Join Advanced Retail Communications Project: McLean, Va.-based GTE Spacenet is teaming with JCPenney and Capital Cities/ABC to deliver television, audio and data services to retailers and malls nationwide via combined satellite and terrestrial networks. Called Advanced Retail Communications, the venture will initially use existing GTE Spacenet and JCPenney satelite communication facilities. Capital Cities/ABC will provide broadcase programming for the effort, which will open in 1993. Ameritech Mobile to test both CDMA and TDMA side by side: In another victory for Qualicomm, Inc of San Diego, Calif., and CDMA, its core digital wireless technology, Ameritech Mobile has decided to conduct the first side-by-side trial of CDMA and its chief rival TDMA. The trial will last for 60 days and will take place in the Chicago metropolitan area. CDMA, or Code Division Multiple Access, and TDMA, or Time Division Multiple Access, are competing standards for future digital wireless phone systems. Comsat files tariff for full-time international digital television: Comsat Corp's World Systems business unit filed a tariff on Aug. 7 with the FCC to offer full-time international digital television service. If the tariff is approved, the system could come on-line by Sept 21. Comsat says the system will allow existing satelite news gatherers to load more programming into their transmissions. The International Digital Television Service places Comsat in the forefront of the future all-digital high-definition television market. Intelsat K satelite now on-line: On Aug. 21, Intelsat announced that the Intelsat K satelite is commercially on-line. From its location ove the Atlantic Ocean, the Ku-band satellite offers broadcasters uplink and downlink service from the eastern half of North America to as far east as Central Europe. Downlink service is also available to the major metropolitan areas of South America. ------------------------------ From: kessler@inuxy.att.com Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 08:32 EST Subject: Caller ID is Now Working in Indianapolis, Indiana After waiting about three years, Caller ID is finally working in Indianapolis. It started working at about 8:15am on my ISDN set. Per call blocking *67 has been working for about a month. Bill Kessler kessler@inuxy.att.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:12:59 -0500 From: Robert A. Carolina Subject: UK - US Compatible? Hello all, I am moving to the UK next month and would apreciate some advice/information about electronics compatability. In addition to the issues raised below, I would be grateful if you send replies along with any advice or tips via Internet email to: rac@intercon.com 1. Will my phones work in the UK? I have a couple of phones with RJ-11 jacks and my own wire splicing kit. Do they use RJ-11 jacks in the UK? Are the voltages, etc, compatible? Will British Telecom come and arrest me if I install my own phones? Do I need to pay any extra fee to use a modem? 2. Is my nice new Mitsubishi color TV going to work in the UK? I have heard that the broadcast standards are completely incompatible and I must purchase a new TV in the UK. (Yes, I am aware of the 75.00 pound Sterling annual tax on color TV's.) 3. Will my other electronic gadgets work allright with the proper transformer? For example, my CD player? Will a US CD player be compatible with an amplifier purchased in the UK? Thanks in advance for any suggestions you may have. Rob Carolina Assistant Corporate Counsel InterCon Systems Corporation 950 Herndon Pkwy, Suite 420 Herndon, VA 22070 USA 703.709.5500 703.709.5521 (direct dial) 703.709.5555 (fax) Internet email: rac@intercon.com ------------------------------ From: kwang@zeus.calpoly.edu (Kevin Wang) Subject: Unusual Part Search Organization: The Outland Riders Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 05:30:36 GMT I'm looking for something like an RJ45, the eight position jack, except that I only need a six conductor cable. I've dug through all of my catalogs, books, and whatnot, and can't find a single thing, except for the 8P/8C jacks. Does anyone have a source? What I need them for is ISDN. We're about to be the first commercial users here in San Luis Obispo County, Calif, except that we want to wire the house ourselves. We already have 9 phones lines in the house, so we will have no difficulty wiring (I just went out and bought another 200' of nine-pair cable), so that's not the issue. Kevin Wang kwang@hermes.calpoly.edu or kwang@gauss.elee.calpoly.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #680 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16526; 3 Sep 92 4:55 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17620 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:56:23 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20967 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:56:14 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:56:14 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209030756.AA20967@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #681 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Sep 92 02:56:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 681 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement: Conference on Hold! (Dave Quinn) Re: Weird Intercept (Mike Morris) Re: Weird Intercept (Mark Baker) Re: Weird Intercept (Alan L. Varney) Re: Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens) Re: Weird Intercept (Mike Coleman) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Gordon Hlavenka) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (chuckle) (Allen Gwinn) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Leonard Erickson) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Dennis Mitchell) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Andrew Klossner) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Barrey Jewall) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: quinn@ender.tamu.edu (Dave Quinn) Subject: Re: Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement: Conference on Hold! Date: 3 Sep 1992 10:19:29 -0500 Organization: Texas A&M University The information posted about Hohocon is no longer valid. It seems that some pre-conference hotel trouble occurred. So, for now, disregard that posting about the Hobby Airport Howard Johnson's. HoJo didn't want hoho ... so ... please stay tuned for more up-to-date info. dave ------------------------------ From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1992 05:38:44 GMT > [Moderator's Note: IBT has a few numbers where they 'store' various > funky intercept recordings for whatever reason: 312-856-1520 ==> 1525 > always return messages like " ... can't be completed as dialed, please > ask your attendant for assistance", " all circuits are busy > now", and a particularly odd one used to be in that range of numbers > which simply said "the voting has been concluded"(?), plus one that > makes sense if you think about it, "the number you have dialed cannot > be reached from outside the customer's premises". PAT] Are these nonbilling? Also 714-259-0020 thru 0029 are nonbilling intercepts. A while ago I pulled a fast one on a friend who I knew was going to call me from a cellphone -- I forwarded my line to the -0029 number, which asks the caller to drop 20 cents and try your call again ... his wife told me later that the look on his face when he heard that was wonderful ... (it was a cell speakerphone and she heard it too). Mike Morris WA6ILQ PO Box 1130 | Arcadia, CA. 91077 | All opinions must be my own since nobody pays 818-447-7052 evenings | me enough to be their mouthpiece... ------------------------------ From: mcb@ihlpf.att.com Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 07:35 CDT Subject: Re: Weird Intercept > I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached > this number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says > "We're sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone > you are using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." > The problem only occurs if I try and dial it as a normal PacBell call, > that is, by dialing 9 for an outside line, then 1-213-663-xxxx. If I > dial it via our long-distance network, or via MCI or Sprint, it works > fine. It it possible that your employer (the owner of the PBX) has asked Pacific Bell to block all long distance calls from your PBX. This would force you to dial such calls via your long-distance network at presumably a cheaper rate. The other possibility is that the lines associated with your PBX have no default PIC, forcing either 10XXX dialing or private network access for inter-LATA calls. Just a thought. Mark Baker AT&T Network Systems ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Sep 92 10:06:44 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article John Higdon writes: > This non-sequiter type of intercept [deleted ] is quintessential GTE > incompetence. For instance, in Long Beach one of our Centrenet lines > had the following recording in response to the simple dialing of '0': > "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. You must first dial '950' and > a carrier access code before the number". > Now mind you that I understand that the wrong recording could simply > be an erroneous channel assignment on the drum announcer. But the > recording itself is complete nonsense. It has no application anywhere. > It indicates a complete lack of understanding of even GTE's > procedures. So why was it made in the first place? Heaven only knows. > [Moderator's Note: ... So if some customer wished to have no LD > carrier assignment for whatever reason and dial everything via 950 > with a PIN, the intercept you described would make sense if they > attempted to one-plus dial. I repeat, the wording is not the best. PAT] You're close, PAT. The specified announcement is required by Bellcore's TR-530/FSD 20-24-0000 Interconnection requirements, in Section 3.3.2F, when a caller dials 10XXX in a CO that only offers 950-WXXX access to the XXX-specified carrier -- in other words, to a carrier that only wants to pay for FG-B trunks. Bellcore's preferred wording (from SR-TSV-002275, "BOC Notes on the LEC Networks - 1990"), Table 6-54: "We're sorry, the long distance company access code you dialed must be preceded by the digits 950. Please hang up and try your call again." Those fortunate enough to also have TR-NPL-000275, "Notes on the BOC Intra-LATA Networks - 1986", will note that Table AU in Section 6 also shows this as List 228 on the CK-22550 standard announcement tape. (The 1990 document deletes many details from the 1986 version.) You'll also note the announcement is slightly different: "We're sorry, the long distant company ...." Either way, the GTE recording is about a clear (or un-clear) as the Bellcore version. So now, John, you know WHY the announcement EXISTS in the GTE switch. As to why "0" would yield the announcement, it's obviously a screw-up in specifying the correct routing for that digit. Note that with the divorce of FG-B XXX codes from FG-D codes and the expansion to four XXXX digits for both by 1995, this particular announcement (and it's twin, where 950-WXXX should have been 10XXX) will no longer be meaningful. I doubt if many companies even bother to use the announcements. For further reference, see: TR-NWT-000690, "IC/INC Interconnection FSD 20-24-0000", which replaces the TR-530 bundle of FSDs. TR-NWT-001050, "Expansion of Carrier Identification Code Capacity for Feature Group D (FGD)" Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 03 SEP 92 02:24 GMT Subject: Re: Weird Intercept In reference to my report of a "Your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are using; please check the instruction card and dial again" intercept when trying to call 213-663-xxxx, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > BTW, 663 IS still in 213. Call GTE repair about six times. That might > do it. You will notice that I never had to ask if you were in GTE > territory. In this case, GTE has an airtight alibi: the intercept only occurs when I try it from my office (in PacBell land) as a normal, 1+ call. If I place it over our long-distance network, or via a major LD carrier, it goes through fine. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com >>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<< Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ From: coleman@twinsun.com (Mike Coleman) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept Organization: Twin Sun, Inc Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 04:39:56 GMT In MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev. unisys.com writes: > When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're sorry; your call > cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are using. Please > read the instruction card and dial again." I've run into this very problem myself, courtesy of Southwestern Bell (in Kansas City). In my case, what that intercept actually *meant* was "even though the number is in another area code, you must dial as though it were in this one". (This took *quite* a while to discover.) In my case, the logical next step was to dial 1-XYZ-1234, which drew an intercept "It is not necessary to dial one when dialing this number", which is apparently Bell-speak for "dial one all you like, but we're not going to connect you until you don't." Ugh. The upshot of all of this seems to be that you're not allowed to call someone unless you know where you yourself are dialing from. How bogus. ------------------------------ From: cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us (gordon hlavenka) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Vpnet Public Access Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1992 03:25:29 GMT > ... This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II where air > phones figure prominently in the plot. In some sequence, our hero gets > paged by his wife from a plane, he checks the pager and calls her back > on the plane. Is this possible or some Hollywood license? Exactly. No uplink calling on Airfone. Never had it. Possibly never will, for political rather than technical reasons. Imagine an insurance salesman or 12-year-old prankster (or terrorist!) calling up to random airplanes. Now try and find a _cost-effective_ way to prevent these calls. Incidentally, a comment WRT the base post here: The main reason that you aren't supposed to use your cellphone in flight is that it will clobber _every cell_ in the ground network. (Line-of-sight from 30,000 feet ...) Kinda screws up the frequency reuse scheme. Gordon S. Hlavenka cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 07:01 CDT From: allen@sulaco.lonestar.org (Allen Gwinn) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air (chuckle) Organization: sulaco > This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II where air phones > figure prominently in the plot. In some sequence, our hero gets paged > by his wife from a plane ... Just a side note, if you look real close, the investigative reporter who is also on the flight, uses the AirPhone as well. In the first two sequences, you'll note that he's even found a way to use it upside-down (with the earpiece and mouthpiece reversed) :-) ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 23:43:13 GMT Another possibility here (although slight) would be poor longitudinal balance in either the modem or the phone, making the voltage to ground on each conductor of the twisted pair not equal and opposite, allowing capacitive coupling into other pairs. Balanced twisted pair lines are great! Radio stations have twisted pairs running thru the same cables your phone does and they get signal to noise of 70 dB or so. This is truly amazing, especially with dial pulses, ringing signals, and the LOUD off hook beeping noise. Harold ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1992 05:33:33 GMT julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) writes: > The big question is "Why are people still doing installations > with quad wire?" Maybe because when they go to Radio Shack or Pay'n Pak (a big chain ha1rdware/electrical retailer here) and ask for "telephone wire" they get sold quad! I'm going to have to find a use for the quad I got stuck with (no receipt) and track down some two-pair to make a *long* extension cable for my apartment. (Phone jacks in the bedrooms, and the kitchen. *none* in the living room ... ) Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: mitchell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Dennis Mitchell) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:00:12 GMT shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes: > The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of > hissing and noise heard on the voice line. > What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can > use inside the house? I had a similar problem in my apartment in Hawaii. I ran a BBS on the second line and when it was on-line I got a lot of crosstalk. After three visits the Hawaiian Telephone tech isolated it to a defective modular receptacle. He explained that in the humid air of Hawaii, there was often a small amount of corrosion that conducted the signal between the two lines. I wasn't willing to believe it ... until he fixed it by changing the receptacle, and it stayed fixed until I moved out. ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 13:31:44 GMT > [Moderator's Note: We have one working hard here at present exhorting > whoever answers to be sure and vote Democratic. PAT] What do you want to bet that it's run by the Republican party in an attempt to annoy voters and dissuade them from voting Democratic? scott [Moderator's Note: That sort of thing is always possible. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 11:56:34 PDT Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon TELECOM Moderator notes: > What would you rather have, a phone call like that or the Jehovah > Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday morning like they do > mine? I'll take the visit. Then I know who it is, and they react so nicely if I open the door unclothed. :-) JWs are supposed to keep files on area households. Tell them firmly that you have your own faith, are definitely not interested in theirs, and ask that they please never visit you again, and (if the system works) they'll leave you alone. (However, they'll deny that any such file exists.) Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) [Moderator's Note: An aquaintance of mine has tried that technique on them a couple times -- opening the door in various stages of undress; but I think that is a little rude, and apparently it is a common response to the Saturday morning visitors; the Jehovah people have seen it many times and no longer pay attention. In other words, the joke has worn thin. A precious little black girl about ten years old stands outside the subway station once or twice a week where I get on the train offering copies of {Watchtower Magazine}. I always buy a few copies from her and leave them in the subway for whoever wants them. The couple dollars means little to me and so much to her. PAT] ------------------------------ From: barrey@Novell.com (Barrey Jewall) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: Novell, Inc. Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:06:08 GMT In drilex!carols writes: >> Apparently, people [in Minneapolis are getting calls] from a new kind >> of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc. It >> sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer >> that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attorney General's >> office says that this doesn't violate any laws. Fortunately, in California there is a law that says that recorded announcements have to be preceded by a live human, which tends to avoid Sears calling me at 3:30 AM to tell me that my dishwasher (which I had not ordered) had arrived. This doesn't stop the calls from out of state, however, as the state of California doesn't do anything about 'em. > [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like > that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday > morning like they do mine? PAT] This was avoided by me rather simply. Upon arrival at our door, the JW's were greeted by two unshaven, slightly drunk men (me and a friend) one of whom was holding a Mossberg police shotgun. Jeff (my friend) cocked the weapon, and asked "you won't be coming back, will you?"... They never did. (BTW ... it was 7 AM, not nine, and we'd gotten home about four hours earlier.) Bah. Barrey Jewall - Network Admin. ++ and yea, though I walk through the shadow barrey@novell.com ++ of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am Novell, Inc.- San Jose, Calif. ++ the meanest sonofabitch in the valley... [Moderator's Note: For all the philisophical differences I have with JW's, I would rather have them as neighbors any day over the nasty people I deal with now. JW's are clean and very quiet. Their children are very well-behaved. Most of my neighbors now are like animals and Chicago is like a zoo where the violent animals are in control. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #681 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27987; 4 Sep 92 2:28 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05036 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:39:16 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23350 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:39:08 -0500 Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:39:08 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209040539.AA23350@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #682 TELECOM Digest Fri, 4 Sep 92 00:39:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 682 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Mark Christophel) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Peter M. Weiss) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Michael A. Covington) Re: Disaster Reporting on Usenet (Jim Graham) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (John Rice) Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups (Robert L. McMillin) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (David Lemson) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Marc T. Kaufman) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Dennis Mitchell) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 00:45:19 GMT From: mark@sunburn.InterLan.COM (Mark Christophel) Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting on Usenet The Moderator has asked to hear what is happening in South Florida. I live in Broward County, 30-40 miles north of Andrew's path of destruction. South Florida (south Dade County mostly) was hit very hard by Hurricane Andrew. At last report the estimated damages are in the area of $20 billion, 280,000 people are reported homeless and twenty people are reported dead (four in the Bahamas, one in Louisiana, the rest in Dade County, Florida). These figures are expected to continue to rise as rescue workers make it into some of the areas worst hit. The destruction is absolutely incredible to comprehend. For those familiar with the destructive force of a tornado which takes out everything in its path of say 300 feet, imagine that swath being 30 miles wide! Entire neighborhoods and cities have been leveled. Most of the destruction in north Dade County and in Broward County was limited to downed power lines and trees being uprooted. 1.5 million people were without electricity after the storm. Many of them have regained power, but those areas hardest hit may not have power for many weeks. Amazingly (or not? ;-)), 98% of the residents did not lose telephone service, even in the height of the storm. The storm hit Monday morning with top wind gusts of 164 miles per hour. Sustained winds were around 140 mph. South Florida has the strictest building codes in the nation, and all buildings are built to withstand 120 mph winds. Andrew's strength surpassed this. The outpouring of support has been great. For those of us in Broward County, we see how close we came to being the ones needing help. When I went to sleep Sunday night (if you can call it sleep), the storm was expected to hit north Dade/south Broward. The needs are very great. Everything basic to survival is needed: food, water, shelter. Many cities across the US are gathering goods to send down. Check in your area to see if you can participate in any way. I can also forward a list of organizations that are accepting donations. The moderator mentioned cs.miami.edu. University of Miami is in Coral Gables, one of the areas hit hard by Andrew. I don't know the status of the University, but they are planning to start classes on Sept. 14, only two weeks late, and expect to finish the Fall Semester by Christmas. Mark J. Christophel mark@sunburn.interlan.com Racal-Datacom, Inc. [Moderator's Note: Thanks for your report. cs.miami.edu has started responding to my nntpxmit calls once again; apparently they are back in operation at least in a limited way. I've previously posted calls for help to South Florida, and the Telephone Pioneers in Ft. Lauderdale are collecting from members of the telecom industry all over the USA. If readers here have not yet sent emergency boxes consisting of house- hold goods and supplies; clothes, food for babies and pets, etc. then it is vital that they do so today. Boxes of whatever you can spare can be sent via Federal Express to "Telephone Pioneers Disaster Assistance, Ft. Lauderdale, FL" ... that address will be sufficient. In addition, parcels can be sent to the City Clerk, Homestead, FL by Federal Express. Thanks very much, everyone! PAT] ------------------------------ Organization: Penn State University Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:29:08 EDT From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet In article , YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET says: > I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not > been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. (...) On the news that we carry here: alt.hurricane.andrew There were 13 articles posted. Pete - pmw1@psuvm.psu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 06:08:29 -0700 From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Rick Broadhead writes: > I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not > been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. That's why we have Amateur Radio. Hurricane Andrew has made me rethink the idea of getting a 2M FM handheld transceiver for emergencies, along with the license to use it. (That and buying some of the 55 gallon barrels for water storage I saw at Home Depot the other day, and maybe an emergency generator.) Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@indigo2.hac.com ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:18:57 GMT Back during the Los Angeles riots, I suggested organizing emergency communications on Usenet, which should be able to play much the same role as amateur radio. Nobody did anything. Rick Broadhead's mention of the hurricane raises the issue again. Any takers? Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 17:38:09 CST From: Jim Graham Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting on Usenet YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET writes: > I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not > been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. For > example, [...] a group [...] which could be used by anxious friends > and relatives to find out about friends and family in disaster areas, > to disseminate information on relief efforts, provide addresses of > those agencies accepting donations, and to report on the situation > in affected areas. Actually, such a service exists today ... but not under Usenet. Amateur Radio (aka Ham) operators have, for a long time, been doing just this sort of thing. In a disaster, there are several different types of traffic (messages) handled by Hams. The first of these, and the most important, is true EMERGENCY traffic, which, among other things, includes direct support for organizations such as the Red Cross/Red Crescent, Civil Defense, etc., on both a local and wide-area scale. Another type of traffic we handle is more what you're looking for. It's called HEALTH AND WELFARE traffic. Basically, H&W traffic is where someone who has family in the affected areas asks for information about those family members, or the reverse, where someone in the area wants to let their family outside know that they're ok. All of this traffic is handled on very formal "nets" on the air, directed by a single net control station. All transmissions on that frequency, except illegal ones (malicious interference) are at the direction of the net control operator. These nets are all part of a formal, regular operation. Uunder normal conditions, these nets still run (except the specific disaster nets such as the United Nations nets, etc) and handle routine traffic (which is basically designed to keep people's traffic handling skills sharpened. Now, there are some very important reasons why this might not really want to be handled by such an informal thing as Usenet ... I'll list the three main things that come to mind now ... perhaps others will add to this. Imagine, if you will, John Doe wants to find out about his mom, Jane Doe, who lives in the disaster area ... so he posts this to the group. Now, along comes Joe Jerk, who fakes a post from that area, and describes this guy's mothers demise in gory detail ... and all a lie. Think it wouldn't happen? When I was helping out with H&W traffic for the San Salvador earthquake (et al), I actually heard people jamming (or at least, trying to jam ... they didn't get very far ...) the net, talking about how in their opinion, they somehow deserved to get hit with that earthquake. There are some real slimeballs out there, and they key on events like this to get their jollies. Strike one. (Could be solved to some degree with a moderated group, but would then be too slow due to the overhead.) But, even more important, here's another reason why this wouldn't really work out too well --- how are people in that area going to get on Usenet? In many cases, for a while, at least, Amateur Radio is truly the *ONLY* stable communications in/out of the disaster area. Amateur Radio is a formal part of the disaster plan for all of the areas I've seen, and generally includes plenty of station equipment, emergency power, etc., all at the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for a city, often with at least one backup site for the primary Amateur operations. Compare this with something as loose and informal as Usenet, and you've got strike two. Here's strike three: Usenet is often just too slow. According to the headers, your article was posted to comp.dcom.telecom on 31 August at 1811 UTC. It just arrived here (I'm in Chicago, just like our Moderator), and it's now 1 September 2219 UTC. That's a pretty substantial delay, just to get the request registered -- and that's not even under adverse conditions ... True, as long as everyone involved is on a link connected with the Internet backbone, this delay isn't an issue, but in strike two, we pretty much eliminated the Internet connectivity in the disaster area as a reliable option. And even then, any type of landline service is likely to be marginal after such disasters (or at least, we have to assume this will be the case ... and then be thankful if it isn't). Later, jim #include INTERNET: jim@n5ial.chi.il.us | grahj@gagme.chi.il.us | j.graham@ieee.org ICBM: 41.70N 87.63W UUCP: gagme!n5ial!jim@clout.chi.il.us AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@n9hsi (Chicago.IL.US.Earth) 73 DE N5IAL (/9) ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 17:44:56 GMT In article , YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET writes: > I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not > been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. For > Are there any folks out there who have experience in creating a new > newsgroup, and are willing to moderate a discussion and run a vote for Look for alt.hurricane.andrew. It's been in existence since shortly after Andrew hit florida. John Rice K9IJ | "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was | MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially | Not my Employer's ... rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 07:12:34 -0700 From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups Rick Broadhead writes: > I am surprised that Usenet, a powerful and international medium of > communication, has not been more widely used to assist in the dissemination > of information during crisis situations and calamities. For example, I am > sure there would be great support for newsgroups such as misc.disaster. > reports and/or misc.disaster.coordination, which could be used: > (a) by anxious friends and relatives to find out about friends > and family in disaster areas > (b) to disseminate information on relief efforts > (c) to provide addresses of those agencies accepting donations > (d) to report on the situation in affected areas misc.disaster.* group(s) would be of limited utility as a mechanism for response to a great disaster. The reason is that the underlying hardware needed to make USENET work, specifically, the telephone system, would likely be out of commission, possibly for an extended period of time. Luckily for the people in Florida left in the wake of Hurricane Andrew, the telephone system still works, somewhat. In Mogadishu (sp?), no phone service even exists. You can't call into or out of the country unless you have a satellite phone or other radio-based communication. In the recent riots here, and during several minor earthquakes over the last several years, I can assure you that the phone systems became swamped. USENET hubs that rely on the "physical transport layer" of the public switched analog telephone network would be unusable in times of emergency. This would shut down many sites instantly and greatly limit the utility of those that remained online -- probably large commercial or academic sites with leased lines and a very good reason for having continuous power plugged into a computer room in case of a disaster, or were just lucky that they didn't lose power. Again calling up the example of Florida, the power grid probably won't get rebuilt for another six months. Of course, it wouldn't necessarily mean that USENET wouldn't be useful outside the area of the disaster. It would just mean that it would be limited to second-hand information relayed by other means -- like amateur radio -- or publishing "send money to:" information. I see misc.disaster.* groups as an ancilliary means of information disbursal at best, at least until direct satellite telephony becomes cheap and readily available. Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@indigo2.hac.com ------------------------------ From: lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Fri, 04 Aug 1992 05:35:01 GMT heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call >> 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency. > I'm surprised that our Moderator didn't mention it, but in the > Chicagoland area, they have put signs up all over the place that one > should dial "*999" to report any sort of emergency from a cellular > phone. I've used it several times to inform the authorities of > stranded motorists, non-working traffic signals, possibly-drunk > motorists, downed trees or power lines, and speeding peace officers. In the St. Louis area, the cellular carriers encourage you to use *55 (this is with SBMS at least, I think the Non-wireline has the same number) to contact the State Police for non-emergency or outside of city emergencies. That is a free call. Once I called to report some railroad lights that were continuously going off, and ended up talking to the guy, who was obviously bored, for about five minutes giving him information. About St. Louis cellular 911, there are two separate numbers: one for the Illinois side of the river (Mississippi) and one for the Missouri side, since the service area spans both states. Once when I was in an accident I got them confused ... not hard to do (one is 611, one is 511 I think, hard to remember ... :-) Also, whenever I did call the cellular 911 in STL, I always was put on hold, even when I was in an accident: "Hi, I was just in an accident, a guy rear-ended me." "Is anyone hurt? "No, I don't think so." "Ok, hold." They always want to know what city you're on, and you hold on while they call that city's emergency dispatch operator. (Usually you can hear that conversation while you wait). David Lemson (217) 244-1205 University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson NeXTMail accepted BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD ------------------------------ From: kaufman@xenon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University. Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 16:10:25 GMT In article heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) writes: > We have been told, through the town newsletter, that we > should use 911 *any* time we want fire/police/ambulance dispatch. So, > the way I read it, if I have a fender-bender and need a police officer > to come by to see what happened, from a non-cellular Buffalo Grove > phone, I'm to dial "911", rather than the police non-emergency number. > I think it's wierd, but who am I to argue? > [Moderator's Note: Who are you to argue? You are a citizen with an > above average knowledge of the telecommunications network. Don't fall > into that all too common trap of criticizing some bureaucrat only to > be attacked in return, 'how would you know anything about this?'. That > is BS! Continue arguing that 911 is *only* for dire emergencies when > immediate police intervention is required. PAT] 911 is for whatever the local agency says its for. In many areas of the country there is plenty of excess bandwidth for the 911 operators, and few if any "daytime" numbers appearing on the board. Besides, the average citizen is not always in a position to distinguish grades of emergency between life-threatening and non. A "smoke check" or "smell of gas" can easily turn into a structure fire. A "fender bender with one victim with a sore neck" can turn into a full code response. Even us volunteer firemen sometimes get it wrong when we are on scene. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@CS.stanford.edu) [Moderator's Note: You are incorrect in saying '911 is for whatever the local agency says it is for ...' In Illinois at least, the state legislature passed the '911 Enabling Act' many years ago which directed local municipalities to install 911 as promptly as possible in cooperation with the local telco using available technology. The Act went on to define the purpose of 911 as a method of communicating EMERGENCY circumstances to the appropriate EMERGENCY RESPONSE agency or agencies within the community. A stolen car or a home which was burglarized several hours previous to being discovered are not what I would term emergencies. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mitchell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Dennis Mitchell) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 02:33:39 GMT Regarding 911 calls from cellular phones: I was traveling cross country through the Quad Cities area (Davenport, Iowa and Moline, Illinois) and needed to call 911 to report a car stranded on the highway. My call went to the wrong 911 office, but they were used to it and forwarded it to the right office (across the river). A few weeks later I got my bill, and I got hit with a $3 roaming charge, and the billed phone number wasn't 911, but some other 'local' seven-digit number. Wierd. [Moderator's Note: If you report the circumstances of your call to the cellular provider (don't just rely on them to see it on your bill and do it automatically) many will write off the charges as goodwill. I know Ameritech here in Chicago has done that on occassion when motorists have called in emergencies then stayed there to assist until emergency personnel arrived on the scene. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #682 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29871; 4 Sep 92 3:41 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10639 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:45:19 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19374 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:45:10 -0500 Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:45:10 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209040645.AA19374@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #683 TELECOM Digest Fri, 4 Sep 92 01:45:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 683 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Jerry Leichter) Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Terry Kennedy) Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Aubrey Philipsz) Re: 110 vs 66 (Jeff Hakner) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Robert Aaron Book) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Bob Yazz) Re: Baby Bells and States (Laird Broadfield) Re: More Phone Line Woes (Dave Levenson) Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill (Joe Trott) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Adrienne Voorhis Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Date: Fri, 04 Aug 92 2:04:48 EDT Recently I, ( Adrienne Voorhis) said: >> There is no prohibition against telling people there is a fire in a >> theater, only against *yelling* "fire" in a crowded theater when the >> person knows that it's *false*. This is merely a "time, place, and >> manner restriction" on knowingly false and dangerous speech designed >> solely to create a public safety hazard. Here, I am talking about >> presumably true information that a private citizen is being prohibited >> from discussing, even for legitimate purposes of public debate. And Pat responded: > [Moderator's Note: I do not believe you are correct in saying you can > 'state there is a fire in a theatre as long as you do not shout it.' > If this were true, then you should be able to make false utterances to > 911 with impunity. . . . Well, you *can* yell fire in a crowded theater if there is one. :-) What I meant to say (and actually thought I did say) was that the yelling "fire" in a crowded theater was an example of a "time, place, and manner restriction": not all reports are punishable, just *false* reports that could conceivably threaten public safety. Clearly, causing fire trucks to rush to a false alarm threaten public safety. Of all the reponses I have received to my question how the government can allow monitoring of broadcasts, but not dissemination of this information, I particularly appreciated Leonard Ericson's (leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com): > Check the Communications Act of 1933. That's where this comes from. > And I think it's a matter of them *allowing* you to listen to private > communications that cross your property via radio. But you aren't > allowed to distribute the info to others. > It's stood up in court for a *long* time. And it is a situation that > is not all that black and white. I believe that some folks have > actually argued in court along the lines of "if I'm not allowed to > listen to it, make them stop sending it to me!" First, I appreciate that he recognizes that it "is not all that black and white." I also appreciate that he did not assume that I believe the "don't shoot electrons at me if you don't want me to repeat it" argument. As I noted in my last post (vol. 72, issue 167), my argument is "you can't say its public to hear but not public to repeat," *not* "its automatically public if its possible to hear." I am curious how this 'long line of court cases' justify what appears to me to be a contradictory public-to-hear, yet confidential-to-not-repeat distinction. If the government *execises its discretion* to let you hear these broadcasts, it seems wrong for it to muzzle you from ever discussing it, no matter how newsworthy. As Bill Sohl , pointed out, reporters in New York City are often monitoring police band radios and using the information to obtain stories. Recently one of the local TV stations even rebroadcast police band transmissions when some racist comments were overheard on them during a riot in Washington Heights. (BTW, it may well have been that the comments were not made by police officers.) Adrienne Voorhis Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx, New York, USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 10:12:02 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Adrienne Voorhis continues to question how the 1934 Communications Act can prevent one from talking about what one has overheard on a non-broadcast band -- after all, what about the First Amendment? This strikes me as one of those "it's a free country" arguments that kids get into. The fact that one element of a crime, considered alone, is not illegal (and may even be constitutionally protected) does not prevent the combined acts from constituting a crime. It's not illegal for me to walk down the street in front of a bank. It's not illegal for me to take a bag from your hand as I walk by the door of the bank. But if you and I agreed to rob the bank, and you just stole that bag and handed it to me to carry away, I'll go to jail. (In fact, part of YOUR illegal act was saying to the bank clerk "Give me all your money". Free speech?) The crime is "intercepting a non-broadcast radio communication and revealing its contents (or even existence) to another". I'm safe as long as I don't perform both acts. If I intercept such a communication and turn the results over to my friend the reporter, he is free to print it. I've broken the law. If he had no prior understanding with me that I would be doing this interception, he's home free. (Consider the Pentagon Papers case: Even if the physical papers themselves were arguably stolen property, and the Times should have known that, the most that the government could do is insist that the physical papers be given back; the Times could still publish the information in them.) If, on the other hand, my friend and I agreed that I will provide this service for him, he's an accessory to my crime. (If I do this for him on a continuing basis, even if we never talk about it, at some point a court would probably decide that we had an understanding.) Daniel Ellsberg came to the Times with the Papers; they didn't send him off to take them. Jerry ------------------------------ From: Terry Kennedy Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool Organization: St. Peter's College, US Date: 03 Sep 92 19:22:05 EDT In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > The tool is shipped with the CUTTING end inside the handle. You are > apparently using the NON-CUTTING end. Loosen the big screw near the > blade, pull the blade out, swing it around, push it back in, and > tighten the screw. You will see that one side of the blade now has a > sharp ridge that will trim the copper wire. It will be obvious which > way to hold the tool (you do not want to cut the business end of the > wire, but rather the excess). If the original poster was _really_ unfortunate, they have a non-spring-loaded tool. Those need a really good _WHUMP!_ to cut the wire. Of course, folks will ask what that ugly bruise on your palm is from 8-) The best tool I've seen is the one from Harris/Dracon. It uses a twist- and-lock blade holder, and you can switch between cut and non-cut nearly instantly. It also has a pocket in the far end for holding the blade when not in use -- keeps the edge from being dulled. Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA terry@spcvxa.spc.edu +1 201 915 9381 ------------------------------ From: aub@access.digex.com (Aubrey Philipsz) Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1992 06:31:35 GMT In article julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) writes: > In article gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu > (Gabe M Wiener) writes: > X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 4 of 6 >> Your description is not clear. So lets make some assumptions. >> You are using a springloaded punchdown tool. The tool has a bit on the >> end of it that is reversable. You usually reverse these by loosening a >> screw or a collet. One end of the bit is for punching and cutting, the >> other end is for punching only -- used when looping wire across several >> blocks. The cutting end has a knife blade on one side. Some tools have a spare blade hiden in the "butt end" of the tool, with an embedded knob to turn and release the spare bit. Often this is where they are hiding the cutting bit. Sort of depends on what kind of installation I was last doing ... > If that blade is blunt or you are using the end without the > blade. The wire will not get cut. Get a new bit, they cost about > $10.00, worth it every time. Or just touch it up with a stone; lots of meat on those blades. > If this is not clear, stop a telco installer - the guys and > girls with the macho tool belts. Ask how to use and adjust a puncdown > tool. Easier to use than a revolver -- much more fun. Both look good > on your hip. For a whole generation of phone enthusiasts, this would not be a good thing to do. My tools are the wrong color and they might laugh or something ;-) Aub ------------------------------ Subject: Re: 110 vs 66 Date: 3 Sep 92 11:21:27 EDT (Thu) From: root@alf.cooper.edu (Admin) In article , davep@u.washington.edu (David Ptasnik) says: > They claim, however, that the 66's are a lot > easier to punch, and that you can punch more wires onto the same post > (for those occasions where several single line phones share a line) > than you can with the 110's, and that the 66's give you a good > connection more reliably. 110's also use different punch tools for > most efficient use (I think you are supposed to be able to punch five > wires at a time on a 110)(when it works right). They also claimed > that it was much easier to hook a test set up to 66 blocks for trouble > testing (clip leads instead of a special connector). > Overall the 110 review from this crew on that day was extremely > negative. I suspect that a negative reaction to a "new" thing was > part of it. Techs seem to be a pretty conservative lot. Your mileage > will vary. I strongly disagree with your techs. From a mechanical standpoint, 110 blocks are much easier to work with. You don't need to "lace" the pair through the terminals, as you do with 66. You simply lay the wire across the slots and push it down a little. On 66 blocks, the excess wire frequently does not fall away cleanly. This is not a problem on 110 blocks (although the wire sometimes comes flying back into your face!) If you're running high-speed data, 110 is much superior to 66. The primary reason is that 110 terminals are stacked end-to-end, while 66 terminals are face-to-face. This means that the capactiance between adjacent terminals is much higher on 66 blocks. To high-frequency signals (such as 10-BASE-T), that capacitance acts as a shunt, introducing termendous attentuation (I've heard figures of 10-15dB per 66 termination). 110, on the other hand, introduces almost neglible attentuation at 10-BASE-T frequencies. As for reliablity, 110 connections are gas-tight and have a "quiet front", meaning there are no exposed terminals. The only drawbacks I can think of: You can't "run the count" (run a tone pickup or test set down the terminals), because of the quiet front. You can't easily bridge over the terminals, and you can't use 110 as a bridging point, because there are only two terminals per wire (one below for the feed, one above for the cross connect), unlike 66 which can have up to sixbridged terminals. Finally, I find the wire management accessories (rings, spools, runways, etc.) associated with 66 to be easier to work with than 110, although this is the price one pays for higher density. To get back to the original poster's question, I would definitely recommend 110 (or at the very least NOT 66 !!) for a high-speed data application. Jeff Hakner Assistant Director of Telecommunications Cooper Union School of Engineering NYC ------------------------------ From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Organization: Rice University Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 04:56:25 GMT In article , mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) writes: > Is it possible to make a calling card call and not have to wait for > the to enter your card number? I'd love to be able to just > dial it all straight and not have to wait those extra few seconds. If you are calling the "home" number associated with the card, you can usually just type in the card number (instead of the phone number then the card number). This will generally give you the "two-tone" and connect you with your home number. I have done this with both Sprint and MCI cards, so I would guess that it's standard. No guarantees -- your mileage may vary. :-) Robert Book rbook@rice.edu ------------------------------ From: Bob Yazz Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1992 04:09:18 GMT stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > One question that I have not been able to answer myself is why it > helps to hit # after entering an additional destination number for a > calling card call The '#' tells circuits waiting for you to dial more digits to stop waiting, and proceed. I don't know why AT&T doesn't recognize a common ten-digit (eleven including the preceeding '0') US area code and phone number. It seems to me they could fix it. The same "timeout" mechanism comes into play to distinguish calls to '0' from calls to '0 plus the number'. You'll get to the operator faster if you dial '0 #'. (Some COCOTS choke on this; I hope nobody is suddenly disillusioned.) I use '#' most every time I dial. If, for example, I've omitted a digit in a common local seven-digit phone call, I get informed of my error sooner. Bob Yazz ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Date: 04 Sep 92 02:36:56 GMT In kung@actin.ee.washington.edu (Darwei Kung) writes: > Judge Harold Greene decided the fate of the Bell System. His rulings > still stands today, and he is still the man who has the final say on > the fate of RBOCs. > [Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say > was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos > would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide. PAT] Judge Greene: "Okay, how many little companies?" AT&T attorney: "Ummm, how about, ahhhhh... ... one?" Hee hee. Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: More Phone Line Woes Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1992 02:13:01 GMT In article , ddl@das.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) writes: > What is the purpose of listening only to my line? I suspect they > wanted to show that the dropouts were coming from my phone/wiring. It would seem that by their own tests, they have proved that the problem is _not_ in your wiring or in your telephone set. I'm curious -- is your line metallic to the central office, or are you served by a SLC somewhere in your loop? A friend here in NJ had a similar problem (I heard drop-outs when talking with him, but he didn't hear them). NJ Bell replaced a line card in a SLC-96 remote terminal in his neighborhood, and the problem went away. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. Warren, NJ, USA UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 14:27:29 GMT kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch) writes: > In article smp@cathedral.cerc.wvu. > wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) writes: >> Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a >> telephone cableto make a longer one? Essentially what I would emagine >> would be similar to the two male connectors fused together. > Well, there is always the old WECO 710 splicing connector, but it > requires a rather elaborate tool to use, since it uses an > insulation-displacement mechanism. I think that the tool runs about > $300, and I don't think that AT&T will sell the connectors in > quantites of less than 25. If you stick (or already have) a couple of RJ11 ends on your cables, Radio Shack sells a coupler to put them together. JTT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #683 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18401; 5 Sep 92 11:16 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19362 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 09:30:52 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32301 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 09:30:43 -0500 Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 09:30:43 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209051430.AA32301@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #678 TELECOM Digest Wed, 2 Sep 92 02:44:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 678 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement Details (Barnard Leddy) Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding (TELECOM Moderator) Status of Non-Dialable Points (Gabe M. Wiener) Telemarketer Identification (was Automated Hate Calls) (Dave Niebuhr) Powering Accessories From the Line (Roy M. Silvernail) Telecom Using Power Lines (Leslie S. Saitowitz) A Correct 1-800-I-RECYCLE (Carl Moore) A Note on Graybar History (KSandy Kyrish) Deaf Dialtone (Marshal Perlman) Looking For Mr. Graybar (Bob Vogel) Wierd Ring(s) (Clay Jackson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: barnard leddy Subject: Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement Details Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 03:38:16 GMT dFx International Digest and cDc - Cult Of The Dead Cow proudly present : The Third Annual X M A S C O N AKA H 0 H 0 C O N "Here... why don't you talk to my lawyer" Who: All Hackers, Journalists, Security Personnel, Federal Agents, Lawyers, Authors and Other Interested Parties. Where: Howard Johnson's - Hobby Airport 7777 Airport Boulevard Houston, Texas 77061 U.S.A. Tel: (800) 654-2000 Hou: (713) 644-1261 Fax: (713) 644-1117 When: Friday December 18 through Sunday December 20, 1992 Somebody call hotel security, we're at it again! Xmas/HoHoCon '92, three years and running. HoHoCon '91 turned out to be the largest and most chaotic gathering of any other computer underground conference ever, yet it was also the most organized and well planned. Everything from party ball soccer to interhotel telegrams from Cliff Stoll to elite cYbuR-strippers, and everyone from Bruce Sterling to Erik Bloodaxe & Doc Holiday of Comsec to K0DE WARRI0R himself. It was also the first conference to produce .gifs, a definite new trend. How we got away with it is still a mystery, and how we'll top it, I just don't know. But you can bet we're gonna try! We're looking to get an even larger group of people from the computer underground, computer security, media, and telecommunications world together to discuss a variety of topics. Still no ego trip either, the event will once again be open to the public so that anyone may attend, and everyone is encouraged to participate in the activities. Hotel Information ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This year, we've moved the conference from Intercontinental Airport to Hobby Airport. This was mainly due to conference room availability and room pricing. It shouldn't create an inconvenience as most airlines service both Airports. The Hobby Airport Howard Johnson's Lodge is located almost directly across the street from the entrance of the airport (approximately one block west if facing the airport). The HoHoCon group room rates are $41.00 plus tax (15%) per night, your choice of either single or double. There are also two suites available, a mini and a large. You can call the hotel for pricing and availability of the suites. Once again, when you make your reservations (800-654-2000, which is also reachable from Houston), you will need to tell them you are with the HoHoCon Conference to receive the reduced room rate, otherwise you will be shelling out $59.00. There is no charge for children, regardless of age, when they occupy the same room as their parents. Specially designed rooms for the handicapped are available. The hotel provides free on call transportation to and from the airport. The hotel restaurant, The Mulberry Tree, is open from 6 AM to 10 PM. Meal prices range between $5 and $10, with breakfast being closer to $5 and dinner closer to $10. There is also a buffet available for $6.95. The hotel bar, The Hobby Saloon, is open from 2 PM to 2 AM and features the general assortment of table games and bar attractions. There is an outdoor pool and an exercise room. Car rental agencies are located in the lobbies of both the hotel and airport. Unlike last year, there will be no need to hack the television sets as the hotel provides free cable tv, which includes HBO (don't know about those wonderfully edited R rated hotel pornos yet, kidz). Check-in and check-out times are both 12:00 noon. Earlier check-in is allowed if there are rooms available. If you need further information, contact us or the hotel directly. If you are only able to get a flight into Intercontinental Airport, there is a shuttle that will take you to Hobby for $11.50. Departures start at 10 AM and continue until 10 PM, leaving every hour on the hour. For more information contact the Hobby Airport Limousine Service at (713) 644-8359. Similar to last year, the hotel is placing the HoHoCon guests (those renting rooms) in their own building (smart move). Thus, we are encouraging people to make their reservations as early as possible to ensure themselves a room in our building. As of this writing, there are six rooms reserved and there is a total of 40 rooms in the building. Directions ~~~~~~~~~~ If you plan to drive to the conference, plan your route to get you to Interstate 45. From there, if you are coming from the North (which most of you will be), take I-45 South to the Broadway exit. Make a right on Broadway and drive down for about a mile or so until you come to Airport Boulevard (you will be right in front of the airport at this point). Make a right on Airport Boulevard and the hotel is one block down on the right. If you are coming from the South, take I-45 North to Airport Boulevard. Go left on Airport Boulevard and the hotel will be on the right, one block past the airport. Conference Details ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HoHoCon will last three days, with the actual conference being held on Saturday, December 19, starting at 11:00 AM or 12:00 noon, depending on the number of speakers, and continuing until 4:30 PM. The reason for having to vacate the conference room so early is because there is a Christmas party following our conference. Hopefully, the partiers will get so drunk, loud and obnoxious that the hotel staff won't have the time to pay attention to us. This is actually a pre 'official announcement', so at this point, we don't exactly have all of the conference itself planned. We are still in the midst of arranging times and confirming speakers. We would like to have a number of people speak on a varied assortment of topics. If you would like to speak, please contact us as soon as possible and let us know who you are, who you represent (if anyone), the topic you wish to speak on, a rough estimate of how long you will need, and whether or not you will be needing any audio-visual aids. The main announcement will probably be going out in three weeks, and we will be releasing updates every three to four weeks after that. We would like to have people bring interesting items and videos again this year, so if you have anything you think people would enjoy having the chance to see, please let us know ahead of time, and tell us if you will need any help getting it to the conference. If all else fails, just bring it to the con and give it to us when you arrive. We will also include a list of items and videos that will be present in a future update. We received a nice amount of media support last year in the form of pre-conference announcements and would greatly appreciate the same this year. Besides our updates, you will most likely be able to get HoHoCon details from CuD, Informatik, Mondo 2000, and Phrack Magazine. If you are a journalist and would like to do a story on HoHoCon 92, or know someone who would, contact us with any questions you may have, or feel free to use and reprint any information in this file. If anyone requires any additional information, needs to ask any questions, wants to RSVP, or would like to be added to the mailing list to receive the HoHoCon updates, you may write myself (Drunkfux) or any of the other HoHoCon planning committee members (uh ... whoever they may be) at: dfx@nuchat.sccsi.com For those without net access, we'll list a few boards to reach us on in the upcoming announcement, as well as a P.O. Box. Currently, your best bet would be to try any of the cDc systems. Mainly, Demon Roach Underground -- (806) 794-4362, Login: THRASH, NUP: Jihad (I think). HoHoCon 92 will be a priceless learning experience for professionals (yeah, right) and gives journalists a chance to gather information and ideas direct from the source. It is also one of the very few times when all the members of the computer underground can come together for a realistic purpose. We urge people not to miss out on an event of this caliber, which doesn't happen very often. If you've ever wanted to meet some of the most famous people from the hacking community, this may be your one and only chance. Don't wait to read about it in all the magazines, and then wish you had attended, make your plans to be there now! Be a part of what we hope to be our largest and greatest conference ever. Remember, to make your reservations, call (800) 654-2000 and tell them you're with HoHoCon. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:46:13 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes IBT has started a new feature for subscribers to Call Forwarding which allows users of the service to turn on or off the service, or change the number to which calls are forwarded from a remote location. In the past, forwarding had to be done only from your own phone. As of the past month, IBT has been phasing in remote access throughout the 312/708 areas. The way it works is you dial the number assigned to your CO (one example is xxx-9923); insert your phone number on request and then the PIN you were given. The change is effected immediatly. There is no additional charge for this service. It is being offered to all Call Forwarding subscribers. Some COs already have it and others are being converted this month. My own office, Chicago-Rogers Park will be equipped as of September 22. Passwords are being distributed with an introductory letter going out this month. Any other of the Sister Bells adding this inovation? Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Status of Non-Dialable Points Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 05:18:45 GMT Can anyone with access to the Bellcore database give a current report on the status of U.S. non-dialable points? Several years ago there was an article in the Digest about this, and the nondialable points included Shoup, Idaho (Farmer's magneto line), Newhalem, Washington (Independent four-digit exchange) and a few others, and then the usual array of Nevada toll stations, plus some unusual ones, such as Texas ranchers who were reachable by _name_ in the Bellcore database. That article was from four years ago. I'd be curious to know the current situation. Last I heard, both Shoup and Newhalem had become dialable. Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 17:47:01 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Telemarketer Identification (was Automated Hate Calls) I seem to recall New York enacting a law similar to those in other states that requires telemarketers to identify themselves, their company, etc. and I've received two from one within a matter of days and both stated the same thing in the preamble. I don't recall the effective date, though. The other day I received a telemarketer call who spewed the preamble and after the person was finished, I told her that I didn't want the product they were selling and not to call me again and to inform their company of that. Last night, another telemarketer from the same company called and that really ticked me off. I'm now thinking of writing the company a letter demanding that they stop or I'll think seriously of taking some sort of legal action. This company is a national chain most recently noted for deceptive auto repair practices in several states. I'm already battling NYTel over a billing problem and I won't mind taking on another so called pillar of the community. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Subject: Powering Accessories From the Line From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 14:42:23 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN I'm getting my winter projects lined up, having just moved into a new apartment. One of the things I'm considering is an electronic line switch for my modem. I'd like to power it from the line. What are the limits for drawing power from the loop? A 386 motherboard is probably out of the question, isn't it? :-> How about an LED or two, and maybe a small relay? How about blocking ring voltage? Any other homebrewer's hints appreciated. E-mail preferred, and if there's any interest, I'll summarize to the Digest. Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ From: saitowit@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (SAITOWITZ L S) Subject: Telecom Using Power Lines Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads). Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 12:01:13 GMT Hi, just a quick question, has anyone ever heard of sending telephony down the power lines? {How's that for quick!!?} Thanks, Lesley :) saitowit@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za [Moderator's Note: The Chicago Transit Authority used to use the electrified 'third rail' for telephone service between subway/elevated trains and the rail dispatchers along the routes. Each car is equipped with a telephone for the conductor and motorman; they talk on those phones to the supervisors. For a few years now they have used UHF radio instead (I listen on the scanner at 470 megs). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Aug 92 10:04:17 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: A Correct 1-800-I-RECYCLE On Saturday (Aug. 29), I saw the correct "1 800 I RECYCLE" at Taneytown, Md. (not far from Gettysburg, Pa.) at the city park. Also there was the same number 1-800-473-2925, shown in "normal" format. This is in a different part of Maryland from the earlier-reported 1-800-1-RECYCLE. [Moderator's Note: Is the incorrect one still in place also? :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 15:09 GMT From: Sandy Kyrish <0003209613@mcimail.com> Subject: A Note on Graybar History Perhaps someone already commented on this, but it should be noted that Graybar was originally co-founded by Elisha Gray, who contended to his death that he filed a telephone patent hours before Bell did and was thus cheated out of fame and fortune. And Graybar became a subsidiary of Western Electric til it was sold off in 1928. ------------------------------ From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) Subject: Deaf Dialtone Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 17:43:37 GMT Hi, I have GTE (shoot me now), and a couple of times in the last year (more this last week then ever), I have a dial tone that does not care if I dial or not ... it is DEAF. For example, I dial a phone number, and when I am done dialing, the dial tone is still there ... nice huh? So I hang up, try it again, same problem. Finally ... I'll try it five minutes later and it is fixed. What the heck is the deal? Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way [Moderator's Note: Nothing 'got fixed' five minutes later. You simply got a different piece of the central office common equipment than you had earlier ... the 'deaf dialtone' is still hanging around out there giving grief to someone else. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 01 Sep 1992 19:44:10 -0400 (EDT) From: BOB VOGEL Subject: Looking For Mr. Graybar I want ten points for this. After arduous search and discussion with 800 information it can now be revealed that Graybar has an 800 locator number which will give you a direct connection to the store nearest you, if only you know and can "tone in" your zip code. 1 (800) 825-5517 I tried it and it works. They got me right to the store closest to me. In the process I talked to a couple of 800 info operators who were OK. MCI 800 repair, so-so, and people at several Graybar locations (not closest to me) who were universally pleasant, helpful, and interested enough to care about the one wrong 800 that information had (800) 476-5210 -- don't use that one. [Moderator's Note: You know who else is still giving out a wrong 800 number? ATT Mail ... 800-555-1212 still cannot come up with a number for them most of the time; when they do, it is some totally irrelevant (to the public) office. And the AT&T corporate HQ switchboard acts like they never heard of ATT Mail either ... pitiful. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cjackso@uswnvg.com (Clay Jackson) Subject: Wierd Ring(s) Date: 01 Sep 92 19:09:57 GMT Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc. I live right on a boundary between GTE and US WEST (PNB). So, we have two phone lines, one US WEST and one GTE. The US WEST line is two "pieces", a GTE "Foreign Exchange" down the hill to a box, and then the US WEST line. A while back, we experienced a continuous ringing on that line, that would typically start around midnight and, in one case, continued until sometime after 8:00 AM next morning (the phone spent the entire time off-hook). When I take the phone off-hook, there's no apparent signal there. This went on for several nites until I finally got someone high enough up in GTE to get it fixed. Last nite it started happening again. Does anyone know what might be causing this? Thanks! Clay Jackson - N7QNM US WEST NewVector Group Inc Bellevue, WA uunet!uswnvg!cjackso ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #678 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20014; 5 Sep 92 12:04 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22254 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 10:15:39 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18858 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 10:15:29 -0500 Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 10:15:29 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209051515.AA18858@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #684 TELECOM Digest Sat, 5 Sep 92 10:15:31 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 684 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Joel M. Snyder) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Toby Nixon) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Fred R. Goldstein) V.32/V.32bis Modems With Direct T-1 Carrier Connection (Louis A. Mamakos) Re: Dialback Management (Eric Jacksch) Re: Voice Message Service (Jerry Leichter) Re: Slamming Prevention (Andrew Klossner) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (rjhawkin@mothra.syr.edu) Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Russell Kroll) Re: Question About PBX Phone (William Degnan) G.ross! (Dick Rawson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jms@mrsvax.mis.arizona.edu Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Reply-To: jms@arizona.edu Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department In article , mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) writes: > I borrowed a MultiTech V.32 modem to do some testing, and while > waiting for something to complete I thumbed through the manual and > came to a curious appendix at the end: "CCITT V.25bis Operation". [Followed by detailed discussion of V.25bis operation.] The CCITT is a treaty organization. With the exception of the United States, the representatives to the CCITT from the countries affected are from the national PTTs. The answer is, yes, it's just as ugly as you think it is: Delayed and Forbidden numbers were something that no one could agree on, therefore it was left as a matter for national standardization. PTTs are strange beasts. That's what the Swiss PTT wanted, and so that's what a V.25bis compatible modem must support. To answer your questions: > I assume that either I am not reading something right, or that V.25bis > is optional/voluntary, or outdated, or something, but I really can't > imagine what reasonable thoughts were occurring in the heads of the > people that thought up this scheme. Does anyone have any ideas about > what CCITT was trying to accomplish here? Whether it's optional or not depends on the country the modem is sold in. If you use a modem in a country (except, of course, for the anarchic US), you have to follow their regulations. It's not outdated; it's new. Claiming that CCITT reps are reasonable is not a useful pasttime -- they're not. The only thing that the CCITT was trying to accomplish was to quiet the arguments, get the useful part of the Recommendation put forward, and get on to real business. What the Swiss do in their own country is their own problem. Remember, the CCITT meets in Geneva. Have you ever tried to use a Cirrus/Plus/Star card in a Geneva bank machine, one of which is in almost every downtown street corner? You can't; you need a UBS card. Have you ever tried to get a VISA card in Geneva? There's a $200 annual fee. Buy a Big Mac, fries, coke? It costs over $10. Take a cab? They take American Express (and cash). Change money? You can do it at machines on the street that take 25 different currencies, with multiple denominations of each---and do so at competitive rates, 24 hours a day. Find a bar open after midnight? Hah. An infinite forbidden number list in a modem with finite memory is not out of character. Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719 Phone: 602.882.4094 (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data) BITNET: jms@Arizona Internet: jms@arizona.edu SPAN: 47541::telcom::jms ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Date: 5 Sep 92 12:50:13 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) writes: > OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable > regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar > devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded. But > ... a Forbidden Numbers list? With numbers that stay on it FOREVER?? > Have these people totally taken leave of their senses? If I dial up > my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't > answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again? It's not nearly as bad as you make it out to be. The "forbidden list" is flushed by power-cycling the modem. The idea is to keep you from getting some little old lady out of bed dozens of times because somebody programmed the wrong number someplace (it doesn't really have anything to do with switch loading). They simply require some human intervention, in hopes that the problem will be recognized and dealt with. That said, however, I DO agree that it makes it nearly impossible to get into busy BBS systems! I should note that this idea of blacklisting numbers did not originate in V.25bis, _and_ it is not restricted to V.25bis! These are regulations of the specific countries noted, not provisions of an international standard; V.25bis is used in the USA, for example, but with no blacklisting because the FCC doesn't require it. AT command set modems used in the European countries in question must also enforce blacklisting, if the modems are going to be approved by the telecom administration. Of course, a lot of users get around this problem by purchasing US modems, importing them themselves, and connecting them (in violation of regulations). Manufacturers don't encourage such actions, but we know we can't prevent them, either. I should note that automatic dialing equipment is about to be more strictly regulated by the FCC as well, but there is a big loophole for modems: equipment which is under "external computer control" is exempted from the restrictions. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 401243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 20:30:42 GMT In article , mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) writes: [complaints about Forbidden Number List] FWIW, the problem isn't V.25bis, and isn't even part of V.25bis, but is in the modem in order to get approval for use in those countries. V.25bis is a rather neat method of doing inband dialing on sync (and async, via a different option set) lines. If the modem is clever enough to autorepeat the call, then it has to meet national regulations, V.25bis or not. I suspect that the "forever" rules are based on an expectation that once the two minutes are up, it is possible that you've forgotten why you're dialing and thus are expected to request the call again. I strongly suspect that being on the Forbidden list doesn't eternally prevent re-requesting the call. If it does, then just make sure that you cancel the request after only _three_ retries! Some national regs are weird. V.25bis is catching on; don't blame it for those regulatory problems. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com k1io or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ From: Louis A. Mamakos Subject: V.32/V.32bis Modems With Direct T-1 Carrier Connection Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 01:00:58 -0400 We're considering bringing in a bunch of phone lines to be used for a modem pool in on T-1 circuite, rather than individual analog circuits. The idea is to eliminate as much analog junk between the modems and CO, as well as making management of the lines a bit easier to deal with. The usual approach to this sort of thing is to plug your T-1 line into a D4 channel bank, giving you 24 two-wire voice circuits. Now, it certainly seems a shame to take all these perfectly good digitized audio samples, turn them into an analog signal, only to be digitized again by an A/D converted hooked to the DSP in a V.32bis modem. I'm looking for vendors that build V.32/V.32bis modem banks that can be directly connected to the T-1 circuit bearing the 24 voice channels. Does anyone have experience with such a thing? Louis Mamakos University of Maryland ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Dialback Management From: jacksch@insom.eastern.com (Eric Jacksch) Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1992 01:20:07 -0400 Organization: Insomniacs' Guild, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Bob.Ackley@ivgate.omahug.org (Bob Ackley) writes: > To eliminate that type of hacking possibility, it is mandatory that > the dialback portion of the modem call is originated from a different > line. A company that I do custom software work for has yet another solution, which is now in use at a government site which found callback units both expensive and unreliable. Caller-ID information from Bell is compared to a database and only pre-authorized callers even get to the modem. In addition, the phone numbers from which unauthozied calls originate are logged. Eric Jacksch, jacksch@insom.eastern.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:49:58 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: Re: Voice Message Service As a general rule, I agree with John Higdon's complaints about LEC use a regulated, protected base to get into unregulated markets. However, his recent tirades about a new Pac*Bell proposal to allow you to have the system deliver a message if you call from a pay phone and there is no answer is a bit off the mark. In response to someone else's comment: > Around here only the COCOTs offer that leave a message on busy > service ... Mr. Higdon remarks: > Notice how as with the information providing business, the field has > been tried and tested by true entrepreneurs who had to put up real > risk capital to try out their ideas. Once a market seems to be viable, > then the telco muscles its way into the market with its network > control and ratepayer subsidization. The first time I saw an example of this service, it was at an SNET-owned and operated pay phone outside of Hartford, Connecticut about two years ago. Since I haven't seen it elsewhere even to this date, I've always assumed that was a trial implementation. The service cost either 25 or 50 cents (I think the former) above the base cost of the call (in-state calls only). It was very nicely implemented. Unless someone can find an older COCOT implementation, I'm afraid the points for "innovation" go to the operating companies here. > Then it offers a better product at a cheaper price, putting the > competition out of business. Tell me, as a consumer, am I supposed to be upset about this? The traditional anti-monopoly line says "once the competition is out of the business they'll raise prices and you won't have any alternative but to pay". If that's the claim, fine; but if the only complaint is that: > Of course it does this with free money and its superior network > access. then why should I, as a consumer, care? Neither "choice" nor the financial health of entrepreneurs in the telecom business is of importance to me; product quality and price are what I care about. Jerry ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Re: Slamming Prevention Date: 04 Sep 92 19:27:47 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon The local GTE (General Telephone of the Northwest) solicited anti-slamming requests. Each subscriber got a form that we could sign and return to prevent a change in default LD carrier without written instructions. No charges were involved. I suppose this could have been mandated by the state. But, on the whole, GTE residential service at (503-620) has been quite good to me. I just built a new house and got outstanding cooperation and visits by genuinely concerned service techs. They each handed me their business cards, complete with pager numbers, and asked me to call them personally if the need arose. It wasn't like this a few years ago when I had major problems at (503-638), just a few miles away. I wonder what changed ... Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 19:33:34 EDT Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY From: rjhawkin@mothra.syr.edu (The Virtual Kid) In article disk!tony@uunet.UU.NET (tony) writes: > The # sign? The POUND sign! > At least according to my bank -- they say, "Enter the amount and > then press the POUND sign." Well, I know they aren't referring to the > asterisk ... so IT must be the POUND sign. Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:". Send all flames to rjhawkin@FUBAR.SYR.EDU ------------------------------ Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News From: unkaphaed!rkroll@uunet.UU.NET (Russell Kroll) Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 22:38:25 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy > 1) Is this a nationwide service, fed from a satellite, so that > everyone all over the country (or continent, or wherever) is seeing > the same video at the same time, and there is one master "jukebox" > feeding these videos in response to te 900-number calls? Or is this a > localized service in which each region has their own "jukebox", so > that what I see here in St. Louis may be entirely different from what > is seen in another region? Here in the Houston area, there is a similar channel - channel 56. Every so often, it says something like: CHANNEL 56 K56DP K04NW CH. 04 It's called "The BOX" and it has three 900 numbers -- one for ordering one video, one for two, and one for three. (I think) Unfortunately, I can only pick it up if I do some strange things with the UHF antenna. The main house antenna won't bring it in! rkroll@unkaphaed.UUCP (Russell Kroll) Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, (713) 943-2728 in Houston, Texas 1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis ------------------------------ From: William.Degnan@mdf.FidoNet.Org (William Degnan) Date: 05 Sep 92 09:03:15 Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone On UUCP (Tony Harminc ) writes to All: > The worst case is, as was mentioned recently, if a Princess phone with > lighted dial was installed at one time, and the dial light transformer > is still connected to the second pair. Then you may have a fire. You > could easily disconnect and tape the red/black leads inside the phone > to be safe. If plugged into a two-line jack (ala RJ-14) it could short line two when the set is off hook. But red/black? Wouldn't yellow/black achieve the same purpose but allow the set to be used? William Degnan, Communications Network Solutions -Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology- P.O. Drawer 9530 | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org Austin, TX 78766-9530 | !wdegnan@attmail.com | Voice +1 512 323 9383 * Origin: Private Line - Stealth Opus in Austin (1:382/39.0) "Well-informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over wires. Even if it were, it would be of no practical value." -- Boston Post 1865 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 12:35:51 PDT From: drawson@Tymnet.COM (Dick Rawson) Subject: G.ross! CCITT Recommendations have identifiers like X.25, Q.931, and so on, but new recommendations usually don't have official identifiers assigned until late in their development. Until then, the Study Groups may assign a temporary label that has some letters in place of the unknown digits; usually they know that it will be an X, Q, G, etc. series Recommendation. I just came across Contribution 183 to Study Group XV, dated February 1992, giving a revised draft of something that Working Party-5/XV must have been developing: Recommendation G.ross "Characteristics of Regenerative Optical Fibre Submarine Cable Systems." Dick ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #684 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22188; 5 Sep 92 13:13 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04645 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 11:22:03 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04105 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 11:21:54 -0500 Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 11:21:54 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209051621.AA04105@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #685 TELECOM Digest Sat, 5 Sep 92 11:22:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 685 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? (Todd Inch) Re: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia (Fred Wedemeier) Re: CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings (John Higdon) Re: Telecom Using Power Lines (Wayne Robert Law) Re: Finding Exchange Names (Dave Quinn) Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (John Palmer) Re: Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? (R. Greenberg) Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (L. Weinstein) Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (Henry Mensch) Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Paolo Bellutta) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) Subject: Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? Organization: Maverick International Inc. Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 20:27:47 GMT In article Irving_Wolfe@happy-man.com writes: > I've been approached by a company called ANI (through a man in Chicago > who apparently is a personal salesman for them, operating out of his > own space) to change my business long distance service to ANI. He > claims that AT&T would still be carrying the calls but that I'd save > 20% or so (on a $250 or so long distance bill) by using them instead. > Does anyone know these guys? Are they okay? > Does what they said make sense? Why would AT&T carry my calls for > 20% below its own ProWatts rates through them? > What's the catch? There are actually two possibilities. Probably ANI is an "aggregator" a term which apparently only applies to AT&T because their tarrifs are different than MCI, Sprint, etc. Another possibility is that ANI has their own switch and gets volume discounts for their outgoing calls. In this case, you usually have to dial the 800 or a local number for the company, then enter your account number/pin, then enter the destination phone number. A kludge indeed. But, these "resellers" (my term, probably incorrect) usually get the best price they can and may have trunks to all of the big three, so if they mentioned AT&T specifically, I doubt this is what you're working with. The one reseller who tried to sell me on this tried to act like he was a IXC (Interexchange carrier, e.g. AT&T, MCI, etc) but when I specifically asked what his business was classified as and gave "aggregator" and "IXC" as examples, he was confused and said he was just a "phone company" -- and he was the sole proprietor, as far as I could tell! American Sharecom used to be one of these. The quality of the reseller's service will be low because they have to add at least one extra switch between you and your destination. The reseller salesperson/owner tried to make dialing the 14 or so extra digits and lack of one-plus dialing (he doesn't have arrangements with the local telco to offer one-plus dialing) a "feature" because you can keep your existing long distance company for "emergencies". It really spurred him on that soon our company will have a smart enough PBX to automatically dial the 14 digits for us. They had some really screwy plans, primarily for residential and smaller businesses, where you could make up to X number of calls per month, each up to one hour. He said you COULD NOT go beyond the limits of your plan. I didn't ask if the switch would drop your call after one hour and your billing number was locked out after X calls, or if he just stung you with enormous "overtime" rates. He claimed a lot of residential customers like having a fixed LD phone bill each month rather than one which always changes depending on the number of calls, etc. The final scary straw was that the contract read that you were responsible for all calls charged to your billing number REGARDLESS of anything. It implied that security was so good on their end that if there was a problem it was your fault. I didn't even ask about such amenities as credit for wrong numbers ... I had to hang up on him mid-sentence when he wouldn't take "no" for an answer. (Switching gears back to the aggregator now ...) I did a little research after an aggregator approached our company. I found: AT&T accidentally or otherwise wrote a loophole into their tarrifs such that a bunch of small companies can form a "co-op" (or some other legal entity consisting of a loose relationship -- I don't know the proper term) and volume discounts apply to the co-op's volume rather than the individual companies volumes, even though the companies are billed individually and have different AT&T accounts. The aggregator either is the co-op or at least runs it. The physical lines, dialing instructions, and relationship between a company and AT&T is the same whether businesses work with AT&T directly or are part of the "co-op". The aggregator has NO telecom equipment whatsoever, they just write up contracts and inform AT&T that you're part of them now. So, if ANI is an aggregator, and you're already with AT&T, it's not a matter of changing your LD to ANI, but rather adding ANI in. Your LD is still actually provided by AT&T. In our case, we were warned that our actual sales rep at AT&T may change because being part of the aggregator/co-op would make us a different class of business (e.g. change from minor accounts to major corporate accounts or somesuch) but I was told by both the aggregator and AT&T themselves that essentially nothing would change except the rates - billing is still from AT&T. I can't remember if the aggregator charges a percentage of total, percentage of savings, or flat rate, but I recall that in our case the proposed gross savings would be about 30%, of which we would keep 20% and the aggregator would keep about 10%. BUT, the salesperson did mention something offhandedly that caused me to look at the contract a little closer. Apparently if the co-op goes bankrupt, the co-op members may be liable for debts. I'm a little fuzzy on this, but I'd have a lawyer look over the aggregator contract. Otherwise it looked like a legitimate good deal to me. ------------------------------ From: fcw@telecom.ti.com (Fred Wedemeier) Subject: Re: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia Reply-To: fcw@telecom.ti.com Organization: TI Telecom Systems, Dallas Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 06:41:55 GMT In article 2@eecs.nwu.edu, david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) writes: > At June 30 this year Australia had 441,256 mobile phones in operation, > up 51% over the previous year. It is not just yuppies either, many > blue- collar workers are finding it an essential tool of their trade. Interesting statistics... Can you give us some typical fees, e.g. monthly service, roaming fees, per-minute cost? In Dallas, Texas: Typical monthly: $32 - 39 depending on the contract roaming $3/day connect $.30/min during the day $.10 - .20 evenings/weekends with some contracts free evenings/weekends with two or three year service contract up to $.99/minute when roaming Thanks. Fred Wedemeier pho: 214-997-3213 fax: 214-997-3639 timsg: fcw inet: fcw@pioneer.telecom.ti.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 00:21 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) quotes: > STATEMENT FROM CWA ON AT&T SALES OFFICE CLOSINGS > "The union has argued against these kind of consolidations and > re-organizations in the past, because they ultimately work against > AT&T's best interest." Not to mention the interests of the CWA members. It is an unfortunate fact of life that competition requires a company to trim down and tighten up. Many on this forum have complained that AT&T has not yet learned how to compete. Maybe, but the company is getting there. And the truth of the matter is that if the people are not needed, then there is absolutely no justification for keeping them on the payroll. Although the point is apparently debatable, IMHO industry is not just another form of charity for "the people". If personel are not required to provide a desired level of service, then they are expendable. It can be argued that AT&T's level of service will suffer, but that is a matter to be resolved in the marketplace, not in CWA press releases. And why is AT&T singled out? GTE has planned a similar magnitude of displacement for its employees in California. Where is the CWA press release about that? Or are GTE employees not represented by CWA (meaning of course that they don't count)? > AT&T will announce next week the closing of six of its fourteen > customer sales and service offices. The closing offices employ about > 860 workers represented by the Communications Workers of America. This is the technological age. There will be much more of this in the future. Anyone who fails to keep up with the times and does not keep his skills current will find himself out on his ear. And there is nothing the unions can do about it. Job security no longer resides in union membership, but in the skill and usefulness of the individual. And it is about time. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: s780961@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU (Wayne Robert Law) Subject: Re: Telecom Using Power Lines Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia. Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 21:28:49 EST saitowit@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (SAITOWITZ L S) writes: > Hi, just a quick question, has anyone ever heard of sending telephony > down the power lines? Within Victoria here in Australia, the power authority uses it's high voltage lines as trunks in it's ETN network. On it's 500kv, 330kv & 220kv lines rf chokes are used to pass power but block signals in the range 100kHz to 400kHz. The telephony signals then appear across capacitive voltage dividers, a tap of which is isolated and fed from the electrical switchyard to FDM multiplex equipment. The mux gear is a single channel system. Each system muxes a 4khz channel made up of a 300Hz - 2.7kHz speech channel and the balance of capacity is taken up by signalling and telemetry channels. These channels start at 2820Hz and are spaced every 120Hz upto 3900Hz. The 3060Hz frequency being used for E/M signalling. These telephone trunks are connected to a network of AT&T Dimension CSS201 PBX's running an adapted software package FP8-SECV which has been customised to suit some of their operational needs. Two RMATS-1 system are installed to provide maintenance and administration. One in Morwell and the other in Melbourne. No doubt other power authorities use similiar systems throughout the world this should give you some brief details of some of the possibilities. The power authority also uses carrier quads and optic fibres imbedded within the earth wire that runs above the lines for comms as well. Regards, Wayne ------------------------------ From: quinn@ender.tamu.edu (Dave Quinn) Subject: Re: Finding Exchange Names Date: 5 Sep 1992 10:24:49 -0500 Organization: Texas A&M University Exchange names? As in wire centers? CLLI codes? I have not heard of the term "exchange name" before. I have been somewhat lucky, in that each telco I have resided under, they provide wire center listings in the frontal portion of my business pages. Dave [Moderator's Note: Well, the phrase 'exchange name' seems to be used interchangeably to mean a few things, all of which relate to the identification of the wire center. Many of the old exchange names in Chicago from the days when we had names rather than numbers were also (and are still) the wire center names also. For example, the old exchange of ROGers Park (now 312-764) was/is in the central office which is known as Chicago-Rogers Park but then and now it included not only 764, but AMBassador (262), SHEldrake (743), HOLlycourt (465), BRIargate (274) and several other recent number-only additions. Likewise Chicago-Edgewater includes EDGewater (334) but also UPTown (878), RAVenswood (728) -- sometimes known as PATrick from back in 1967 when my phone number was 728-7425 for a brief time -- LOngbeach, SUnnyside and others. Chicago-Lakeview included LAKeview (525) as well as GRAceland (472), BITtersweet (348), DIVersey (248), EAStgate (327), and others. Everyone here is also served by what the tariffs refer to as the "Chicago Exchange". So take your pick! PAT] ------------------------------ From: jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer) Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Detroit, MI Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:38:18 GMT In Detroit, we live in an area where the exchange name used to be TUXedo (881,882,883,884,885,886). However, the official name of the CO is DTRT Niagra (DTRTMINICGO -- still a 1ESS). I used to think that the CO name was the name of a street on which the CO was located (or a street near the CO), but there isn't a TUXEDO in that area. Most of our Edison substations are named for the street that they are either on or close to. [Moderator's Note: But here in Chicago we had a 'true TUXedo' as in 889. The CO's here were variously named for the street they were located on or the neighborhood; sometimes an historical person or event (i.e. HAymarket [riots]; [Mayor Carter] HARrison. PAT] ------------------------------ From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail. Playa del Rey, CA Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 19:43:07 GMT In article sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner) writes: > I have an OKI 891 transportable cellular phone that has a 12V NiCd > battery (number RP 9021A/64-21055, if it matters). The charger for > this battery (model RP9022A) doesn't have any warnings against leaving > it plugged in all the time. My question is: would this be all right > (leaving it plugged in)? Depends on how "smart" the charger is. If it cuts off the charging current to a tiny trickle after charging, its ok. If not, it will cook the battery. Caution: Some "smart" chargers are a bit stupid in that if you remove and then replace a fully charged battery, it will start a full charge cycle all over. This will NOT do the battery any good. > On a related matter, why does my FM radio at work seem to get much > better reception when the cell phone battery charger is plugged into > the same power strip? Most home FM radios use the line cord as the antenna. By plugging in the charger, you increase the size of the "antenna". The portion of the electrical wireing inside the wall is (usually) inside shielding (bx, flex, or conduit). Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - richg@hatch.socal.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:55:18 PDT From: lauren@cv.vortex.com Greetings. Remote call forwarding, as described, could be a very handy service. But a few questions pop immediately to mind: 1) How long is the PIN? (Four digits is not sufficient!) 2) Can the subscriber change the PIN through some relatively "secure" mechanism? 3) Is there any mechanism to notify the subscriber or take other actions if there are a large number of incorrect PINs entered for a number? (E.g., by someone with a PC running through the codes night after night trying to find someone's PIN?) 4) Can you disable or "opt-out" of the remote feature entirely if you don't want it to be available for your number, short of eliminating call forwarding from your service entirely? Let's see how well IBT thought this one out. --Lauren-- [Moderator's Note: The remote feature is only turned on if someone wants to use it; It is only a four digit PIN, however that is a compromise between convenience and security which seems to work okay for the majority of subscribers. The number (different for each CO) that you dial into to use the remote feature *is* equipped to trap information about who is calling it; I'd be reluctant to change your call forwarding without permission, have you complain to IBT about it and have them respond 'oh, it was changed from over at Patrick's house about three in the morning ...'. All in all, the security is average and the convenience it affords is above average. A nice trade off. PAT] ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 11:19:31 -0700 Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes Reply-To: henry@ads.com TELECOM Moderator writes: > There is no additional charge for this service. It is being offered > to all Call Forwarding subscribers. *no additional charge* Does this happen routinely with your phone company? No additional charge for something *useful*? I'm astounded. # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back in the 1960's ... and we had it routine use in various exchanges as early as 1974 downtown. We had lots of centrex in use in the 1960's. The company has always been involved in the community with numerous charitable donations and services. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bellutta@ohsu.EDU (Paolo Bellutta) Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep Organization: Oregon Health Sciences University Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:43:29 GMT In article schuh@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Schuh) writes: > Feyman mentions in one of his books, using the denisty of phone lines > to find the way back to town. In 1988 I was driving through NorthWest Territories (Canada) and my "town detector" was the radio on the car in continuous search mode in *AM*. When the radio locked to a station I knew a town was 20-30 miles ahead. Paolo Bellutta ---------- bellutta@ohsu.edu B.I.C.C - Oregon Health Sciences University 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd. - Portland, OR tel: (503) 494 4804 --- fax: (503) 494 4551 [Moderator's Note: Ah yes, what a beautiful place on this planet! I was very fortunate to ride with a friend the full distance between Fort Nelson, BC and Seattle, WA down a *long* stretch of very deserted highway in 1968. Signs said the next place to stop for food, car service or to make wee-wee was fifty miles away. Talk about desolation! We'd ride for an hour at a time without seeing another car on the road. We were going to start from Fort Nelson at 9 PM that night and were strongly discouraged from doing so; we waited until 6 AM the next morning when at least *someone* would eventually see us if we got into trouble with the car, etc. I'd love to return there someday. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #685 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28739; 6 Sep 92 22:32 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21897 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:39:03 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28633 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:38:54 -0500 Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:38:54 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209070138.AA28633@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #686 TELECOM Digest Sun, 6 Sep 92 20:39:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 686 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia - 678 Misnumbered as 683 (TELECOM Moderator) Latest Cuba - US Telephone Situation (Don Kimberlin, FIDO via G. Thurman) New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law (Scott Loftesness) US to UK Conversion Hints (John Pettitt) Live AT&T Opertaors From Pay Phones (Joe Rice) TIE 820 Phone System For Sale or Trade (Jason Galanter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 09:53:00 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia - 678 Misnumbered as 683 The original transmission of 678 failed for some reason. Following issue 683 I was alerted to it and resent 678 to the entire list ... but although the Digest itself said 678, the envelope said 683 ! ... sorry about that. Please take the retransmitted copy of 678 (I assume you did not get the original) and change the envelope so it reads 678 also. Thanks. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 16:26 GMT From: George S Thurman <0004056081@mcimail.com> Subject: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation Here is an article from the FIDONET SHORTWAVE ECHO that I thought TELECOM Digest readers would find of interest ... Msg#:14519 *SHORTWAVE* 09-02-92 21:55:00 From: DON KIMBERLIN To: ALL Subj: TECHIE REALPOLITIK It appears that AT&T has gotten itself into a bit of a bind about connectivity between the U.S. and Cuba, in a fall from one of the world's catbird seats into one of its stickier wickets. Within a week's time, Hurricane Andrew helped the whole matter turn around. Back in pre-Castro Cuba, AT&T and ITT had enjoyed a 50/50 split of ownership of the Cuban-American Telephone Company. Right up through the Batista dictatorship, that deal had made Cuba a willing market for AT&T's Western Electric-made hardware and a willing correspondent for the international services sold by AT&T and ITT's various telephone and telegraph entities. By 1959, the telecommunications bonds between Cuba and the U.S. had grown through several generations of shortwave radio and a couple of generations of submarine cable (from Key West reaching 78 miles underwater to Havana, providing all of 12 voice channels and supplemented by a Western Union telegraph cable of similar length), to the point that vastly expanded telephone communications were reasonable to provide. In 1959, AT&T and Cuban-American opened up what was at the time, one of the world's great advances in public dial telephone service -- a 900 Mhz tropospheric scatter over-the-horizon radio system capable of bearing 960 dial telephone channels...or one video signal. (A similar, smaller tropo scatter to Nassau, Bahamas also was built operating in the 2 gHz region.) Now, both the Bahamas and Cuba had instant, direct-dialed communications in copious quantity via the U.S. to the world. Via the U.S. radio terminals at Florida City, FL just two microwave hops south of Miami along the route to Key West. And, both correspondents made good use of their broadband links to the outside world. It was indeed a breakthrough in international communications for 1959. Florida City's drive-in movie-like parabolic sections were a showplace on AT&t publications and in AT&T executive tours. But, when Fidel Castro toppled the Batista dictatorship in Cuba very shortly thereafter, the troposcatter between Florida City and Guanabo (outside Havana), the troposcatter link to the U.S. became both a prize and a symbolic political thorn for both countries. First off, AT&T and the U.S. had to keep the link up, and in doing so, it provided a handly way for Castro and his government to dial Rome, Paris, Madrid, London -- and even Moscow -- while the hated Americans had to handle the calls, and wonder when they would get paid for them. At the same time, incoming calls from the U.S. made it easy for expatriate Cuban refugees to just dial up relatives and even counter-revolutionaries from their new homes and offices in the U.S. Florida City operated that way for more than 30 years, and its traffic volumes were huge. It was, in fact, so popular that by 1966, AT&T had to do something about the gigantic unpaid settlements for years of calls made out of Cuba to the whole world -- on AT&T's tab with all the world's other communications entities. The balance owing AT&T was enormous, and Castro had no intention of paying. Obviously, his huge unpaid balance was simply an item he felt was tit for tat. It's easy to see how Castro (and certainly his Russian masters) must have enjoyed the dual economic "get-back" and embarrassment Florida City was causing the hated U.S. during the deeper years of the Cold War. Finally, after years of no successful moves toward settling the balance, AT&T did something Castro probably never thought they would do. AT&T set up a plan and got approval from the government in Washington to shut down the system ... until Castro would come to terms. It was only necessary to to so for a few hours. Obviously, Castro needed it badly, and all within one day, Florida City was shut down and restarted after Castro's government agreed that all future calls had to be paid for from the U.S. end; that is, pre-paid on all calls to Cuba, and collect on all calls out of Cuba, with the proceeds being applied to settling Castro's debt to AT&T. It would seem the hated Yankees had won, and Florida City operated that way clear up to Hurricane Andrew. Things got old and creaky, and circuits got noisy, but continued to function enough for people to shout on and communicate. Very early on, the Cubans shut down one of their two transmitters to save power and parts, so the link had no diversity, which would show in Florida's frequently foggy weather. But, the traffic volumes remained high, and AT&T must have felt secure. AT&T may have felt a bit too secure, however, when in 1990 the Cuban government advertised to the world for someone to provide another international outlet for Cuba. AT&T's response was to go ahead and lay a used fiber optic cable from West Palm Beach down to Cuban territorial waters and give the Cubans an "opportunity" to let it be completed to replace the Florida City link. But AT&T's skills in international competition really are still neonatal, and they didn't count on any meaningful competition. The result was that Castro's government accepted a contract with ItalCable, Italy's equivalent of AT&T's international division, and ItalCable built a large satellite earth station linking Cuba to the world via Rome -- with full world-reaching DDD. Castro no longer needed the Florida City link; something AT&T hadn't counted on. However, by 1990, the "war" between Cuba and Washington had mellowed to one that permitted Castro to tolerate its existence -- so long as it didn't become a bother. AT&T was merely the backup route now, and Castro had no need for AT&T's "opportunity" which lay dormant under the tropical ocean. But, Florida City was becoming another sort of bother for AT&T, which felt differently, and didn't properly realize it was no longer in controi of Cuba's international communications destiny. Florida City was sitting there occupying frequencies that BellSouth now needed for its new cellular telephone service. AT&T was in Washington, regrett- ing it simply could not shut down one of the U.S.'s links to a foreign country. (All along, once the Italian route was opened, AT&T could have set up an operating agreement to transit calls with Cuba via Rome, but pride can and does keep politicians and corporations from swallowing bitter pills without help. So, even though alternate routes to Havana were available, AT&T never set up agreements for third-country routes to Cuba.) Enter Hurricane Andrew on the scene. Andrew toppled AT&T's microwave tower at Goulds, FL, between Miami and Florida City, shutting down microwave connectivity to both the Florida City tropo station and the Florida Keys, a route that has to follow a narrow path of semi-dry land and stepping-stones of islands down to Key West ... there's just no alternate physical pathway down the Keys, so everything -- electricity, water, telephones -- all run along the narrow roadway and under the bridges of U.S. 1 leading to Key West. AT&T lost its connectivity to Cuba. The world's telephone network operates internally with far less control than most outsiders would know. That lack of control provides convenience for excess traffic to momentarily "overflow" to other routes via third nations, and the CCITT standards even allow for occasional spills of such traffic, requiring each nation to handle occasional and casual calls for the other partners. It's also a weakness that lets phreaks do their thing once they can get into the innards of their own nation's dial network, because a few calls transiting each nation are permitted without question. But, when a regular liaison is to be set up between two nations, any "transit" nation is supposed to be paid its share for handling the calls. A "transit operating agreement" has to be set up. So long as Florida City functioned, AT&T did not have to face the truth of its loss as the world's prime route to Cuba. And, the volume of calls between Cubans on both sides of the political fence made it convenient. But, Andrew's stoppage of Florida City caused a problem that didn't reach the nightly national news. Thousands and thousands of Cubans still dialed for Havana daily. AT&T had a particular problem in its network with those thousands of calls routed to Florida with no place to go. The traffic spilled out to alternate routes that normally serviced Madrid, Paris, Rome and other European capitals -- all of which now focused on Rome as the main route to Cuba. Congestion occurred between European cities as the large influx originating in the U.S. and Canada went across the Atlantic. By Tuesday, September 1, the Europeans were complaining and threatening to limit U.S. calls from AT&T into their networks. AT&T had no "operating agreements" for them to handle transit traffic to Rome and Cuba. (No small part of the problem is a consistent one that occurs in international transits. Everbody on the route wants a 50% share. That loses money on the first transit, but when a call has to spill out such that four places are involved, it's downright expensive, something nobody wants a piece of. So, by Tuesday: a.) Hurricane Andrew's impact had been felt in the European telephone network, and Europeans were threatening to choke back AT&T traffic into their nets; b.) Competitors like MCI and Sprint were chortling a bit as their traffic went into Europe unimpeded, since they handled no calls to Havana, instead dumping their loads at AT&T; c.) Stepchild BellSouth was hoping AT&T would give up on Florida City, so they could open up some cellular channels in that area, and d.) AT&T was trying to find a way, without talking directly, to get Castro to accept use of the fiber cable lying fallow under the ocean. Now that you know, as Paul Harvey puts it, "The Rest of the Story," I hope you'll enjoy understanding more fully what bits of news you do hear about AT&T's loss to Hurricane Andrew at Florida City. It's bound to become a political debacle before it's over. WM v2.04/92-0315 * Origin: Borderline! BBS Kannapolis,N.C. (704) 938-6207 (1:379/37) ------------------------------ From: sjl@glenbrook.com (Scott Loftesness) Subject: New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 17:32:24 PDT Organization: Glenbrook Systems, Inc. Reply-To: sjl@glenbrook.com I am pleased to recommend an excellent new book the subject of the US telecommunications law. The book, titled "Federal Telecommunications Law" (ISBN 0-316-48676-0 published by Little, Brown & Company), was written by Michael K. Kellogg, John Thorne, and Peter W. Huber. Kellogg is a partner at Mayer, Brown & Platt; Thorne is Assistant General Counsel, Bell Atlantic; and Huber is Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute, and Of Counsel, Mayer, Brown & Platt. Huber is also known for authoring "The Geodesic Network" for the Justice Department a few years back. Chapters: 1. An Industry in Transition 2. The Powers of the FCC 3. Antitrust 4. Restructuring the Bell System 5. Equal Access Under the Divestiture Decree 6. The Line of Business Restrictions 7. Interpreting, Enforcing, and Modifying the Divestiture Decree 8. The GTE Decree 9. Pricing 10. Telecommunications Equipment 11. Enhanced Services 12. Long-Distance Service 13. Mobile Telephony 14. Telephony and Cable Television 15. International Issues 16. Privacy Appendices include the text of the AT&T and GTE Consent Decrees. I ordered the text in response to a direct solicitation from Little, Brown and have not seen the text yet in any bookstores locally (San Francisco Bay Area). The book is extremely well written and a real delight to read. It helps clarify the nuances of US federal telecommunications law. Highly recommended for readers interested in understanding more about the current -- and projected -- state of telecommunications regulation in the US. Scott Loftesness (sjl@glenbrook.com) Redwood City, California Others: 3801143@mcimail.com, 76703.407@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 21:17 PDT From: jpp@StarConn.com (John Pettitt) Subject: US to UK Conversion Hints Guide to converting things from the US to the UK and back: 1) All things electrical will need some attention befor use in the UK. Firstly the supply voltage is different (240v instead of 110v) this is important. There are two ways to fix this, if your equipment is switchable you switch it (most computers are - Apple being a notable exception). If your equipment is not switchable you need a transformer. Low power transformers are easy to buy in `tourist' type shops. Higher power units can be had from more specialized sources (Radio Spares in the UK has a good range). In addition to the voltage difference the line frequency is 50hz instead of 60hz. This will cause your clock radio not to work even if you have a transformer. Some equipment will not work on 110v 50hz (which is what your transformer will give you) the change in frequency has been known to melt power supplies (I have seen this it's not pretty). WARNING - unless you know what you are doing don't mess with 240v supplies -- they bite. I take no responsibility for your damaged equipment. This advise is worth what I charged you for it :-) 2) Your television, VCR etc are junk in the UK. The UK uses the PAL system (Phase Alternating Line or Pay for Additional Luxury) where the US uses NTSC (National Television Sub Committe or Never Twice Same Color). Other parts of the world use different versions of PAL (the sound sub carrier is different) or the french SECAM system. 3) Subject to power requirments your US phone will work just fine in the UK (you will need to change the plug). Tone dialing is available in quite a lot of places, to find out if you have it try it. It may help when ordering service from BT (British Telecom) to ask for a `digital' line. Where I was (Ascot) there were two switches, one system X and one older, unspecified analog type. If you are on a newer switch (call it an exchange if you want BT to understand you) most nowmal features (three way, memories, call waiting etc) will be available for a price. Call completion on the newer BT switches is VERY fast. You will get a ring before you have your finger off the button from the last digit if the other party is also on a digital switch. International call setup is also very good (13 seconds to California is typical). There is no flat rate local service and calling is expensive by US standards (although not bad compared to Germany). The only alternate long distance provider (mercury) requires you to dial a long code before each call (you can get phones that will do this for you). The bad news is that all the things that won't work cost twice as much in the UK as the US - expect $ = Pound when looking at prices of HiFi, TV etc (current exchange rate is $2 = 1 Pound). In the end it comes down to how much mess (transformers etc) you are prepared to put up with. We transfered from the UK to the US and left almost all of our 240v stuff in the UK because it was not worth the hassle (and replacements are soooo much less expensive in the US). Hope this helps. If anybody has specific questions on moving from the US to the UK or back please feel free to mail me (I have moved both ways in the last six years). Regards, John Pettitt jpp@starconn.com Archer N81034 apple!starnet!jpp Fax: +1 415 967 8682 Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX ------------------------------ From: jrice@atss.calstatela.edu Date: Sun Sep 6 16:54:11 PDT 1992 Subject: Live AT&T Opertaors From Pay Phones It appears that when direct dialing any LD call from a Pac*Bell pay phone one now gets a live AT&T operator on the line who announces the charges and (occasionally) asks if you wish to actually use coins. As of only a couple of weeks ago, an automated system was used to recite the charges. Does anyone have any information on why this switch has been made? It seems to me that it is a waste of resources by AT&T, especially when they are cutting back their workforce. Joe Rice jrice@calstatela.edu ------------------------------ From: n3hnr@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (Jason Galanter) Subject: TIE 820 Phone System For Sale or Trade Date: 06 Sep 92 03:44:47 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh I have a TIE 820 phone system for sale. It includes the following components: TIE 820 Series-4 KSU 1 ETSU-D Series-3 1 EICU-B Series-4 4 ESTU-C Series-2 1 ESTU-A Series 5 1 ECMU-D Series-5 1 EDTU-A Series-4 2 ECOU-C Series 3 TIE 820 Power supply unit 14 W-820 Telephone sets 1 1236 Display console The power cable that connects the KSU to the Power supply is missing, however I assume that this is probably one of the least expensive components of the system. No reasonable offer refused. Contact Jason @ n3hnr@hpb.cis.pitt.edu or 412-521-6042 Jason Galanter / N3HNR n3hnr@hpb.cis.pitt.edu 322 Mall Blvd., Suite 306 galanter+@pitt.edu Monroeville, PA 15146 (412) 521-6042 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #686 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03240; 7 Sep 92 0:49 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08971 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:57:38 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06187 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:57:30 -0500 Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:57:30 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209070357.AA06187@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #687 TELECOM Digest Sun, 6 Sep 92 22:57:36 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 687 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Labor Day, 1992 (TELECOM Moderator) Announcing the Internet AUDIOTEX Mailing List! (Lauren Weinstein) 313 to Split to 810 (Jim Rees) Loading Auth Codes Into CO Switch (Morris Galloway Jr.) Call Forwarding Help Needed For Red Cross Office (Kevin Day) 900-555-XXXX (Information) (Ralph Hyre) Telephone Line "Wink" (Bob Kupiec) Rolm PBX Question (Dave Levenson) TRT (was Call Home Country Codes from UK and France) (John R. Levine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:19:33 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Labor Day, 1992 Once again, the end of summer ... and the holiday which has become a chance for one last fling in the sun but which was originally intended to celebrate the contributions of working men and women to our society. And this year it seems the picture is more gloomy than ever: a high rate of unemployment in the United States; an economy that is very sluggish; thousands of newly unemployed people in south Florida whose places of employment simply up and vanished in Hurricane Andrew two weeks ago. Yes, many of these folks are finding work in the newly booming construction industry in what the {Chicago Sun Times} today referred to as the 'newly formed third-world country of Dade ...' thousands of working men and women who had everything they've worked for all their lives taken away in a minute by a violent and angry Mother Nature ... It used to be a job with AT&T meant job security for life ... but no more. How long will it be until the Mother Company has totally automated *everything* and only the Chairman and a handful of close associates are left? Don't say it can't happen ... they said that about a total conversion to automatic calling back in the 1930-40 era. Of course back in the 1930's they also said no one would ever unionize AT&T. They said it couldn't be done; and the workers of that era who signed union pledge cards and set about organizing Bell were laughed at and mocked by supervisors and co-workers alike. When I started my working career, manual 'cordboard' style switchboards were in evidence everywhere; we had no terminals for data entry and very few places had computers of any sort. Hundreds of clerks sat around all day doing very tedious jobs adding columns of figures and making entries in ledger books ... there were no handheld calculators, no home computers, no answering machines, no portable or cellular phones .. and of course, there was just One System ... one way of doing things where telecom was concerned. Well, happy holiday, everyone! Take a minute and pause to reflect on the contributions of American workers to our society today. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 18:28 PDT From: lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Announcing the Internet AUDIOTEX mailing list! Greetings. This message is to announce the formation of the Internet AUDIOTEX mailing list. The AUDIOTEX list is an Internet discussion forum for topic areas relating to the field of "audiotex" systems. "Audiotex" is a general term covering the broad area of telephone-based information systems of a wide variety of types. The distinguishing characteristic of an audiotex system is usually the use of either recorded or synthesized voice to output information to the user, with either telephone touch-tone keys or in some cases voice recognition systems being used for input. Voicemail systems, information collection/retrieval systems, and entertainment services are all examples of audiotex applications. All aspects of audiotex systems, including currently deployed systems, research and development issues, user interface design, applications concepts, security considerations, etc. are valid topics for discussion in this mailing list. At the current time, the AUDIOTEX mailing list is a direct distribution, non-moderated list with very little traffic. If traffic becomes considerable the list will probably be converted to a digest format. Subscriptions to the AUDIOTEX mailing list are controlled by an automated "listserv" system. To get more information about the AUDIOTEX list, please send a message to: audiotex-request@cv.vortex.com with the line: information audiotex in the BODY of the message (the "Subject" field of the message is ignored). To subscribe, please send a message to the same address above but with the line: subscribe audiotex where is replaced by your actual name, for example: subscribe audiotex Larry Fine Thanks much! --Lauren-- ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: 313 to Split to 810 Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 17:55:03 GMT This story appeared in {News & Views,} Michigan Bell's billing insert. I didn't see any copyright on it, and I assume they would like wide distribution, so I scanned it in. NEW AREA CODE WILL ADD MILLIONS OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS In 1994, a new area code will be added to southeast lower Michigan -- 810. The new area code is needed because southeastern Michigan is running out of phone numbers. The increasing popularity of fax machines, cellular phones, pagers and computers has used up telephone numbers at a rapid pace over the past few years. Establishing the new 810 area code will create more than three million additional telephone numbers. Some important things you should know about the creation of the new 810 area code are: + It won't raise anyone's rates -- even if you have to dial an area code for a number that you didn't have to before; + No one's local calling area will change; and, + Your basic, seven digit phone number will stay the same. Who will get the 810 code? Customers in Oakland, Macomb, Sanilac, Lapeer, St. Clair and Genesee counties, as well as small sections of Saginaw, Shiawassee and Livingston counties. And who will keep the 313 code? Customers in Wayne, Washtenaw and Monroe counties, as well as small sections of Jackson and Lenawee counties. A seven-member advisory committee spent months studying and talking to customers before recommending how best to establish the new area code. The addition of the new area code will affect millions of people, not just in southeastern Michigan but across the country. But from now until Aug. 10, 1994 (that's 8-10-94), when the change will occur, Michigan Bell will carry out a massive program to educate customers. In the meantime, if you've got a question about the new 810 area code, just call us toll-free 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday at 1 800 831-8989. We're committed to helping you make the transition to the new 810 area code as smooth as possible. We're just a call away. ------------------------------ From: mmgall@hubcap.clemson.edu (Morris Galloway Jr.) Subject: Loading Auth Codes Into CO Switch Organization: Clemson University Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 00:23:15 GMT Hello, We have 700 to 1000 authorization codes to turn down each spring, then new codes to be turned up in the fall when students arrive. Since these codes are in an on-campus computer, I do _not_ want to print them out and have our local telco key them back in. Nor do I want to key them in to the telco's system myself. I want to put them on a tape or diskette and have them loaded by Southern Bell. The CO switch in question is a NT DMS-100. Is anybody doing something like this? Morris Galloway Jr. mmgall@presby.edu +1-803-833-8217 Dean, Administrative Services Presbyterian College Clinton, SC 29325 ------------------------------ Subject: Call Forwarding Help Needed For Red Cross Office From: kday@entropy.mcds.com (Kevin Day) Date: Sun, 06 Sep 92 02:16:26 EDT The local Red Cross office would like to add a fax number. The problem is, they can't afford to add a fourth line simply for a fax machine. Their current setup is: line 1 (main number, published) line 2 (hunts with line 1) line 3 (forwarded to answering service) When someone calls line 1 outside of office hours, they are instructed by an answering machine) to call line 3 if they have an emergency. A few years ago, when someone was in the office they would disable forwarding and use line 3 for inbound calls also, but something broke in the telco and this no longer works. (The local telco is United Telephone - draw your own conclusions ;-) So, when someone calls line 3, the office gets a short half-ring and the call bounces out to the answering service. Call forward-no answer is available from the telco. What they want to do is use the line 3 for fax AND emergency calls (the line is almost always unused right now) 24 hours a day. Is this possible? I haven't come up with a way of doing this. The only idea I have is to get a fax/voice switch on line 2, and publish that as the fax number, but the fax switch would have to work well (they get a lot of traffic for a small town). Does anyone have any ideas? The first scenerio would be preferred, but if that isn't possible (I don't think so) then could someone recommend a fax/voice switch (remember they're on a tight budget). Thanks. kday@entropy.mcds.com ------------------------------ From: falcon!cubs!ralphw@grackle.att.com Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 19:04:31 EDT Subject: 900-555-XXXX (Information) > In article (Dave Cantor) writes: >> I tried to get 900 directory assistance tonight from Nashua, NH >> (603-888). I got the following intercept: >> "Due to a change in network architecture, the 900 information number >> has been disconnected. This is no further information available >> at this time." > I just tried 900 555 1212, and I got an AT&T live operator intercept. The 555 exchange has apparently been reassigned by BellCore. It will be interesting to see if enough PBXes allow 900-555 calls to go through to make this service worth it to vendors and other information providers. AT&T TODAY (U.S. Edition) Thursday, August 27, 1992 -- 11:45 a.m. EDT AT&T ANNOUNCES *** Businesses looking to offer database information and technical expertise to other businesses can use a new telephone "address" on the AT&T network. AT&T announced yesterday that the company would dedicate the 900-555 exchange to business-to-business pay-per-call programs. Bell Communications Research, which manages the national telephone numbering plan, assigned exclusive use of numbers in the 900-555 exchange to AT&T. Companies today are using 900 numbers to provide services to other businesses, such as out-of-warranty product support, high-level technical consulting services, credit verification, facsimile database abstracts and employee dial-in conferences and training. Charges for the calls offset the cost of providing prompt, expert service. Any PBX that allows six-digit screening can be programmed to accept 900-555-XXXX calls. AT&T chose the 555 exchange for business-to-business 900 service calling partly because so many people equate 555 with "information." Information on AT&T MultiQuest 900 Services is available from AT&T sales personnel or by calling 800-243-0900. [See news story below.] *** 900 BUSINESS -- AT&T has set up a specialized 900 service for businesses only, designed for firms that offer database information and technical expertise to other businesses. AT&T said it will dedicate the 900-555 exchange to business-to-business pay-per-call programs. Many corporate switchboards are programmed to block access to 900 numbers. But the numbers in the 900-555 exchange will be accessible to those who need them, while still blocking calls to other 900 numbers, AT&T said. [Newark Star-Ledger] ----------------- Personally, I suspect that this is just something else that Cincinnati Bell won't be able to deal with, while other RBOCS will. I'd want my 900 blocking to be disabled for calls to 900-555. I worry about our model of communications when we have to use a single phone number to control routing (choice of carrier), content (`clean' information for business), billing (900 is extra $), and addressing (actually getting connected to the person or organization you are trying to reach.) EasyReach 700 services seems to be a good compromise in this regard. You can control who calls you for free vs who pays. Disclaimer: My own opinions. Ralph Hyre ------------------------------ From: olwejo!bob@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Kupiec) Subject: Telephone Line "Wink" Reply-To: olwejo!bob@uunet.UU.NET Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 00:27:38 GMT What is the cause of telephone line "wink"? I might guess that it is TPC's way of monitoring the lines? I happen to notice it on a telephone that has "in use" LEDs on it. One line does it consistently (almost on a regular schedule, although I have never timed it) and the second does it once in a while. This happens while no-one is using the telephone. It's kind of disturbing to see the LED flash without using the phone. I'm always thinking someone's outside with alligator clips making calls! ;-) Another time that the line "winks" is upon hangup. One line will not wink when hanging up and one line will. Can anyone offer an explanation (or guess at one)? Bob Kupiec - Amateur Radio: N3MML UUCP: olwejo!bob@cs.widener.edu Internet: kupiec@hp800.lasalle.edu !: uunet!widener!olwejo!bob ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Rolm PBX Question Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1992 15:53:18 GMT I need a ROLM PBX expert: A customer wants to install our interactive voice system behind a ROLM PBX. (We normally install on central office lines, and bypass the customer's switch.) Our application will terminate and hang up if the caller is non-responsive to several repetitions of a voice prompt, or if the caller indicates that the transaction is complete, or if we receive an open-loop (forward disconnect) signal from the switch. The ROLM PBX does not provide an open-loop signal. If the caller hangs up and we do not, it will transmit dial-tone to us for some un-specified interval, followed by error-tone. At that point, it places our station port in a disabled state, and will refuse to connect inbound calls until we have re-enabled the port. We can do this by going on-hook, then going off-hook and dialing *50, and then going on-hook again. This presents us with a serious problem. If we're playing a lengthy voice prompt and the caller abandons the call by silently hanging up, we won't know about it. Our Dialogic Corp. voice platform can detect dialtone when it is placing an outbound call, but there appears to be no way to sense dialtone during an established connection. We cannot perform a call-progress analysis while we're playing audio. When we stop playing audio, we expect DTMF from the caller, but while we're expecting DTMF, we're not able to sense dialtone or error-tone (what is error-tone?). At the end of any call, we have no reliable way to know whether or not we're disabled. If we assume that we are not disabled (the normal case) we'll just go on-hook and await the next call. If the switch has disabled our port, we'll never get another call. If we assume that we have been disabled, we could, after every call, go off-hook and dial *50 to re-enable our line. But if we were already enabled, this action could result in glare: we could be answering an inbound call, and sending the *50 toward a calling party. Does anybody know of a better option? Can the 'feature' of the switch that disables our line be disabled, or can the time interval be made long enough that we'll never see it? Is there any reliable way to get forward disconnect information from the PBX? Thanks! Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Subject: TRT (was Call Home Country Codes from UK and France) Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 6 Sep 92 17:32:56 EDT From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > [calling from the UK] > USA (quad) 0800 89 0456 Phone USA (TRT) > [Submitter's query: Who is TRT? Used to be the name of AT&T Mail's > Telex Service.] TRT was, as I recall, Tropical Radio Telegraph, which started as the radio department of United Fruit and evolved into one of the IRCs (international telex carriers) with routes mostly between the U.S. and Latin America. The telex business is no longer a great one to be in, as customers switch to fax as fast as they can, so it makes sense that TRT would be switching to long distance telephone. I've never seen any mention of them as a long distance carrier within the U.S., so they may be international only. They're not in the 1990 10XXX list in the telecom archives, either, so they have gotten into telephony within the past year. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #687 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04716; 7 Sep 92 1:37 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27279 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 23:46:50 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26783 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 23:46:41 -0500 Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 23:46:41 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209070446.AA26783@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #688 TELECOM Digest Sun, 6 Sep 92 23:46:40 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 688 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Emperor's New Figleaf (Robert Horvitz) Spirit Phones (Joe Smooth) Telecom White Pages (Antony Ingram) Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question (Steve Bixby) Caller ID Box Interface (Joel Robertson) Question on How to Get Internet Domain Access (Paul Robinson) Working Assets Long Distance (Mark McWiggins) Looking for Used PBX/VMX On-Sale Publications/Mags. (Ned M. Kazi) Strange MCI Problem (Bill Huttig) A/A1 Answer Supervision (Tom Metro) Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls (Peter Capek) Bell Science Series on Video (John Higdon) Need Info on Compass Voice-Response Software and Others (Jeff McCartney) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 05:28:13 MDT From: Robert Horvitz Subject: The Emperor's New Figleaf Adrienne Voorhis recently asked readers of the TELECOM Digest: > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor [mobile radio] broadcasts but can stop you > from disclosing what was heard? Adrienne said she was disappointed in the answers given. I was, too, but hadn't responded to her initial request because I assumed such a knowledgable group would have a better grasp of the issues. Let me take a swing at it now and see if this helps. Let's start with the distinction between a MEDIUM and a MESSAGE. In the case of radio, the public airwaves can be used to send and receive private messages. The information content of radio waves can be owned, and copyrighted, but not the waves themselves. By the same token, the user of a radio frequency does not own the frequency. They are authorized by a public authority only to use it for a particular purpose in a certain place for a set period (usually the duration of the license). They no more own the channel than a publisher owns the light reflected by a page in a book that they published. To come at this from another angle, a license is needed to broadcast a TV program. But no license is needed to produce the program. The public nature of radio airwaves was first recognized in US law by the Radio Act of 1912, and has been upheld in all succeeding laws, even the ECPA. The ECPA criminalizes the "intentional interception" of certain radio communications. It defines "interception" as "acquiring the contents" of the transmission. Note that an alternative definition was proposed by AT&T early in the drafting of the ECPA: they proposed to define "interception" as "acquiring the TRANSMISSION of the contents" (emphasis added). That would have made it a crime merely to hear the hiss of a DES-encrypted audio transmission, or look at the garbled snow of a scrambled TV image. It would have become illegal to sweep the environment to determine what kinds of RF radiation your body is absorbing. Even having the energy enter your body would pose a legal problem. (The qualifying adjective "intentional" was added much later in the drafting.) Fortunately, Congress rejected this definition as unreasonable and excessive. The distinction between medium and message was preserved: the ECPA is supposed to protect information, not radio waves. The Communications Act of 1934 allows you to receive any radio signal that comes to you. But when you aren't "authorized" to receive it, you cannot tell others what you heard or exploit the content for "gain" (courts usually interpret "gain" as "financial gain"). This policy was a compromise between the well-understood public nature of the physical medium, and the idea that for an act to be criminal, it must BE an act: that is to say, one must act on the information in some way. Therefore, exploiting or divulging what you overheard was criminalized, not mere passive reception. This was, admittedly, a legal "figleaf" owing to the practical impossibility of preventing people from picking up signals intruding into their homes - and a recognition that it was in fact not their fault that signals were intruding into their homes. Speaking on a cellular phone is like using a megaphone. Anyone in range can hear you, and the range is farther than the eye can see. In such a situation, who should be responsible for protecting the "privacy" of the communication -- the transmitter, or everyone else who happens to be in range? Until passage of the ECPA, it was an established policy, decades old, that the person (or corporation) operating the transmitter bears the initial responsibility for protecting the transmissions. The person who transmits benefits from the use of a public resource (radio frequencies), and is in the best position to protect signal content. If they take no precautions, there's not much anyone else can do to compensate for their carelessness. Where the ECPA differs from all past US laws is in making it the responsibility of everyone in range of a wide-area radio signal to avoid receiving it. That is why the law is the object of so much derision even now, so long after its passage. Its most serious defect is that it absolves cellular companies of all responsibility for protecting the privacy of their customers' phonecalls. Courts, citing the ECPA, have already dismissed several civil suits by customers who argued that broadcasting their phonecalls "in the clear" constitutes a "disclosure" to third parties which violates the Communications Act of 1934. So rather than protecting the privacy of cellular, as it superficially appears to do, the ECPA actually eliminated the meager protection afforded by earlier laws: the Emperor's New Figleaf. ------------------------------ From: kingpin@world.std.com (Joe Smooth) Subject: Spirit Phones Organization: The World Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 03:11:02 GMT Is there anyway to rewire Spirit phones so that they can work on normal ring and tip wires? I heard there was someway to build some kind of interface which can keep the functions intact, too. Anyone heard of this? ------------------------------ From: v8aa002@stan.xx.swin.OZ.AU (INGRAM A) Subject: Telecom White Pages Date: 7 Sep 92 03:00:34 GMT Organization: Computer Centre, Swinburne Univ. of Tech. Melbourne, Australia. Hi there, does anyone know where or how I can get access to the Telecom White Pages over the net. I know I can subscribe directly for $50 a month but for the amount I would use it, that would be a waste of money. And if there is an organisation that is connected with AARnet or ACSnet that has the white pages database. Is there a world database and not just an Australian one? Thanks anyone that can help, Antony v8aa002@stan.xx.swin.OZ.AU ------------------------------ From: sbixby%portal@cup.portal.com Subject: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 14:02:20 PDT Hi, folks, I have a question, and this is the closest place I can find to post it ... I am deaf, and have a Motorola "Advisor" pager, which is an alphanumeric pager -- ie, you call a service number and leave a text message to be sent to the pager. In my case, the service number is a TDD, so deaf folks (or those with a TDD anyway) can send me messages. Anyway ... The pager has three contacts on the bottom -- do any of you readers have any clue how I can find out what these contacts are for? I'm guessing they're for programming the thing, but ... I'm hoping they can be used to sense when the pager goes off, in order to build a device to flash a strobe light and wake me up at night. Are there any Motorola (ex-)employees out there that might know how to get this info for me? Or anyone else that knows something about this pager? I would REALLY APPRECIATE this information, because my company is pressuring me to find something so that I may be paged at night. Email is preferred. Thanks in advance! -swb- (Steve Bixby - sbixby@cup.portal.com) ------------------------------ From: robertson@ewir-wr.wr.aflc.af.mil (Joel Robertson) Subject: Caller ID Box Interface Date: 6 Sep 92 16:28:00 GMT Organization: Robins AFB - LNEW I bought a Caller ID box this weekend that has a serial RS-232 interface. It's a BellSouth Products Calling Line Identifer (CLI) Model 20 which is actually made by MHE Systems (MHE20). There are three modular connectors on the unit. Two are RJ11 line in and line out. The other is a smaller connector (the same one used by handset cords) for data. The instruction manual gave precious little info on the data port other than it's RS-232 1200 BPS 8N1. I called BellSouth customer service who were no help. The instruction manual cautions that mis-wiring may damage the unit. Therefore, the RS-232 circuitry may not be very robust and I hesitate to "swap wires till it works". If I have to, I'll open it up and trace wires. Does anyone have the hardware interface info (pinouts) for this unit? Does anyone have the address/phone number for MHE Systems? What are the part numbers for the Motorola and Sierra Semiconductor Caller ID chips? Where can I find the definition (physical/electrical) of the various RJ?? modular connectors? Thanks in advance. Joel Robertson | Internet: robertson@ewir-wr.wr.aflc.af.mil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 05:42 GMT From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> Subject: Question on How to Get Internet Domain Access I don't have the kind of access to Internet that allows me to find out where to find this out, so I'll ask it here. I'd like to find out two things, which I've heard can be done, the problem is in finding them: 1. I have heard there are some sites that will register a domain(s) on Internet for anyone who needs DNS; does anyone know who that is or where to write? (I have MCI Mail which means I have mail access only to Internet; I do not have Telnet or News Group access. I need to know either the address to post a message to, or the place to ask.) 2. Does someone know of a low-cost access to send mail into and receive mail from Internet marked with user addresses within a domain name that one registers with the Internet Network Information Center? UUNET Technology of Falls Church, VA wants $30 a month plus $3 an hour; Digital Express of Greenbelt, MD, will provide internet access for $15 a month with 1 hour a day free and $1 for each additional hour; this would be {perfect} except that for them to add a domain they want at least 50 accounts on that domain! All I want is some place to handle taking some messages from BBS users, the way Fidonet does. (I don't want to use the "fidonet.org" domain as I am trying to arrange something for people who are not on Fidonet sites.) I'd like to find a way to do something for around $10 a month against $1 an hour or so, that will simply "dump" any mail sent to the domain(s) I use (if I have to purchase a separate account for each domain that's acceptable). I'm trying to do this on a shoestring budget. It's for transfer of some newsgroups and mail that are running on some non-internet networks, to allow their newsgroups to migrate into internet and allow Internet mail (and possibly Internet news groups) to migrate down to them. The networks are running on ordinary computer BBSs run by individuals. If the cost is low enough, I can foot the bill out of my own pocket as my attempt to contribute to something I get a lot of enjoyment out of. If the cost is higher, then I'll have to find out if the sysops who run these boards want to participate. Something in me says I should try to find out if the sysops who are providing this service to users are willing to foot the bill for this (or get the users themselves to pay for it.) I probably will do that, but what I'd like to do is find out what the best cost I can get for this service is. (BBS users are notoriously cheap and it's very hard to get them to pay much, if anything.) If it's low enough, I can "salami slice" the charges out to the individual BBSs that want it, (or if it's low enough, to all of them) and they don't have to pay a tremendous amount for this capability. The point is that trying to explain to someone who has never been online the benefits involved in it is difficult. To explain to people who use non-networked BBSs the benefits of networking is difficult. To explain to people on networks the advantages of being part of Internet is also difficult. (I am currently taking the APL ('A Programming Language') news list which is sent to me as Internet mail, so that a local BBS which is related to APL can take this material; the sysop never realized that when he had some books about APL to sell for those who'd want them, that he could have me post a message on the Internet APL news list. (I had to suggest it to him, and several people on the list were very interested.) Until you see the internet as a resource, you can't know the value of having it.) I also have to include in whatever it "costs" to get this, the costs to get to the material. If I can get free access to Internet to use a domain name, but I've got to call a site in Alaska, (I'm currently in the Washington, DC area) that's not much help. I will appreciate any information that anyone here can pass on to me. Paul Robinson: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM or 0005066432@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: markmc@sierra.com (Mark McWiggins) Subject: Working Assets Long Distance Organization: Sierra Geophysics Inc., Kirkland, Wa Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 09:10:37 GMT A friend is considering Working Assets for long distance. Do you have any experience with this service? Would you do it again? Thanks in advance for any guidance. Mark McWiggins +1 206 822 5200x377 days Box 31356 markmc@sierra.com +1 206 632 1905 24 hrs. Seattle WA 98103-1356 ------------------------------ From: nmk@fns-nc1.fns.com (Ned M. Kazi) Subject: Looking for Used PBX/VMX On-Sale Publications/Mags. Organization: Fujitsu Network Switching Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 23:04:13 GMT I am trying to obtain names/addressess/telephone numbers of any magazines/trade publications/horse traders which would list used PBX/Voice Mail machines for sale. I am sure there are some news-paper-type-format publications which lists telecom equipment which sre used or on sale etc.etc. I would appreciate if someone could supply me with name/addressess/telephone number of such publications. Please email: uunet!mcnc!fns-nc1!nmk or if unable call 919-790-3393 Thank You. ------------------------------ From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) Subject: Strange MCI Problem Date: 7 Sep 92 02:28:08 GMT Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA I had a strange thing happen to me tonight. I called my aunt and after dialing heard nothing; no ringing or noise at all, so I tried several more times. At first I thought it might be that the speed dial lost the end of the number so I dialed it (well actually pushed) the number manually ... still no luck After several tries I did get through. It turned out that she has been picking up and saying 'hello' I never heard her. I later tried to call my other line via MCI and the same thing happened. Is this what can happen with a SS7 problem? The ringing through but no voice path getting opened? Is MCI connecting their SS7's to the LEC's yet? Bill ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 4:58:19 EDT From: Tom Metro Subject: A/A1 Answer Supervision Organization: Venture Logic, Newton, MA leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: > dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) writes: >> I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex >> system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on >> business lines or risk of electrical short circuit"... > It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that > when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires > together. What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop current. Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision? Tom tmetro@ds5000.dac.northeastern.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 11:40:32 EDT From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls I tried to use the AT&T Alliance Conferencing service, whose number is 700-456-1000. I dialed and got a "cannot be completed as dialed" message. I tried 700-555-4141 to confirm that AT&T was still my default carrier, and it was. It turned out that for the Alliance number, one must dial 0 + 700 ... even though the 0 is not necessary for 700-555-4141 call. What's going on here? Is the leading 0 some sort of acknowledgement by me that this is a chargeable call? If I dial the 0, is it presented by my LEC to AT&T in a different way than if I don't dial it? Also, where was the message generated? By the LEC or by AT&T? If the latter, is there a technical reason why they couldn't easily have figured out what I wanted and what I was doing wrong, and told me, rather than forcing me to call around to find out. (The service worked wondefully, by the way, once I got through to it ...) Peter Capek [Moderator's Note: Zero-plussing generally indicates that you are requesting the assistance of the operator for some task other than a straight direct-dialed call. The 'operator' might only be a computer you deal with (ie. the automated collect calling and third number billing some telcos use now-a-days), but that is beside the point. Setting up conference calls is a function of the 'operator', and all 'operator assisted' calls carry a surcharge. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 16:58 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Bell Science Series on Video Those of you who are over forty will remember a series of television programs sponsored by The Bell System. A product of the fifties, these were excellent films featuring Dr. Frank Baxter as host explaining such things as meteorology, time, biology, and physiology. Highly produced, these programs utilized puppets, animation, and well-written scripts to inform and entertain young and old alike. Unfortuately, even I did not own a VCR before 1974. Browsing at my local video store this afternoon, I discovered that the series is out on home video. I was able to purchase on CAV laserdisc the following titles: Strange Case of the Cosmic Rays (produced, written, directed by Frank Capra); The Unchained Goddess (produced by Jack Warner) The Alphabet Conspiracy (produced by Jack Warner) Thread of Life (produced by Jack Warner) Gateway to the Mind (produced by Jack Warner) Hemo the Magnificent (produced by Frank Capra) About Time (produced by Jack Warner) Others may be available but out of stock at this time. Needless to say, I will be scanning the shelf for other titles. The downside here is that the source appears to be ordinary 16mm film (optical sound). This is disappointing to a videophile who has been spoiled with Gone With The Wind restorations, etc., but finally being able to put one's hands on these classics is at least something. And BTW, the quality of the presentation is as good as I remembered it to be. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: gt8963a@prism.gatech.edu (MCCARTNEY,JEFFREY ELWOOD) Subject: Need Info on Compass Voice-Response Software and Others Date: 6 Sep 92 18:21:00 GMT Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology I'm looking into various voice-response systems. Would anyone care to tell me about their experiences with the various manufacturers of such and the associated software and hardware, especially Compass Software out of Sarasota FL. I'm interested in all types: Touch-tone (DTMF recognition) Text-to-speech Synthesized voice Thank you. If I get a decent sampling, I'll post a summary. uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt8963a Internet: gt8963a@prism.gatech.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #688 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23683; 8 Sep 92 0:17 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24867 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:20:44 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26273 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:20:35 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:20:35 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209080320.AA26273@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #690 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Sep 92 22:18:20 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 690 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Role of Usenet in Case of Disaster (M.J. Crepin-Leblond) Disasters and Computer Communications (Greg Trotter) Re: Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups (was Disaster Reporting) (Rick Broadhead) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Thor Lancelot Simon) Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (B Campbell) Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (E. Sheafer) Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (M. Solomon) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Wolf Paul) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Harold Hallikainen) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Fred R. Goldstein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:46:06 +0100 From: Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond Subject: The Role of Usenet in Case of Disaster Someone (sorry - I inadvertently deleted the message) suggested that Usenet would be used to a further extent in cases of disasters such as the one in Florida, with hurricane andrew. Well, we do receive here a group called alt.hurricane.andrew , and the feed is indeed pretty long (it has to go through five or six sites before reaching me here in London, and that's from UUNET only!). I would be surprised if this group wasn't available in U.S.A.! Cheers, Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond, Digital Comms. Section, Elec. Eng. Department Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2BT, UK Internet/Bitnet: - Janet: ------------------------------ From: greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu (Greg Trotter) Subject: Disasters and Computer Communications Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 17:59:40 GMT Organization: A Planet Of His Own I need some information regarding methods of emergency data communications. Imagine a disaster team in a crisis area, with a laptop computer and no electricity or phones. What is readily available (hardware-wise) to facilitate this? Any suggestions are appreciated; I'm guessing some type of sattelite system. I would appreciate any replies by mail. Greg Trotter -- Norman, Oklahoma greg@gallifrey.ucs.uoknor.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 01:08:21 EDT From: Rick Broadhead Subject: Re: Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups (was Disaster Reporting on Usenet) First of all, I'd like to clarify that I am *not* suggesting that Usenet be used to *coordinate* disaster assistance. I realize this contradicts an earlier statement I made in TELECOM Digest. For many of the reasons already stated here in the Digest, it would not be practical nor feasible to coordinate disaster relief activities on Usenet, and it was never my intention to do so. I clarified my proposal and submitted it to news.groups. I apologize for any confusion. What I am suggesting is a MISC.DISASTER.* group to disseminate information on disasters, whether they be man-made or natural. During catastrophes/calamities, such a group would be a place where reports could be posted, and information could be exchanged. And, as I have already pointed out, a misc.disaster.* group would be used to publish the addresses and phone numbers of agencies accepting donations and enquiries from the public, enquiries about the welfare of friends and relatives, for example. The point that was made about this group not being a good place to ask about specific people is well-taken, and I agree. One need look no further than TELECOM Digest itself to see the need for a disaster group. Not one disaster has slipped by without requests from readers for updates and information. And similar requests appeared on other Usenet groups too (i.e. soc.culture.caribbean for Hurricane Andrew). I am proposing that we create a newsgroup devoted to this type of traffic. The success of disaster newsgroups does not depend on communication in and out of the affected areas. First of all, not everyone has access to the same sources of information. Remember that Usenet is carried nationally and internationally. Information that you may have may be information that someone else is looking for. Secondly, it is evident from TELECOM Digest and elsewhere on the net that you don't have to be directly in the disaster area to share information and/or report on how the disaster has affected you personally. I am aware of alt.hurricane.andrew. But many people are not. More importantly, such alt.* groups are created *after-the-fact*. For a disaster group to be effective, it has to be in-place and ready-for-use. This means having a permanent group on Usenet devoted to disaster traffic, and not creating temporary groups to deal with separate crises, groups which would only be created *after* a hurricane, earthquake etc. hits, and removed several months later. Note that a disaster group could also deal with emergency preparedness and related issues. I am not worried about the slow propagation of articles to some sites. I have posted articles to Usenet and had responses arrive less than an hour later. Take a look at any Usenet group to see that replies are often posted within 24 hours of the date of the original article (and these are only the *public* replies). This is really a weak argument. I truly believe that the Usenet community would benefit from one or more newsgroups that would act as a clearinghouse for disaster information, but it won't happen (at least not right now), unless someone picks up this idea, and carries it through the various stages of the Usenet group-creation process. If I didn't have classes starting next week, I would take it on myself. Thanks to those people who took the time to send me their comments. Rick Broadhead ysar1111@VM1.YorkU.CA (Internet) Faculty of Administrative Studies ysar1111@yorkvm1 (Bitnet) York University ...!bitnet!yorkvm1!ysar1111 (UUCP) Toronto, CANADA ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:00:05 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC In article YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET writes: > I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not > been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. For > example, I am sure there would be great support for a group such as > misc.disaster.coordination and/or misc.disaster.reports, which could In this vein, has anyone got a copy of Brian Reid's article from waybackwhen which argues the case that the Usenet would withstand, in working order, any concievable disaster up to and including a nuclear war? I think using the net to coordinate disaster relief efforts is a fine idea; especially because large computer installations often have backup power. And better still, I believe the contracts with the telcos for much of the NSFnet backbone specify multiple geographically diverse wires, don't they? Perhaps it's worth bringing this up somehow with an appropriate organization such as the Red Cross? What'd it take, a 386 box in their national headquarters to run things from? Probably worth the money! Thor Lancelot Simon tls@panix.COM [Moderator's Note: Actually, it would be quite easy. If someone wants to donate the 386 and the required UUCP software, I'd set it up in the Chicago Red Cross or else my own office. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 15:13:44 GMT In infmx!johng@uunet.UU.NET (John Galloway) writes: > I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge > normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number, > I had planned to get a cellular, then only give out that number. When > I get to an office or am at home, I just forward the cellular to the > number where I am -- simple. I only give folks one number and it > either goes to where I am, or to my home phone with an answering This is exactly how I work. My cellular number is the one I use for my business and it is on call-forwarding most of the time. I also have the message center service on the cellular for those times it's not call forwarded and I cannot answer the phone. This service costs about $5.00/month plus air time if I call for messages on the cellular. There's no charge if I call in for my messages from a land line. US-West cellular in the Seattle area doesn't charge for the land-line forwarding. US-West doesn't charge for calls to busy signals either. I had an account with Bell Atlantic for a while and it really annoyed me that they would charge me $0.10 for busy calls. Bill INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software UUCP: ...!thebes!camco!bill 6641 East Mercer Way uunet!camco!bill Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591 [Moderator's Note: Not only does Ameritech Mobile not charge for calls forwarded to a land line number, they gave us free service all day on Labor Day! A full page ad in the papers on Sunday said everyone with Ameritech cellular service was invited to use their cell phones as much as desired at no charge today, long distance and local telephone company surcharges not included. That was a nice gift from them! PAT] ------------------------------ From: David E. Sheafer Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line Date: 7 Sep 92 20:03:26 GMT Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA In article , infmx!johng@uunet.UU.NET (John Galloway) writes: > I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge > normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number, > (Call your cellular carrier and complain TODAY! :-) > [Moderator's Note: *Which* Cellular One? *Which* GTE? Cellular One in > Chicago does not charge for forwarding calls to landline numbers, nor > does Ameritech, the 'B' carrier here. And regards forwarding of > calls, Illinois Bell now allows us to *remotely* change our forwarding > at no additional cost. I will comment more on this in the next issue. PAT] Both, Nynex Mobile Communications New England and Cellular One Boston charge regular airtime rates for fowarding calls to landline numbers. I've never understood why Nynex charges as they are the local phone company, yet I can understand why Cell One charges as they have to pay for using the Nynex (New England Telephone) network. David E. Sheafer internet: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu or uucp: samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b GEnie: D.SHEAFER Cleveland Freenet: ap345 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 13:57:33 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line > [Moderator's Note: *Which* Cellular One? *Which* GTE? Cellular One in > Chicago does not charge for forwarding calls to landline numbers, nor > does Ameritech, the 'B' carrier here. And regards forwarding of > calls, Illinois Bell now allows us to *remotely* change our forwarding > at no additional cost. I will comment more on this in the next issue. PAT] Cellular One/Boston charges airtime for calls forwarded to land lines or answered by Message Plus. They don't charge any monthly fees for call waiting, call forwarding (including no-answer transfer), three-way calling, or Message Plus. The forwarding can be canceled or changed only from the cellular phone. It is not possible to have call forwarding and Message Plus enabled simultaneously since they both use the forwarding mechanism. Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty%roscom@think.com ------------------------------ From: cc_paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul) Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Reply-To: cc_paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf N. Paul) Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 12:14:08 GMT In article mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) writes: Commenting on V.25bis Delayed & Forbidden Numbers lists, and the term "stay on this list forever" used in the Multitech Modem manual: > OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable > regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar > devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded. But > ... a Forbidden Numbers list? With numbers that stay on it FOREVER?? > Have these people totally taken leave of their senses? If I dial up > my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't > answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again? > I assume that either I am not reading something right, or that V.25bis > is optional/voluntary, or outdated, or something, but I really can't > imagine what reasonable thoughts were occurring in the heads of the > people that thought up this scheme. Does anyone have any ideas about > what CCITT was trying to accomplish here? Well, the purpose of this feature is not so much to prevent line overloading, but rather to prevent harrassment of voice phone customers. Thus, in my experience, also with Multitech modems, "failure to connect" means the phone is answered, BUT NOT BY A MODEM. If there is no answer at all, the feature does not kick in. If the phone is answered but there is no modem tone it does. Imagine a slightly mistyped phone number in a UUCP L-sys entry which gets called every fifteen minutes ... "Forever" is also relative ... the list is cleared by turning the modem off and on again. The point is, it requires manual intervention. Otherwise some people would put the software command to clear the "forbidden list" into their modem reset sequence at the beginning of each dial command ... I agree however that the wording in the Multitech manual is unclear and rather drastic. Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center wnp@rcvie.co.at Alcatel-Elin Research Center +43-1-391621-122 (w) Ruthnergasse 1-7 +43-1-391452 (fax) ELIN RESEARCH A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe +43-1-2246913 (h) [Moderator's Note: A sad thing happened here several years ago when a FIDO site kept trying to connect with another FIDO site several times nightly for about *two weeks* ... only to reach the voice number of a 70-year old woman in error. IBT tracked the fellow down and handed him a seven word ultimatum: "The BBS goes offline today. Permanently. Period." Either that or he could risk having the Illinois Commerce Commission order IBT to disconnect his service, since the lady had already filed a complaint and made a big stink with all concerned. He turned off the BBS for several months until things quieted down. Then there was the First National Bank of Chicago's infamous FAX machine which kept calling a family in Germany at 3 AM German time for awhile. Bundespost got AT&T involved; AT&T backtracked it to IBT and the bank. IBT gave the bank some good old-fashioned hell in return. FNB/Chicago is so incompetent -- remember, that's the bank that the $5 per hour wire transfer clerk ripped off for twenty million dollars! -- that a month later when their long distance bill showed several dozen one-minute calls to Germany, some clerk in the bank's telecom department had the nerve to call IBT to get the charges removed 'due to some billing error by AT&T ...' Then a telco supervisor really blasted them! PAT] ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 18:13:58 GMT A previous post listed the redial limitations in various countries, including a "forbidden number list" where numbers of calls that were failed several times were stored. The modem would then refuse to dial the forbidden numbers. I had heard of this regulation before (I think in the documentation to Xtalk mk 4). I am reminded of one of our customers who put a wrong phone number in one of broadcast transmitter control systems. Instead of dialing the network control point, it called some invalid number every couple minutes all night long. They got a call from AT&T in the morning wanting to know what was going on. I imagine this regulation (for the US) is in part 68. My copy of part 68 seems to be deep in some pile of paper here ... Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@pan.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 20:30:42 GMT In article , mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) writes about Forbidden Numbers and redial limits. FWIW, the problem isn't V.25bis, and isn't even part of V.25bis, but is in the modem in order to get approval for use in those countries. V.25bis is a rather neat method of doing inband dialing on sync (and async, via a different option set) lines. If the modem is clever enough to autorepeat the call, then it has to meet national regulations, V.25bis or not. I suspect that the "forever" rules are based on an expectation that once the two minutes are up, it is possible that you've forgotten why you're dialing and thus are expected to request the call again. I strongly suspect that being on the Forbidden list doesn't eternally prevent re-requesting the call. If it does, then just make sure that you cancel the request after only _three_ retries! Some national regs are weird. V.25bis is catching on; don't blame it for those regulatory problems. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com k1io or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #690 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23905; 8 Sep 92 0:23 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26047 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:24:49 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18617 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:24:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:24:12 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209080324.AA18617@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #689 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Sep 92 21:02:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 689 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Volume of Telecom Question (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) New Phone Number Intercept (Rupa Schomaker) Fast, Cheap Async Short-Haul Modems? (Thor Lancelot Simon) Ending Automated Calls (G. Brendan Reilly) How to Wire Telephone Into Audio System? (Milovan Djilas) ISDN And Dialing 911 (Martin McCormick) Need Advice on Sending Voice Over Modem (Patrick Connor) Cordless Phone Recommendations Wanted (Eric Benson) Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? (Michael A. Covington) The Bell Science Series on Video (Update) (John Higdon) Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? (Jeffrey R. Millar) "911" as an Area Code? (Will Martin) Information Wanted on CPC Pulses (Tom Metro) Cordless Telephone Schematics Wanted (Arlindo Filho) Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology (Yee-Lee Shyong) When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? (Carl Moore) Finding Your Own Number - a Few Canadian Updates (David Leibold) Advance Notice of Report On Telecommunications - 8 Sept. (David Leibold) Oops, Lost The Reporter (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Volume of Telecom Question From: stapleton@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) Date: 7 Sep 1992 20:56 MST Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department For a paper I'm writing on export controls and information, I'd like to present a quick summary of the growth of telecommunications over the past several decades. I've seen some overview articles (there was a two-pager in the {Whole Earth Review} a few issues back), but could someone from this most august forum provide some referenced figures (or pointers to where I could find them) on: - Growth in number of domestic calls completed (US); - Growth in number of international calls (either with the US and rest of the world, or total internationally, or both); - Growth in bandwidth or calls completed to interesting places like Moscow, or Cuba, or Iran, etc. I apologize if this is contained in a FAQ file (and I'm scanning around on my hard disk for the FTP address for the archives ... darn this Internet murkiness), and I look forward to responses. Ross [Moderator's Note: The Telecom Archives are available using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. When connected, you would 'cd telecom-archives'. But to answer your question, I do not believe any files there at this time have the information you are seeking. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rupa@f-454.fidonet.org (Rupa Schomaker) Reply-To: rupa@f-454.fidonet.org Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 14:19:00 -0600 Subject: New Phone Number Intercept I'm in the process of getting another line, and the conversation here about different and unusual intercepts made me think. What would happen if I dialed my new number before SWBT put it in? The intercept goes: We're sorry, , is a working number. Please try your call again later. So, if it is a working number, why don't I get to use it until Thursday? :) UUCP -> rupa@f-454.fidonet.org FidoNet -> 1:106/1024 [Moderator's Note: Here it says, "the number you have dialed may not yet be connected. Please try your call again later." Or sometimes an intercept will say "is being tested for trouble. Please try again later." Usually the only instance of an intercept which says "is a working number, please hang up and dial again" is when you misdial and reach some place where the equipment cannot detirmine what number you dialed so a live operator has to come on and ask what you (think) you dialed; then bubble it in so the equipment can respond. If the equipment had known what you dialed, it would have responded "is not a working number" rather than "is in service please try again." Logic dictates that if is in service, you would have been connected to it. Speaking of live operator intercepts, are there still any of those situations where the operator responds but cannot hear the caller because the LD carrier does not open the mouthpiece until the call has supervised, which it will never do with an operator? To get around that, the Bell telcos had to use an intercept recording which the operator started manually when she realized she could not hear the caller: "Under some circumstances, callers using alternate long distance carriers may not be able to speak with local telephone company operators. Please ask your long distance carrier for assistance." Are all the OCC's opening the talk path now? PAT] ------------------------------ From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Subject: Fast, Cheap Async Short-Haul Modems? Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:09:52 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC I'm looking for some inexpensive short-haul modems that will go 38400bps on async RS232. I've seen fairly inexpensive models in the Black Box and South Hills catalogs (well, inexpensive for the catalogs in question) that will go up to 19200 async, and some that will go 38400 synchronous, but nothing that will go 38.4 async. I only need to traverse about a half-mile stretch of two-pair, so though it's too far for RS422, even the el-cheapo low-power models seem to offer enough in that respect. Can anyone suggest a reputable, fairly inexpensive source for what I'm looking for? Alternately, if nobody builds any that wil do 38.4K async, a cheaper source than the aforementioned catalogs for a model that will work at 19.2K would be appreciated! Thor Lancelot Simon tls@panix.COM ------------------------------ From: reilly@staff.dccs.upenn.edu (G. Brendan Reilly) Subject: Ending Automated Calls Date: 7 Sep 92 14:23:13 GMT Organization: University of Pennsylvania It seems that if you wanted to end automated calls you would simply have to get the exchange of the cellular phone in Washington DC and start bombarding them with automated calls. I'm sure that when the congressional staffers and such have to put up with this crap they'll decide "something must be done in the public interest." ------------------------------ From: dgc3@midway.uchicago.edu (milovan djilas) Subject: How to Wire Telephone Into Audio System? Reply-To: dgc3@midway.uchicago.edu Organization: Parts of the University of Chicago Date:Mont, 7 Sep 1992 13:20:37 GMT I need to connect a dead (i.e., not connected to a line) telephone into an audio system (via a mixing console) for a play I'm doing sound design on. Unfortunately, I'm not as knowledgeable about telphony as I would like to be, although I've done some hacking on phones connected to a line before. I previously connected a live phone into an audio setup at home, but I'm not sure how to go about it without having the line attached. I read something once regarding small intercom systems using telephones which said something about putting 9VDC through one of the wires, but I don't even remember which wire it was supposed to be. What I need to know is: 1) What do I need to do to power the phone? 2) What effect will this have on the rest of the system? In case it's relevant, the idea is to use the telephone as both prop and mic on the stage, feeding the mic input into a mixer channel to be sent out to four to six house speakers, along (of course) with signals from other audio components. Would this require changes to the signal strength from the phone, or is it a standard mic level? Thanks for any help. Post or E-Mail replies; I'll post a summary if it's wanted. dgc3@midway.uchicago.edu ------------------------------ Subject: ISDN And Dialing 911 Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 08:11:30 -0500 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu The latest on the case of the Tulsa physician whose wife died of a heart attack while her husband tried to call 911 for help is that Dr. Homer Hardy, the physician, is suing Southwestern Bell for 35 million dollars. The original story was not that a dial-tone was unavailable, but that callers to the Tulsa area 911 system got a busy signal. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group [Moderator's Note: In times of grief, people will do a variety of irrational things such as the doctor, but his complaint is with either the operators of the 911 service or the people who jammed the system -- not with SWBT. Suppose a patient calls the doctor and his line happens to be busy. Could the patient then sue the telco or the doctor? PAT] ------------------------------ From: bw300@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick Connor) Subject: Need Advice on Sending Voice Over Modem Date: 7 Sep 1992 23:33:18 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA) Reply-To: bw300@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick Connor) As part of a project I am working on, I need to send two-way voice communication over a modem line. Are there any products on the market that will do this easily? The ideal box will have a telco jack and an RS-232 port, so I can just insert it between phone and modem. If such a box does not exist, how easy would it be to build? Please respond by email. Thanks, pc ------------------------------ From: eb@lucid.com (Eric Benson) Subject: Cordless Phone Recommendations Wanted Reply-To: eb@lucid.com Organization: Lucid, Inc., Menlo Park, CA Date: 7 Sep 92 15:09:14 I'm looking for recommendations on cordless phones. Basically, everyone I know who owns a cordless phone hates it. The sound quality is terrible. Is this just something one lives with? I've noticed a few recent models in the stores claiming to work in the 900 Mhz band. Are these really better than the 49 Mhz models? They are a lot more expensive, like $300-400 instead of $70-150. Spending that much isn't out of the question, but I'm wary of new technology. They claim to have greater range, but I'm not so concerned with range, I'm more concerned with the irritating, constant buzz on the line. Also, I'd like to have one that's comfortable to hold, and most cordless phones are very bulky. A few of them have the "flip-out" shirt-pocket cellular style. This is more convenient for transportation, but how is it in actual use? Has anyone tried connecting a hands-free headset to a cordless phone? ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 03:36:00 GMT I've been told that the following two pieces of legislation are before the Senate, but cannot identify them from Congressional Record and similar references. Can anybody fill me in? (1) A ban on radio receivers that can tune cellular phone frequencies. (Listening is already illegal but the receivers themselves aren't.) (1) A ban on private consulting in electronics, "S. 1706," recently mentioned by a letter writer in Robert Pease's column in Electronic Design. (There is a S. 1706, but it deals with import duties on certain industrial chemicals.) Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. [Moderator's Note: What is this 'ban on private consulting in electronics'? Please tell more. When does private become public or legal? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 17:14 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: The Bell Science Series on Video (Update) For video enthusiasts, it appears that only the Capra-produced episodes are transfered from 16mm film. The Warner-produced programs are from 35mm film. The difference is, of course, remarkable. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: millar@rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com (Jeffrey R. Millar x7047) Subject: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? Organization: Sanders Associates Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 21:55:07 GMT I have two answering machines which hang up on callers. The problem apparently began in May ... but we didn't notice it because it manifested itself as intermittent loss of the latter part of messages. We recently got a second line for business, so ... performing a few tests resulted in the following information. - counting in a loud (very) voice kept the machine on - talking in a normal voice resulted in a hang up in just a few seconds. I have two machines that do this, now. One was bought just to replace the machine I thought was broken. It seems like the line audio level might be low ... resulting is the VOX failing to hold the line. However there is no audible difference between "before the problem" and "after the problem" in levels on the other telephones in the house. I tried disconnecting other phones, modems, surge protectors, etc ... it made no difference. Could someone in telco-land either suggest something to try on my own or maybe suggest what to tell the repair people about my problem. (I am afraid to get charged just for them to test the line and tell me it must be my fault or my equipment ... which I don't think it is.) Thanks in advance, jeff millar millar@mervax.sanders.lockheed.com Jeffrey R. Millar Lockheed Sanders, Inc 603-885-7047 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:36:17 CDT From: Will Martin Subject: "911" as an Area Code? The area-codes lists that have been put out on Telecom always note that "911" is not used as an area code, but is reserved. I suppose that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area code, since it should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in making a call, and thus be distinguished from the emergency-call 911 service, but I also suppose having it as a regular area code would cause false or misdialed 911 calls and thus the telcos keep it reserved. So what I'm wondering about -- our toll-call list that is generated by our NEC NEAX 2400 phone system came out with an entry for a call from one of our office phones to "911-572-4000", a one-minute call on May 7th at 10:30 AM. We're reviewing old logs because our phone people are fighting with the vendor over billing, having been charged for multiple one-minute calls to the same number at the same wallclock time (probably uncompleted redial attempts) and for 800-number calls. Anybody have any possible legitimate excuse for a call to 911-572-4000, or does this sound like garbage generated by the billling or accounting software? Anybody else getting similar stuff showing up on their logs? Regards, Will wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 4:54:57 EDT From: Tom Metro Subject: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses Organization: Venture Logic, Newton, MA What does a CPC pulse "look" like? What type of circuitry is typically used to detect it? What are the timing specifications for when it should occur with respect to the call termination? And what simple test can I perform to see if my phone service provides CPC pulses? Thanks, Tom tmetro@ds5000.dac.northeastern.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:34 GMT From: SOLOYOLLA@orion.cpqd.ansp.br Subject: Cordless Telephone Schematics Needed Hello! Does anybody knows how can I get a schematic for cordless telephones such as Broksonic, Cobra, Sony, etc? Thanks for helping me! ARLINDO RIBEIRO DE LOYOLLA FILHO PY2-LOY TECNICO EM ELETRONICA CENTRO DE PESQUISA E DESENVOLVIMENTO TELEBRAS - CAMPINAS BRASIL FONE (0192)39-6733 FAX (0192)39-6125 SOLOYOLLA@VENUS.CPQD.ANSP.BR ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 21:19:40 CST From: apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) Subject: Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology What's the usage of E&M signaling technology in the subscriber line? When do we use the two-wire E&M or four-wire E&M? Is anybody out there who could tell me where the CEPT/ETSI is published? Why do telecommunication professionals always say -48Vdc not +48Vdc? When the trunk equipment is linked with the signaling circuit, what's the effect of E&M signaling between them? I am eager to know the answer to the above questions. Thanks! Apollo ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:48:10 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? There is a note in the archives about France going over to eight digit telephone numbers. Does someone have a date available for it? The archives only say "a few years ago", and the passage of time will make this obscure. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 03:56:57 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Finding Your Own Number - a few Canadian updates During a recent vacation through the west (I won't mention in too much detail the disastrous attempt to meet the Moderator in person :-() I encountered a few more ANI numbers which may not be in current lists: 204 (Manitoba) area: dial 644 or 644.xxxx (where the xxxx digits don't matter) and get your number read back ... one habit of the device is that the seven digits will be spoken, then the first digit is spoken again before the thing cuts off. 644 didn't seem to work in Churchill, though. (As a side note, Churchill recorded messages like to end with the code "CHHL", presumably part of the CLLI designation (common language) that represents the CHurcHiLl, Manitoba exchange). In 403, at least in Edmonton (run by Ed Tel, as opposed to AGT in the rest of Alberta), 311 should read the number back. Three years ago, in some cases, 999 would also do this function. I forgot what the code was in British Columbia, but it was one of the N11 type codes ... 311 or 511. More vacation details may follow, considering the holiday isn't quite over yet. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 00:05:51 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Advance Notice of Report On Telecommunications - 8 Sept. The national newspaper in Canada, {The Globe And Mail} is expected to have another of its Report on Telecommunications tomorrow, Tuesday, 8th Sept. More stuff on long distance competition, what Unitel might be up to, etc. should be expected. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 9:14:39 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Oops, Lost the Reporter Friday morning (Sept. 4), I had KYW news-radio (1060 AM in Philadelphia) tuned in. Al Novak was reporting live from Cherry Hill (nearby in New Jersey) and then I heard a dialtone for a few seconds. The woman who was the "anchor" back at the station then broke in and said "Oops, I think we lost Al Novak." I guess Mr. Novak was using a telephone? What kind of telephone could he have been using? [Moderator's Note: Apparently a regular dialup line, or perhaps a cellular phone on his end to a regular POTS line in the studio. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #689 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26225; 8 Sep 92 1:22 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25510 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:28:11 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27694 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:28:01 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:28:01 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209080428.AA27694@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #691 TELECOM Digest Mon, 7 Sep 92 23:28:07 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 691 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (John Higdon) Re: Call Home Country Codes from UK and France (George Mitchell) Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (kph@cisco.com) Re: GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL (John R. Levine) Re: Telecom Using Power Lines (Jim Haynes) Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (S Forrette) Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (John Perkins) Re: Radios in Die Hard (Pat Turner) Re: Radios in Die Hard (John Gilbert) Re: Baby Bells and States (Hans Mulder) Re: Baby Bells and States (David G. Lewis) Re: Baudot Codes (Kevin J. Barth) Re: Baudot Codes (Rich Greenberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 12:48 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes On Sep 5 at 11:21, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive > and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back > in the 1960's ... and we had it routine use in various exchanges as > early as 1974 downtown. We had lots of centrex in use in the 1960's. > The company has always been involved in the community with numerous > charitable donations and services. PAT] Just a little plug here for Pacific Bell. Before divestiture, Pacific Telephone was the lowliest step child of AT&T. It was the last of the Operating Companies to get any technological advancement. No crossbar until the mid-fifties. No touch tone until the late-sixties. No ESS until the early seventies. Virtually every other BOC was at least a half-decade ahead of anything that Pacific Telephone was allowed to do. Since divestiture, it has been playing a very successful game of "catch-up". It has virtually eliminated all mechanical switching throughout its system. It is right up to speed (technically) with ISDN and other specialized services. It is CLASS-capable, although the technoweenie-controlled PUC is making sure that customers cannot benefit. I would put post-divestiture Pacific Bell up against most of the other operating companies in the country. Pacific Bell is a major supporter of the arts and charities. You will find its name as sponsor on many worthwhile charitable projects in California. It has a most progressive employment policy. It regularly provides its services for charitable events at no charge. And with all of this manages to deliver local service about 20% cheaper than GTE, who has no noticable community involvement whatsoever. Yes, IBT is a very progressive company. It should be; it was the favored son of the former Bell System. It had a tremendous head start. Pacific Bell has gone from being one of the most backward telcos to its current position in less than a decade. Not a bad endorsement for divestiture, if you ask me. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: Has anyone ever noticed how many senior management people at AT&T came there from Illinois Bell? A former chairman of AT&T held the same position at IBT for several years. In another angle to this thread, Lauren Weinstein posed some questions about possible risks involved with remotely programmed call forwarding. I responded and then another message which unfortunatly seems to have gotten lost here commented on the ease with with people could anonymously use pay phones to illegally change the call forwarding of someone else. I am sorry I don't have the message for some reason; I have looked high and low for it here. The answer is yes, there will always be some risks involved with any telephone connection to computers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: george@tessi.com (George Mitchell) Subject: Re: Call Home Country Codes from UK and France Organization: Test Systems Strategies, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:37:15 GMT FLINTON@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU (Fred E.J. Linton) writes: > USA (quad) 0800 89 0456 Phone USA (TRT) > [Submitter's query: Who is TRT? Used to be the name of AT&T Mail's > Telex Service.] TRT = Tropical Radio Telegraph, one of the oldest International Record Carriers (i.e. telex companies). George Mitchell (george@tessi.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 11:27:26 MST From: kph@cisco.com > Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the > service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my > service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not. I am an A carrier subscriber, and once needed to call 911 in an area with only B carrier service. I switched the phone to B and called 911, and the call went through without any problems. So, this is probably true, unless there is some way to "black-list" an ESN so that it can't be used at all. Kevin ------------------------------ Subject: Re: GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 7 Sep 92 17:39:19 EDT From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) In article is written: > I heard a report on the radio (WMAL in Washington DC) that GTE is > testing a new service in Tampa FL area. This unnamed service would > permit you to use a cordless phone like a cellular phone. ... This sounds a lot like the British Telepoint system, with small cheap cordless phones that could be used to make outgoing calls when within a small radius of a base station, uses digital coding so the connection is quieter than cellular, and which have been a complete flop. {The Economist} had an analysis of them a few weeks ago. They point out that if they're outgoing only, their main competition is with pay phones, not cellular phones. The Telepoint carriers priced the phones around $300, as much as a cheap cellular phone, and the airtime was also about the same as cellular. Not surprisingly, customers stayed away in droves. More recently the Telepoint carriers dropped the prices of the phones and the air time substantially and got permission to sell combined pagers and Telepoint phones so you can tell when someone wants to talk to you, but it's too late. Something called PCN (which may be digital cellular but the article wasn't detailed enough to be sure) is on its way which will be technically as good as cellular and cheaper. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: Re: Telecom Using Power Lines Date: 7 Sep 1992 22:02:19 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz A long time ago when you went to a telephone business office there would be a rack of brochures and booklets, including at least one that explained how telephones work (in terms of electromagnets and carbon granules and all that kind of stuff that isn't used anymore). I believe it was in one of these that I saw mention of a rural telephone carrier system that used the power line for transmission. There was a picture of a farmhouse and a power pole next to it, and a high voltage capacitor that ran from the high voltage power line to a box that had the telephone electronics in it. haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:11:40 GMT In article infmx!johng@uunet.UU.NET (John Galloway) writes: > I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge > normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number, > when you have your number forwarded to a land line. This seems like a > real rip off since in this case the only resources being used are the > land line connected switches, which likely have plenty of bandwidth, > there is no cellular communication occuring (that I can see anyway, am > I mistaken?). Cellular One of Seattle does not do this. When I lived in California and asked for an explanation for this practice, I was told that forwarded calls actually go "over the air," thus the charge. I guess they use a different type of switch in Seattle. :-) > I had planned to get a cellular, then only give out that number. When > I get to an office or am at home, I just forward the cellular to the > number where I am -- simple. I only give folks one number and it > either goes to where I am, or to my home phone with an answering > machine. But, as I now realize, this would be very expensive. That's exactly what I do now, and it works great! The only problems I've run into is that on a few occasions, my cellular number has been out of service due to switch upgrades, software upgrades, etc. Cellular One of Seattle is pretty good about doing this sort of thing in the middle of the night on weekends, but they don't realize that many of us actually use the telephone during those hours and consider 100% uptime a reasonable expectation. "Real" telephone companies manage to upgrade their switch software without causing loss of service -- at least I've never been deprived of service from a landline carrier for this reason. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: john@bunsen.rosemount.com (John Perkins) Subject: Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago Organization: Rosemount, Inc. Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 21:29:14 GMT In article nickless@antares.mcs.anl.gov writes: > I've called *999 several times on the highways around Chicago to > report drunk drivers and stranded motorists... It's been possible to dial 999 from almost any telephone in the UK to get emergency help since at least the 1940's (when I was a kid). I've often thought it would have been nice if this had been adopted as a world-wide standard and it puzzles me why AT&T chose to use 911 when they must have been aware of the UK system. Conversely the US Zip code scheme, which was established first, appears to be a lot more straightforward than the crackpot British system. It almost seems that there's a nationalistic desire to be different that has spoiled the chance for a lot of useful world standards. John Perkins ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 01:32 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: Radios in Die Hard > not quite. Start with the idea that airplanes are somehow "stuck" at > the outer marker when the radio goes down, continue through the idea > that a pilot of a commercial passenger airplane would try to land > without visual on the runway lights, and end with the idea that you > can tap into and simulate an airport control tower by attaching > alligator clips (or equivalent) to the cables and then hacking through > them with an ax. Being somewhat familiar with FAA telecommunications, I think you only scratched the surface. For one thing control lines for runway lights would never leave the airport, although packet radio links are sometimes used. There also exist several redundant layers of ground to air communications. Primary communications would most likely be from a RCAG (Remote Communications Air to Ground) site or the equilivent. If this link fails, there are BUEC (Backup Emergency Communications) sites that utilize diverse links. If the RCAG is on a telco leased line, then an effort would be made to place the BUEC on a microwave link. If both of these sites fail there is backup equipment in the tower building. If all this fails most towers are equipped with portable units in the tower cab. If for some reason all of this fails, the nearest center could vector traffic away from the airport with their RAGS or BUEC's. The tower would be connected to the center with either leased lines or microwave links. If these fail, VHF and HF radio nets are in place across the country linking major airports with the centers and FAA offices. Hams would drool over the computer controlled radios, high gain Log Periodic antennas and PK-232 TNCs, often located in screen rooms for EMP protection. The part about planes landing without any visual contact is valid, as long as the plane and airport have the right equipment. If there is enough RVR (Runway Visual Range) the pilot can land blind. I beleve this is called either a Cat. III or Cat. I landing, I forget which, I'm not a pilot. The towers at some airports are equipped with surface radar for observing planes on the surface of the airport when they are not visable from the tower cab. Disclaimer: The above is my opinion only. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: Radios in Die Hard Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:11:55 GMT My favorites from the Die Hard movies were: In the first movie where the portable two-way radios talk to the bad guys inside the building, but when taken to the roof talk to the police on the same frequency. (These are those fancy full-duplex two-way radios). Not a very good choice of frequencies by the bad guys, or very wise placement of voting receivers by the police. In the second movie in one scene the DTMF keypad activates the "scrambler code." In another scene the thumbwheel frequency switches on top (same radio) are used for this function. It is always fun to see how many times the actors talk into the wrong side of the microphone, use a phone without a cord or a radio control head without any control cable. Back a few years ago, Motorola made dummy portable radios for Hollywood. Just a regular radio, battery and antenna -- minus all the guts. Some of the production line workers got autographed pictures of the cast who used their radios. On the other hand there were other shows that just stuck a telescopic antenna on a pager for their two-way radios. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 16:14:16 +0200 From: hansm@cs.kun.nl (Hans Mulder) Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States In lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) writes: > Judge Greene: "Okay, how many little companies?" > AT&T attorney: "Ummm, how about, ahhhhh... ... one?" Actually, it went more like: Judge Greene: "Okay, imagine you're representing Snow White. How may dwarves will your client need?" > Hee hee. Hans Mulder hansm@cs.kun.nl ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Organization: AT&T Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:25:12 GMT In article lairdb@crash.cts.com writes: >> [Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say >> was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos >> would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide. PAT] > Judge Greene: "Okay, how many little companies?" > AT&T attorney: "Ummm, how about, ahhhhh... ... one?" > Hee hee. Not so hee hee. EOBS says, quoting directly from the MFJ, "nothing in this Modification of Final Judgment shall require or prohibit the consolidation of ownership of the BOCs into any particular number of entities." I read this to mean that it would have been perfectly valid for AT&T to spin off the 22 BOCs into a single holding company, say, American Local Telephone and Telegraph, *provided* there was *no* corporate relationship between that holding company and AT&T. ------------------------------ From: barth@wam.umd.edu (Kevin J. Barth) Subject: Re: Baudot Codes Organization: University of Maryland, College Park Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:22:54 GMT There are actually several Baudot codes. The more-or-less standard one (dubbed the "U.S. Military version" in the ITT Handbook) is commonly used by amateur radio operators and can be found in the Amateur Radio Handbook published by ARRL, among many other sources. There is also a European standard, a weather standard, and probably a couple of others I've forgotten about. They all differ primarily in the shifted characters, i.e., the punctuation. Alphanumerics are the same. ------------------------------ From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) Subject: Re: Baudot Codes Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail. Playa del Rey, CA Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:22:44 GMT In article telb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lowe) writes: > I need the five bit codes (mark/space) for the baudot protocol. If > anyone has them, I would appreciate a copy. Find an electronics store with a good selection of amateur radio books. Look for one on amateur RTTY. Most amateurs use (used to use?) Baudot. (Some (many?) now use ASCII.) Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - richg@hatch.socal.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #691 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27733; 8 Sep 92 2:04 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09980 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:09:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06860 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:08:57 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:08:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209080508.AA06860@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #692 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Sep 92 00:09:10 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 692 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Bad Connection to MCI (Alan L. Varney) Re: Bad Connection to MCI (Rolando Vinluan) Re: Weird Intercept (John Higdon) Re: What Number am I Calling From? (Elizabeth Fong Wah Chan) Re: PC-Based Automated Messaging Systems Information Request (E. Chan) Re: Telephone Directories? (Brendan Kehoe) Re: Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines (Michael Schuster) Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Harold Hallikainen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 12:10:15 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Bad Connection to MCI Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article sullivan@riemann.geom. umn.edu (John M. Sullivan) writes: > A friend of mine just moved to a new apartment yesterday, here in > Minneapolis. Her phone was connected by US West on schedule. She > requested MCI Dial-1 service ... {Summary: 1 + ten-digit dialing lead to regular Vacant Code announcement with "2EB" appended. So did 1+ 700-555-4141. 10222 + 00 worked, but 10222 + 1 + ten-digit didn't. 10XXX to AT&T/Sprint with ten digits worked.} I have an explanation at the end, but you'll need the material below to understand it. > This, and the "2EB" code in the message, led me to believe that the > problem was MCI's. .... {Placed 3-way call between MCI and USWest.} > .... They were both agreeing that my problems were due to > USWest not having put in the Dial-1 choice properly, and I couldn't > convince them otherwise. I'll side with MCI here (and that's not frequent) -- Vacant Code is USUALLY from three possible points on an inter-LATA call: - the originating CO when it finds a routing error on the call, and the error isn't due to 10XXX, 1+, 0+, or international prefix digits; (Classic case is the NPA-NXX does not exist.) - the first switch reached in the terminating LATA determines that it's not the proper IC delivery point for that NPA-NXX; or - an IC switch believes the NPA-NXX doesn't exist -- in other words, there is no LATA that owns the NPA-NXX. Some ICs alter the wording somewhat from the Bellcore suggested Vacant Code announcement, allowing this case to be distinguished from the LEC cases. The second one (terminating LATA) can be detected (until SS7) by the time delay in getting to the LATA. 90% of the time, it's a customer dialing error and/or CO routing error detected at the originating CO. > At one point the conversation went: > USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two? > me: Yes. > USW: Is she [MCI] still on the line? > me: I don't know. > MCI: Oh. What? > USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two? > MCI: What's a pick code? > me: You know, like one-oh-two-two-two. > MCI: Oh, I've never heard it called a pick code. [Neither had I] > Does anyone out there know what's going on here? Correct non-lingo version of conversation: USW: (to the IC) Is your Carrier Identification Code two-two-two? MCI: Yes it is. Carrier Identification Code (CIC): The XXX (or XXXX, soon) digits that select a particular Carrier. CIC can also mean Circuit Identification Code (labels a particular trunk in SS7); those documents that refer to both have started using TCIC for the latter. Carrier Access Code: The code dialed by a customer to select a particular Carrier (10XXX or 950-WXXX today). PIC (pronounced "pick"): Pre-subscribed InterLATA Carrier -- the value of the CIC you have selected (if any) to carry Inter-LATA calls dialed without a Carrier Access Code. ICs are not familiar with the term PIC because it is typically used only by people who deal with IC pre-subscription in the CO. > What message should I hear when dialing 1-700-555-4141 if no carrier > is selected for Dial-1? The announcement for "10XXX Omitted when Required" is: "We're sorry, a long-distance company access code is required for the number you have dialed. Please dial your call with the access code." But an (option) allows regular Vacant Code to be used, and many COs pick that option. > (If I dial 10-xxx-1-700-555-4141 for a random choice of "xxx", I hear > a very long pause with some touchtones in the background, and finally > "doo-wee-dee Your call failed. Please try again".) This is not consistent with your claim that 10288 and 10333 would complete ten-digit calls. Nor is the announcement consistent with the selection of an invalid XXX value. Maybe you picked XXX values for ICs that don't support "700-555-1212" identification. ------ So here's my analysis (with the help of a couple of Interconnect experts): 10XXX + ten digits works for other carriers, so your line has not been denied all InterLATA calls. 10222 + 00 works, so you are not totally denied FG-D access. You implied 10222 +0 + ten digits didn't work. Answer -- there is a "feature" called Selective Carrier Denial (SCD) that prevents all access to an IC (or list of ICs) except for 10XXX + 00 and 1 + 800 calls. (Actually, I believe 00 also works if your PIC is one of the denied Carriers). I'd give this a 75% chance of being the root cause. How much more do you want for free? Al Varney -- remember, just MY opinion. ------------------------------ From: Rolando Vinluan Subject: Re: Bad Connection to MCI Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:55:12 GMT sullivan@riemann.geom.umn.edu (John M. Sullivan) writes: > A friend of mine just moved to a new apartment yesterday, here in > Minneapolis. Her phone was connected by US West on schedule. She had > requested MCI Dial-1 service, and had told MCI about her new number so > that her account billing and F+F circle, etc would be transferred > over. > But she couldn't dial 1 + area + number yesterday. I suggested trying > 10222 + 1 + area + number, but this behaved exactly the same way. > After a ring or two, we heard the message "Your call cannot be > completed as dialed. Please check the number and dial again. 2EB" > (no doo-wee-dee tones at the beginning). This same message was heard > when dialing 1-700-555-4141. I then tried placing a long distance > call with ATT (10288) and Sprint (10333). Both of these worked fine. > Does anyone out there know what's going on here? I don't exactly what was wrong in your case (though I have a suspicion) but I have a similar experience (horror story, IMO): I switched to MCI last May. I do a lot of long-distance calls, and they were cheaper, though their international lines suck compared to AT&T. Last July, I was out of the country for the whole month. When I got back early August, I found my long-distance wouldn't work! My NYT phone bill wasn't due till a couple of days from the time I got there, but evidently, they thought I couldn't pay and cut off my line! Which is pretty strange to me ... because here I am giving them a LOT of business, and then they cut me off. I pay my bill that week, and I expect them to get it on back. No dice. 1022 doesn't work, even asking NYT to get me MCI doesn't work -- nothing works. I get almost the same message you got, but with a "2CY." I call Customer Service. They say there's no problem with my account, and we try to call NYT to get a three-way connection, but it's the start of the schoolyear and we can't get through. The operator says she'll put my problem in and handle it. I wait a week ... it's still dead. I call NYT (up to now, I thought it was their problem), and they say their's nothing wrong with my account at their end, it's MCI's problem. I call MCI again, and the operator says my account is okay, so he'll make a "Trouble report" or whatever on it right away. After three days, still no long distance. By this time, I really would've switched to AT&T, if only switching didn't take so long -- I needed it by next week, you see. So, I call MCI again, and FINALLY the operator tells me that "oh, there's a block on your line" EVEN when I paid them over three weeks ago AND I'd kept asking them the previous times to double-check this fact. She says, it's gonna be turned on in 48 hours. It was turned on in 72 hours. MCI is pretty incompetent, in my experience. If they didn't have that Northwest tie-up, I'd never have gotten them. As soon as AT&T starts offering a competitive Frequent-Flyer program (their current one is still lousy), I'll definitely switch back. Maybe somebody from MCI is listening. Talk to me again when your company's gotten your act together. (Oh, and about that "suspicion": In my first call, when I told the operator my problem, I guess one of the things that prevented her from checking out my *real* situation was that she immediately assumed that my local carrier was USWest. So, I guess a lot of people ended up in your situation.) Randy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:11 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Weird Intercept MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com writes: > In this case, GTE has an airtight alibi: the intercept only occurs > when I try it from my office (in PacBell land) as a normal, 1+ call. > If I place it over our long-distance network, or via a major LD > carrier, it goes through fine. Ah, a PBX. Are you quite positive that there are no GTE FX circuits available as routes to the ARS? And of course, you cannot be sure exactly what a PBX may be appending or prepending to what you dial (as set up by the system administrator). I realize that problems are not GTE's fault 100% of the time, but I would like to make absolutely sure. After all, GTE blames most of its own screwups on Pac*Bell. Figure that one out. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: elizabec@sfu.ca (Elizabeth Fong Wah Chan) Subject: Re: What Number am I Calling From? Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:34:05 GMT In Vancouver, B.C., Canada, we can pick up the phone and press 211; the phone number belongs to the phone that you are using will be echo back. Try this, it may work for you at your part of the world. ------------------------------ From: elizabec@sfu.ca (Elizabeth Fong Wah Chan) Subject: Re: PC-Based Automated Messaging Systems Information Request Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:40:53 GMT Get a copy of {Voice Processing Magazine}. You may call them at 800-638-1376. Good luck, Louie [Moderator's Note: *Why* should we get a copy of the magazine? Was there some article of particular interest? Were we to obtain any certain issue? PAT] ------------------------------ From: brendan@cygnus.com (Brendan Kehoe) Subject: Re: Telephone Directories? Date: 7 Sep 92 07:34:11 GMT Reply-To: brendan@cygnus.com Organization: Cygnus Support, Palo Alto, CA In article <1992Sep3.052559.15694@samba.oit.unc.edu> jem@calypso.unc. edu (Jonathan Magid) writes: In article 18439hINNgpq@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu, cb705@cleveland. Freenet.Edu (Jason K. Green) writes: > Does anyone know if there are any telephone directories on line? > (Not electronic-address directories) I would check out WAIS sources (list of servers) at think.com. Many universities have their phone lists available through wais (UNC does, for instance), so if the person you are looking for is at enlightened university :), you may be lucky. I think Jason was asking about your conventional phone-company supplied directory, not faculty directories and such. But, unless you're just curious about this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing that old fashioned tools (like the phone company's directory service) are suited to. Uh-uh, don't go limiting it. I'm sure a few years ago many people said exactly that about making airline reservations. An idea I had, but never followed through with, was to approach leading carriers (Bell Atlantic, Pacific Bell, NYNEX, etc) about making their directories accessible over the Internet. It would probably involve creating search software (WAIS isn't well-suited to the kinds of lookups necessary for normal directory assistance), as well as convincing upper management that it would be in their best interest. (Doing so in an area where there's a per-call charge for directory assistance would be uniquely difficult, though.) Another problem would be abuse of the system, by doing mass searches for "everyone named Mary," or using it for destructive purposes. Those issues would have to be properly addressed, as well. To use an example from my own experience, I began investigating what might be needed for Bell of PA to make such a thing available on PrepNet. I didn't get too far (it was more of a problem of "who do I talk to?" than being turned away). Perhaps someone else, with better resources, might find their attempts more fruitful than I. Brendan Kehoe brendan@cygnus.com Cygnus Support, Palo Alto, CA +1 415 322 3811 ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: Re: Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 12:38:51 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC In article andrew@jester.pa.dec.com writes: > Panasonic KX-T8000 Here are some further comments after owning one for a few weeks. > maybe has remote selective deletion of messages Yes, it does. You can delete the current message or all messages using the *4 or *5 key combinations. There is a minor timing problem though; on long hang-up calls (i.e. when the caller hangs up just after the beep; too late to be dumped by the CPC detector) it is impossible to hit *4 fast enough to selectively delete that message remotely. All message delete will remove it remotely, and the selective delete button on the console will get it locally. The skip/forward buttons also work remotely: you can go back and forth between stored messages with a keypress. Complaints: voice quality is actually better over the phone than through the speaker. Digital voice is okay, better than the SONY, but still lacking in treble. Nobody has complained or, for that matter, even noticed that I changed machines. Some features on cheaper Panasonic analog machines ( e.g. dual outgoing messages, priority message) are not present on this model. Remote delete does not =say= "DELETED", it just plays a staccato of beeps at you. Since it uses voice for everything else, I consider this a design flaw. Also has rapid playback (no Mickey Mouse) on either local or remote playback of messages. Can be toggled remotely too. The above minor niggles notwithstanding, this is rapidly becoming my all-time favorite answering machine. Mike Schuster NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 16:54:02 GMT In article Alan TC Penn writes: > I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The > function of this device is to route the incoming phone message > directly to either an answering machine or a modem. Seems that the telecom device companies (modem manufacturers, fax machine manufacturers, phone manufacturers, etc.) ought to put the distinctive ringing decoder inside their machines. It should "be just software". Are there standards for distinctive ringing (standard cadence, etc.). I guess we could handle some of it in software by watching the RI line on modems. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@pan.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #692 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10836; 8 Sep 92 9:00 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05746 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 06:47:41 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09516 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 06:47:33 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 06:47:33 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209081147.AA09516@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #693 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Sep 92 06:47:34 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 693 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: American Phone on British Phone System (Nigel Roberts) Re: Voice Message Service (John Higdon) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (John Nagle) Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (M. McCormick) Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question (ghadsal@american.edu) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Leonard Erickson) Re: Working Assets Long Distance (James Hartman) Re: New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law (Leonard Erickson) Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? (Harold Hallikainen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: roberts@frais.enet.dec.com (Nigel Roberts) Subject: Re: American Phone on British Phone system Date: 7 Sep 92 09:36:10 Organization: IC Software AG (on contract at DEC) In article , jean@hrcce.att.com (Nancy J Airey) writes: > Some time ago I picked up a phone connector at an electronics gadget > store that is supposed to "convert" an American "modular" phone to a > British modular plug. The American end is the "typical" one I'm used > to seeing. The "British" end is somewhat larger but has a similar > type of "push in" connection. (Love the technical terms!) That's actually a pretty accurate description. I have a similar adaptor for American plug to TAE (new German) sockets. > I am planning on giving a "nice" phone to some friends over there for > Christmas. Depends why you want to do this. If it's simply that your friends would appreciate a nice phone, then the optimum way to do this would be to order a phone by telephone from a supplier somewhere in the U.K., pay by credit card and have them deliver it. That way, you and your friends will get no hassles over the lack of BABT approval (it's against the law to connect any phone which does not have BABT approval, even if it has FCC approval). On the other hand, you may simply want to send them a fun phone which is not available in the U.K. In that case don't forget that they will have to pay duty (5%??) and then Value Added Tax (17.5%) to Customs and Excise, unless you simply smuggle it in with on a visit. (You are limited to bring in not more than approximatly $50 worth of goods). > Now I know that I could not select any phone that has features > requiring electrical connections and expect a direct connection, but > what is the likelihood that making a connection for the other end is Actually, most phones which need electrical power run off low voltage DC (e.g. 9v or 12v). It's usually no hassle to get a replacement power supply with 240v AC input (instead of 110v AC) for between $5-$10. > going be a hassle? Are modular wall outlets common? The are almost universal nowadays -- they started to be introduced over ten years ago. > For any British folks reading this -- what would be a "nice" feature > set on a phone for you to get as a gift? I haven't been in a lot of > private homes, and am not sure if things like programmable speed > calling, speakerphone etc. are appealing -- or would the cutesy phones > (Mickey Mouse, Kermit the Frog) be more appreciated? Most ordinary people (i.e. non-DIGEST readers) in the U.K. aren't too worried about such things. I know what *I'd* like for Xmas -- that'd be a standard Bell System 2500 set. One thing to bear in mind is that if your friends use Mercury long- distance service, you will need to make sure the phone you give them has at least one memory button which can store mixed pulse and tone numbers up to 16 digits long. Many phones sold in the U.K. are sold as "Mercury compatible" phones and have an extra blue memory button for this purpose. > Is this going to work on touchtone -- or will it have to be set to > dial-pulse? Depends on the area code. I think that over half of the country has been converted to digital exchanges which understand either TouchTone (a trademark of BT in the UK) or pulse (There are no extra charges for TT). The rest can only understand loop disconnect (pulse) dialing. Hope the above helps. Nigel Roberts | roberts@frais.enet.dec.com | Tel. +44 206 396610 European Engineer | P O Box 49,Manningtree,CO11 2SZ | & +49 6103 383 489 G4IJF | "Life is but a tale . . . " | FAX +44 206 393148 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:44 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Voice Message Service Jerry Leichter writes: > The first time I saw an example of this service, it was at an > SNET-owned and operated pay phone outside of Hartford, Connecticut > about two years ago. > Unless someone can find an older COCOT implementation, I'm afraid the > points for "innovation" go to the operating companies here. There have been COCOTs doing this in some areas for well over two years. Of course, they are only able to do this on long distance calls since the COCOT operator has absolutely no local access other than dial tone. The LEC has interim access and can manipulate the call, local or not. >> Of course it does this with free money and its superior network >> access. > then why should I, as a consumer, care? Neither "choice" nor the > financial health of entrepreneurs in the telecom business is of > importance to me; product quality and price are what I care about. And if you have no choice, how do you know that either the quality or the price is as good as it COULD be? This is an exceedingly short view of the industry. The engine that drives innovation is the expectation of ultimate rewards. The financial health of entrepreneurs in the telecom business should bloody well be of concern to you because if they die, you can kiss innovation goodbye and you will have whatever the LECs in their infinite wisdom decide to provide to you. Period. You do not think that the LECs will raise the price on that which it has a monopoly (after putting the original entrepreneur out of business)? I direct your attention to a very substantial rate restructuring that will shortly be approved by the CPUC. It calls for rate reductions on virtually every service for which the LECs have competitors and hefty rate increases on everything for which there is no competition (yet), such as small business and residential dial tone service. It irriates me greatly to hear people say that it matters not who tramples over whom as long as they get a good product cheap (in the short run). With that philosophy, may I suggest that you start doing business with the mob; it provides some great deals on certain items? It manages to stay in business and put others out of business using tactics not much different than the LECs (captive customers, etc.). The LEC says, "Let us do all of this shell-game marketing and we will provide you with wonderous services cheap." It looks like you fell for it. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 19:12:28 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Toby Nixon writes: > In article , mcb@presto.ig.com > (Michael C. Berch) writes: >> OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable >> regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar >> devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded. But >> ... a Forbidden Numbers list? With numbers that stay on it FOREVER?? >> Have these people totally taken leave of their senses? If I dial up >> my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't >> answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again? If it works reasonably, this is a useful feature. If you call a number, and it is busy, some countries require that you not call it again for a period of time. South American countries with underconfigured COs (notably Brazil) have required this for years. So that's the mandatory delay. Busy numbers shouldn't be added to the Forbidden Numbers list, and numbers that answer and present modem tones won't be. Only numbers that answer, but don't present modem tones, should end up on the Forbidden Numbers list. This makes sense; if a number is answering but not attached to a modem, there probably isn't a modem there and the calling end should stop calling and annoying somebody. If the receiving system is down, that's OK. Either the modem doesn't answer the phone, or it answers the phone and brings up a data connection, even if no data can be transmitted. The only real problem comes with some old systems where, when the system went down, a voice message was switched on. But that's rare today. John Nagle ------------------------------ Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 07:15:50 -0500 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu Regular NO22 or NO24 gauge station wire can be spliced by using just about any kind of common splicing device. Of course,if the wire is going to be exposed to the elements, the splices must be air and water resistant, but in-doors, one could use anything from wire nuts to crimp terminals as well as solder and tape. Another variation is solder and heat-shrinkable tubing. Some heat-shrink tubing is even rated for out-door use. Several years ago, we had a tremendously bad period of rain which flooded the cable tunnels under the Oklahoma State University campus. The telephones were out because water had breached the outer covering on a 2400 pair cable and converted it into a 2400 channel audio mixer. After the technicians had found the internally soggy cable, they replaced it. While I have no idea what method was used to splice each pair of wires, I do know that the technicians were seen taking whole tubes of RTV silicone rubber caulk, cutting the bottom of the tubes open with a pair of tinsnips and stuffing large bundles of spliced connections into the tube so that they would eventually be encased in a capsule of hardened rubber. It seemed pretty down-to-Earth and practical when you consider that this practice probably saved a lot of man-hours. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:04:56 EDT From: ghadsal@american.edu Subject: Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question Steve, To answer your question concerning the Motorola Alphanumeric pager I'll make a couple assumptions; the pager is a PMR2000, and your service is a for-profit company. BTW - I am not an Motorola empployee. The PMR2000 has three small holes on the bottom of the unit that look like contacts for something ... well the PMR2000 has a couple optional devices; a printer, and charger, and a printer charger. As to which does what I cannot help you, but I am confident that someone at the paging company can; if its a local "Ma and Pa" company you are likely not to get any help, but if its a larger service (ie: Bell Operating Co like PacTel, Bell Atlantic, NYNEX, etc) or one of the larger private services like MetroComm, PageNet or even the national company called SkyTel (MTel) you can expect that *someone* knows how the thing works. If you still are not satisfied I would snag the local yellow pages (or OneBook) and find the nearest MOTOROLA SALES office (not a dealer). If your not close to one email me ... I'll see what I can do; no promises or timelines. A long time ago I helped some people at a non-profit agency in Glen Burnie, MD called Volunteers for Medical Engineering (VME) with similar, but unique challenges ... haven't spoken with anyone since moving away. Again, no promises. Also, your friends that have PC's and modems can alphanumerically page you as well using commercial software; I have a *demo* copy for ONE alpha USER and ONE paging service I'd be happy to pass on. ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 16:33:57 GMT andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes: > TELECOM Moderator notes: >> What would you rather have, a phone call like that or the Jehovah >> Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday morning like they do >> mine? > I'll take the visit. Then I know who it is, and they react so nicely > if I open the door unclothed. :-) > JWs are supposed to keep files on area households. Tell them firmly > that you have your own faith, are definitely not interested in theirs, > and ask that they please never visit you again, and (if the system > works) they'll leave you alone. (However, they'll deny that any such > file exists.) This explains the why a friend's "solution" worked. He merely invited some friends over and had what appeared to be a full fledged Black Mass going on in the background when answered the door (in a cowled robe). I've never been bothered by them at home, and on the bus mall downtown, they are the *only* religious types that will just nod and walk on when given a polite "No, thank you." response to the offer of their literature. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) [Moderator's Note: Not only that, hotels all over the USA bid for the JW annual convention. They are the one group which leaves the meeting hall cleaner than they found it when they got there. A janitor at the Hilton here said he couldn't believe how *little* cleanup there was to do after the JW convention a few years ago. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance From: unkaphaed!phaedrus@uunet.UU.NET (James Hartman, Sysop) Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 20:30:14 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy markmc@sierra.com (Mark McWiggins) writes: > A friend is considering Working Assets for long distance. Do you have > any experience with this service? Would you do it again? I do not personally have any experience, but a friend of mine who was originally trying to get me to switch (for those not in the know, Working Assets channels the money you spend on long distance into contributions to various groups doing good things -- for example, you could have your money go to Greenpeace) told me not to switch, because she said she suddenly got a HUGE phone bill. Apparently, Working Assets raised their rates or changed their agreement with whatever LD company they worked with and didn't bother to tell her (or did and she didn't read her bill correctly). Either way, she wound up with a bill over twice what she thought it should be. She cancelled with Working Assets very quickly (after paying the bill). phaedrus@unkaphaed.UUCP (da sysop) ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:42:48 GMT sjl@glenbrook.com (Scott Loftesness) writes: > I am pleased to recommend an excellent new book the subject of the US > telecommunications law. The book, titled "Federal Telecommunications > Law" (ISBN 0-316-48676-0 published by Little, Brown & Company), was > written by Michael K. Kellogg, John Thorne, and Peter W. Huber. One minor detail is missing. What's it *cost*? Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 03:40:48 GMT In article mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: > I've been told that the following two pieces of legislation are before > the Senate, but cannot identify them from Congressional Record and > similar references. Can anybody fill me in? > (1) A ban on private consulting in electronics, "S. 1706," recently > mentioned by a letter writer in Robert Pease's column in Electronic > Design. (There is a S. 1706, but it deals with import duties on > certain industrial chemicals.) As I recall, the legislation in question (which I think may have gone through several years ago) has to do with the IRS determining whether a worker is a contractor or an employee. Companies often use "job shops" as technical temp agencies to hire engineers for fixed term projects. These may last several years. Under these circumstances, the worker is an employee of the job shop, which is a contractor to the "end customer". Many engineers would like to work something similar, being contractors instead of employeess while not having part of "their pay" going to the job shop. Actually, this seems pretty reasonable to me, though I have not studied it thoroughly. One is a consultant and contractor if one provides that service to several customers, maintains an office where a substantial portion of that work is done, set the hours and conditions and provides the tools. If someone goes to work 9 to 5 every day at someone elses premises, and that someone else provides the tools, it sure looks like employment to me! There are, of course, several other questions to consider in offering "consulting engineering" services. One major issue is state licensing. Harold Hallikainen ap621@Cleveland.Freenet.edu Hallikainen & Friends, Inc. hhallika@pan.calpoly.edu 141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4 phone 805 541 0200 fax 544 6715 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590 telex 4932775 HFI UI ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #693 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12185; 8 Sep 92 9:38 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26163 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:34:21 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11829 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:34:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:34:12 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209081234.AA11829@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #694 TELECOM Digest Tue, 8 Sep 92 07:34:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 694 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Calling Card Changes For SNET in CT (Howard Pierpont) Are Wireless-Tapping Laws in England so Loose? (H. Shrikumar) Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex (Joseph Bergstein) T1 Interface for PC/Workstation (Looking for Product) (Chang Hyeoungkyu) Eavesdropping on the British Royal Family (Charlie Mingo) Financial World Sept. 15 on Telecom (Bruce Klopfenstein) Clients, Cheats, Crooks (Richard Nash) Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Gerald Ruderman) Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Joe Trott) Re: Unadvertised SW Bell Offering (Charles Mattair) Re: Modem Access From Europe to North America (Julian Macassey) Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (John Lebert) Information Wanted About Clearing Houses (Sharon Kroo) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 16:35:29 PDT From: HOWARD PIERPONT Subject: Calling Card Changes for SNET in CT The August issue of SNETnews "A telecommunications newsletter for Connecticut residents" has an article under the heading "Free for fall" SNET Calling Cards. Starting in September, all customers who have ever ordered SNET Calling Cards will receive new cards in the mail. This scheduled reissuance will be completed by November. Changes in the Cards. A few changes have been made recently: - Only a four-digit security number appears on the card. Your phone number is no longer on it, so it's more secure to use and carry. - There's a new 800 information number on the back of the card for customers with questions on how to use the SNET Calling Card. - The magnetic strip on the back is fully activated. Easy-to-use. The SNET Calling Card is still easy to use wherever you go because it's based on your easy-to-remember home phone number AND it requires no complicated access codes when calling in North America. Look for the new card in the mail soon. Wellllllllll. If someone steals my wallet, they will know my address. Seems that they can call DA and get the home number tied to the card. It will slow down the shoulder surfers. My dad likes having a card that only has four numbers on it. If the mag stip is "fully activated" seems that the person who should not have your card could just pass the card thru a mag reader phone and still get through. Howard Pierpont DEC, Hudson MA Standard disclaimers apply. [Moderator's Note: But if a person stole your wallet wouldn't they likely have your address anyway from your driver's license and other documents in your wallet? And with the old telephone cards showing your full phone number they did not have to search out anything. So what is the solution? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 18:54:29 -0400 From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar{shri@ncst.in}) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Reply-To: shri@legato.CS.UMASS.EDU (H.Shrikumar) Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: >> Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not ... >> the cell-phone frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that >> the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him. In article Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70. n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) writes: > From what I gather from the British papers, there is no prohibition > on eavesdropping on cellular or cordless calls. There is some sort of > restriction on "using" material heard over the air, but it is not > being enforced in this case. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > British laws concerning wiretapping in general seem to be rather > loose. Recently, members of the press recorded conversations between > the Minister of National Heritage (David Mellior) and his mistress, by > tapping into an extension socket at the flat the mistress was using. > They apparently had the *landlord's* permission, but not that of > either party to the conversation. According to the {Sunday Times}, > this activity broke no laws. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Funny, and makes me provoke a comment ... Not too long ago, perhaps a year and a half at the most, someone most likely a British, had described the UK as a "police state" when discussing (if I remember right) "wireless waves coming in my own yard anyway". Has *the* Great Britain changed ?? :-) shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu) ------------------------------ From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 01:37:08 -0500 Subject: Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex Would like to know if anyone has any information on a GTD-5 Centrex Central office switch? Believe manufactured by G.T.E.? In particular need information on processing S.M.D.R. data from such a switch. If anyone has information or knows where to obtain it, please respond. Thank you. ------------------------------ From: chk@ssp.etri.re.kr (Chang Hyeoungkyu) Subject: T1 interface for PC/Workstation (Looking for Product) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 10:46:32 KDT Dear netters, I want product information that can interface T1 line with PC or Unix Workstation. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Why do I need this ? I want to connect "Computer" to "Switch". The computer would do voice synthesis, voice recognition, and optionally image processing. Yes, it is IP! Name: Chang Hyeoungkyu Phone: +82-42-860-5337 Fax: +82-42-860-6832 E-mail: chk@ssp.etri.re.kr or chk@cosmos.kaist.ac.kr Mail: Chang Hyeoungkyu Switching Services Section, TDX Division ETRI, Daeduk Science Town, P.O. Box 8 Daejeon, 305-350, Republic of Korea ------------------------------ From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 20:28:13 -0500 Subject: Eavesdropping on the British Royal Family In a previous posting, I had remarked that it did not appear to be illegal to eavesdrop on cellular or cordless calls in the United Kingdom. An article in the September 2nd {International Express} (an affiliate of the London {Daily Express}) appears to indicate otherwise. The article quotes a spokesman from the British Home Office that a prosecution under the 1985 Interception of Communications Act may lie against a ham radio operator who eavesdropped on and recorded a wireless telephone conversation reportedly between the Princess of Wales and an admirer. "A Home Office spokesman said: 'Under the 1985 Act a conviction at crown court could mean two years imprisonment plus unlimited fines. "'The criteria for bringing a charge are met when a person intentionally intercepts a communication message in the course of its transmission. "'The only time it is legal to intercept a call is if one of the parties involved agrees. To my knowledge, there is no time limit for bringing a prosecution under the Act.'" The conversation was reportedly recorded by Cyril Reenan, a retired bank manager, who has a large radio installation in his L 200,000 home in Oxford. ------------------------------ From: klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu (Bruce Klopfenstein) Subject: Financial World Sept. 15 on Telecom Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh. Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:39:59 GMT Most of the September 15 issue of {Financial World} is devoted to "Telecommunications: A Global Report." I have yet to read it, but among the topics covered in separate articles are US West/ TCI (cable TV); British Telecom; British Cable & Wireless; Newspapers vs. Baby Bells; U.S. Sprint; Nynex; Telco in Former USSR; Privatization; Alcatel; Japan Telecom in U.S. Market; and a Table of the "World's 50 Largest Telecom Companies." Bruce C. Klopfenstein | klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu Department of Telecommunications | klopfenstein@bgsuopie.bitnet 322 West Hall | klopfens@bgsuvax.UUCP Bowling Green State University | (419) 372-2138; 372-2224 Bowling Green, OH 43403-0235 | fax (419) 372-8600 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 09:53:01 -0600 From: rickie@trickie.ualberta.ca (Richard Nash) Subject: Clients, Cheats, Crooks From a recent item in {The Edmonton Sun} sometime in early August that I had ripped out of the newspaper and had been carrying around in my wallet for a month, page 6 "News"; Clients, Cheats, Crooks. [] Refreshing to see some blunt truth in advertising. Private Lines Inc. contacted {The Edmonton Sun} to flog its service that allows you to make phone calls without having your number traced. It could be a popular service now that Call Trace and Call Display services are widely available. The company advertises its service by saying it's meant for those who want to: o Cheat on their wives. o Fudge an expense account. o Bet with a bookie. A news release from the Beverly Hills company says its creator, lawyer Will Dwyer II apologizes for the suggested uses. But you can bet he's not apologizing for making money from people who use the system that way! Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman) Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers Organization: Rational Systems, Inc. Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 02:53:44 GMT In article leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) writes: > 'You may already have won'). Strangely enough, this was a real check > for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance' I got one for only $20 earlier in the summer. Since I did not switch, you are the beneficiary of them increasing the amount. No if you hadn't switched the next check would have been for $80 and then if ... Gerald Ruderman geraldr@ratsys.com ------------------------------ From: joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 18:21:59 GMT leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) writes: > I heard someone else mention this briefly before, and I didn't > understand what they were talking about then, but it seems as though > AT&T is offering customers $40 to switch to AT&T. I received a mailing > from AT&T, and I was immediately annoyed by this check-looking thing I > saw inside (it looked like one of those things that are usually marked > 'You may already have won'). Strangely enough, this was a real check > for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance' > or something like that. Anyway, I guess the deal is that if you cash > the check, you agree to switch over to AT&T. I'll take $40 over my MCI > totebags and Sprint AM/FM radios anyday ... > For $40, I'd switch my _mother_ to AT&T. Are you sure this is a bona-fide _check_, and not a voucher? AT&T was offering a number of switch-back programs, but so far the only ones I've heard about involved them "paying" in _future_ long distance service discounts; not actual cash. Of course, if it's real, and I get one, I'll probably switch too. I am not satisfied with MCI's line quality on long distance modem calls between Baltimore, MD and Atlanta, GA. JTT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:26:12 CDT From: mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Re: Unadvertised SW Bell Offering Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX > [Moderator's Note: IBT offers forward on busy/no answer and likewise > they do not market it to residential users but will sell it if you ask > for it. The only problem is that it is not user programmable: it is > turned on at all times to one selected number which must be another > number in the same CO. So they say. PAT] I called SWB back on the user-programmability of forward on busy/no answer. They are selling it in the same way you describe. The service rep did indicate they would be willing to change the forwarding on customer request but I would suspect this to fall in the "between 8 and 5 tomorrow" category. This feature is definitely intended for Call Notes (SM). Charles Mattair (preferred) mattair%synercom@hounix.org Fast, Cheap, Good. Choose Two. (anon) (or) mattair@synercom.UUCP Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Modem Access From Europe to North America Date: 7 Sep 92 21:04:22 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article RM_KIEFF@rom.tcpl. ucalgary.ca (ROM M. KIEFFER) writes: > One of our employees will travel to the Netherlands in the near future > from where he will need to access various computing devices back at > the office in Canada, with his Macintosh powerbook and built-in modem. > This gives rise to several questions: > - since European jack wiring is different from North American > standards, what kind of cable will I need to build/acquire to make > ends meet? Yes, you need an adapter to allow your Bell standard RJ line cord to plug into the Dutch jack. This question is asked about once a month -- when are the modem manufacturers going to cover it in their manuals? You can make up a "works anywhere modem kit", I have posted this before -- I will email to interested parties. For the fumble fingered, you can buy adaptor kits. There is a fellow in the U.K that sells them. Not cheap, but if you have screwdriver, voltmeter phobia, they will do the job. He is: Teleadapt P.O. Box 169 Pinner Middlesex HAS 5QW England Phone: +44.81.429.0479 He has a range of kits. He offers a Europak for 100 pounds and a Netherlands kit for an unspecified sum. I have never seen his products let alone tested them. But they are a solution. > - is it legal in to connect private modems to the public carrier? Who cares? Do you seriously believe the modem policde are going to come knocking? > - and, are the European digital dial tones the same as the North > American ones? "Digital dial tones"? Lemme see, rotary dial, that's digital. Touch Tone that's analogue. But I spose the question is: "Is TouchTone the same in other countries? To all intents and purposes, yes. Yes I know the CCITT Spec is different than the Bell spec; don't ask me why. What about pulse dial? Well, yes, pretty much the same all over the world -- New Zealand and Sweden being exceptions. There is a difference in the make break ratio, but a good modem can change this. Busy tones etc may be different, as are dial tones -- the noise you hear when you pick up the phone. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: forthd!johnl (John Lebert) Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Date: 7 Sep 92 19:54:15 GMT Reply-To: johnl%espace@relay.tek.com Organization: Fourth Dimension, Portland OR In article , jhenderson@pomona. claremont.edu writes: > I live in the LA area, and use Pac Tel for my cellular service. > Calls to 911 are free, and you're connected to a CHP dispatcher (I > assume that most calls for help in this area are from stranded > motorists). This dispatcher will connect you to other agencies as > needed. > Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the > service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my > service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not. I got a cellular phone in with a bunch of computer equipment I got at an auction here in Portland, Oregon. I found that 911 *does* work without being connected to service. This is great, because that is all I would ever need it for. John Lebert johnl@espace ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:02:51 EDT From: sharonk%pelham.UUCP%bnrmtl.UUCP@Larry.McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Sharon Kroo) Subject: Information Wanted About Clearing Houses Organization: Bell Northern Research Montreal, Canada. Would anyone have some info on clearing houses? They are used in order to simplify the billing and administration between various telecommunications service providers. I know of some clearing houses in Europe but none in North America. Any general or detailed info would be greatly appreciated! e-mail me directly at sharonk@bnr.ca Sharon [Moderator's Note: This was previously handled in the USA by a department within AT&T called 'Separations and Settlements'. Who is doing it within this country now? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #694 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27162; 9 Sep 92 10:19 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03336 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:23:10 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25663 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:23:02 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:23:02 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209090523.AA25663@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #695 TELECOM Digest Wed, 9 Sep 92 00:23:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 695 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: "911" as an Area Code? (Andrew Klossner) Re: "911" as an Area Code? (Alan L. Varney) Re: "911" as an Area Code? (John Higdon) 911 Emergency Service Instead of 999 (Richard Cox) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (John Higdon) Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (Ron Dippold) Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (Carl Moore) Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Leonard Erickson) Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Jack Adams) Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Stephen Tell) Re: Volume of Telecom Question (Jack Adams) Re: Volume of Telecom Question (Jon Sreekanth) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Tony Goulding) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Bob Denny) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code? Date: 8 Sep 92 20:12:21 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon > "I suppose that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area > code, since it should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in >making a call ..." Maybe not. My mother-in-law once started a call to Kansas at 913-780, but she aborted the call after punching 1-9-1. A 911 operator called her and asked if she'd tried to dial 911. She is convincing when she says that she's sure she dialed 1-9-1 and not some other sequence. It would be interesting to know just what key combinations her CO (in Albuquerque, 505-898) routes to 911. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 15:43:13 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code? Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article Will Martin writes: > The area-codes lists that have been put out on Telecom always note > that "911" is not used as an area code, but is reserved. I suppose Actually, 911 is assigned a non-NPA function, so it's not "reserved" any more than any other N11 code. > that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area code, since it > should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in making a call, and thus be > distinguished from the emergency-call 911 service, but I also suppose > having it as a regular area code would cause false or misdialed 911 > calls and thus the telcos keep it reserved. Bellcore's LSSGR (and common sense) says that 1 + 911, 0 + 911 and 911 preceded by 10XXX should ALL route as if only "911" was dialed. > So what I'm wondering about -- our toll-call list that is generated by > our NEC NEAX 2400 phone system came out with an entry for a call from > one of our office phones to "911-572-4000", a one-minute call on May > 7th at 10:30 AM. I can't (or won't) comment on NEC products. What did your REAL telephone bill say for that call? Al Varney -- just MY opinion. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 23:08 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code? Will Martin writes: > I suppose that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area code, > since it should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in making a call, Except in those places where it is not required. Such as here. Those places would have to be set up for a "dial 1" requirement and then followed by an appropriate grace period, followed yet by another buffer period to get "non-dial 1" users whipped into shape. I am always getting stung when I use a San Francisco telephone where a '1' is required after being used to my own phone where a '1' is not required (and never has been -- ever). I am afraid that in the San Jose area, there would be an awful lot of unintentional '911' calls if 911 was to become an area code. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 15:06 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: 911 Emergency Service Instead of 999 Reply-To: mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk John Perkins writes: >> It's been possible to dial 999 from almost any telephone in the UK to get >> emergency help since at least the 1940's (when I was a kid). I've often >> thought it would have been nice if this had been adopted as a world-wide >> standard and it puzzles me why AT&T chose to use 911 when they must have >> been aware of the UK system. Well, you'll get an embryonic World standard when Europe adopt a new code, 112, to replace the UK's 999 and all the other country variations in Europe. Will Bellcore follow suit? I doubt it. 112 is one of the easiest codes to MISdial ... a very bad choice made for what may be political reasons. Richard Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 222 747111 Fax: +44 222 711111 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:08 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show On Sep 4 at 0:39, TELECOM Moderator writes: > A stolen car or a home which was burglarized several hours previous > to being discovered are not what I would term emergencies. PAT] But does it not seem a little unreasonable to expect citizens to correctly make judgment calls on emergency/non-emergency situations when there are cases when the 911 dispatcher cannot even make that distinction? I refer, of course, to the celebrated case in San Francisco where a young man called 911 from a pay phone to report that he was being robbed by some thugs who were after his car. The dispatcher passed the call off as "non-emergency" and did not issue a code response. The young man's body was found more than a day later. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:53:40 GMT I've written the user interface for our new cellular phones, and can confirm that 911 is definitely an exception case. For instance, if the phone is locked, it sits there waiting for the four-digit lock code to unlock the phone. However, if the person enters 911 and then hits send, I have to bail out of the lock state, actually do an origination with 911, then go back to lock state when the call is over. Regardless of call restrictions on the phone, 911 works -- we try to originate if we can. The rest of it is up to the carrier -- they can indeed flag an ESN as bad in several different ways, the most common being someone trying to make a call with a mismatched MIN and ESN, probably fraud. There are even two centralized massive databases (one run by EDS) which coordinates these records between different phone companies, so that an ESN/MIN pair marked as bad in one service area gets marked bad the others. I do not know whether all carriers allow 911 even from a phone marked as bad. I would suspect so, because of liability issues, and it's not likely that someone calling 911 is trying to engage in phone fraud. [Moderator's Note: I don't see how there could be any liability issues in a total denial of service to a delinquent or non-existent account. When landline telcos cut your service, the phone goes dead. Period. Some may leave dial tone there but refuse to process anything. Telco is not required to connect calls between a delinquent (or non-existent) subscriber and anything. Emergencies are unfortunate occurances, but that is why telephone service is so valuable to the average person. But if telco cannot force payment (or subscription) any other way except by denial of service, then that's what they have to do. Ditto for cellular customers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 17:33:34 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago 999 is in use in some areas in the U.S. as a local prefix. ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:34:42 GMT Tom Metro writes: > leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: >> It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that >> when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires >> together. > What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds > redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop > current. Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision? I really don't know much about it. It seems to have been the default for all the old multiline office phones. I rather suspect that it was simpler to run the power for the lights in such a way that they got turned on when the line got picked up. Personally, I doubt that the old key systems were up to monitoring loop current in a reliable way. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:19:38 GMT In article , Tom Metro writes: > leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: >> dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) writes: >> It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that >> when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires >> together. > What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds > redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop > current. Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision? The A and A1 leads originate with Key Telephone Systems where their function was to operate {Can you say "A" Relay :-)!} relays in the Key System (Those grey colored boxes of various sizes which hung on walls or lurked in closets). The timing of these lead closures in relation to the presence of loop current is what operated the "Hold" feature of key systems. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: tell@cs.unc.edu (Stephen Tell) Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision Date: 8 Sep 92 13:12:40 GMT Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill In article tmetro@ds5000.dac. northeastern.edu (Tom Metro) writes: > What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds > redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop > current. Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision? Since I don't see an answer yet, I will ... one more time, shorting the second pair is used to let a single-line phone (or other device) work properly on a 1A2 type key system. ("A" and "A1" come from the signal-naming conventions in that system.) Key systems do monitor loop current, but here are some reasons why one couldn't do this only. Breaking A/A1 before loop current puts the line on hold. You want to be able to keep the line open without there being loop current present, like when the CPC pulse comes in, or when you push the little button on some key sets to break the loop to flash or get a new CO dial tone. Remember, the original key system was a simple, robust, relay-based system (that used a lot of multipair cable!). I'm not sure when it was first introduced; I'd guess the 40s or 50s. Anyone? Steve Tell tell@cs.unc.edu H: 919 968 1792 | #5L Estes Park apts UNC Chapel Hill Computer Science W: 919 962 1845 | Carrboro NC 27510 [Moderator's Note: Multi-line phones were first in use in New York City in the middle 1920's. Does anyone remember the old three line phones with six buttons? There was a hold button for each line. I think they were manufactured by Automatic Electric in the 1940-50 period. GTE used them for multi-line business customers back then. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: Volume of Telecom Question Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:28:47 GMT In article , stapleton@misvax.mis. arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes: > I've seen some overview articles (there was a two-pager in the > {Whole Earth Review} a few issues back), but could someone from this > most august forum provide some referenced figures (or pointers to > where I could find them) on: > - Growth in number of domestic calls completed (US); > - Growth in number of international calls (either with the US and > rest of the world, or total internationally, or both); > - Growth in bandwidth or calls completed to interesting places like > Moscow, or Cuba, or Iran, etc. An excellent source I used (unfortunately, its a book) for a course I developed on the business aspects of telephony was a book published by AT&T entitled "The World's Telephones". It is published yearly (Most good libraries keep back issues so your information should be easy to extrapolate) and has enormous amounts of easily understandable statistics ... precious little telephoneeze! Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} | (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) Subject: Re: Volume of Telecom Question Organization: The World Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:10:14 GMT In article stapleton@misvax.mis. arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes: For a paper I'm writing on export controls and information, I'd like to present a quick summary of the growth of telecommunications over the past several decades. I've seen some overview articles (there was a two-pager in the {Whole Earth Review} a few issues back), but could someone from this most august forum provide some referenced figures {Wall Street Journal}, Oct 4, 91, had a special section on telecomm. Lots of interesting articles, and figures too. Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems, Inc. Fax and PC products 5 Walden St #3, Cambridge, MA 02140 (617) 876-8019 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: tonyg@spock.retix.com (Tony "Salty Dog" Goulding) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: Retix, Santa Monica CA Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:39:26 GMT In article rjhawkin@mothra.syr.edu (The Virtual Kid) writes: >> The # sign? The POUND sign! No, this is a pound sign... _ / \ | -|- | | __|__ What you're referring to is a 'hash' symbol... Tony [All views expressed are mine - if anyone is to blame its me] ------------------------------ From: denny@alisa.com (Bob Denny) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:05:37 GMT Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc. > messages suggesting "POUND" or "number" sign The only internationally recognized name for "#" is "sharp" as in music notation. So it's a "sharp sign". A pound sign in England is quite different, for example, and I'm not sure if # is used as a number prefix in very many written languages. Robert B. Denny voice: (818) 792-9474 Alisa Systems, Inc. fax: (818) 792-4068 Pasadena, CA (denny@alisa.com, ..uunet!alisa.com!denny) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #695 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27770; 9 Sep 92 10:41 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29091 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:44:05 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25647 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:43:57 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:43:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209090643.AA25647@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #696 TELECOM Digest Wed, 9 Sep 92 01:43:53 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 696 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Standardized Exchange Names (George L. Sicherman) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Anthony J. Stieber) Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? (Michael A. Covington) Re: Bell Science Series on Video (Leonard Erickson) Re: New Phone Number Intercept (John Higdon) Re: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? (Andrew G. Minter) Re: Strange MCI Problem (Jack Adams) Re: Ending Automated Calls (Wolf Paul) New "Call Completion" From Cinci Bell (Isaacson First ESS was in New Jersey (was Illinois Bell Allows) (David G. Lewis) First ESS Was Not in Morris (Dave Levenson) Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Leonard Erickson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 11:57:32 EDT From: gls@windmill.att.com (George L Sicherman) Subject: Re: Standardized Exchange Names Organization: AT&T In , leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com writes: > I think "FAirfax may be a "standard" name of some sort, as the 32x > exchanges in Spokane used that in the 60's. The generic name for 32 in Buffalo was FAirview. Buffalo had some special names like DElaware and HUmboldt, but "Fairview" had no special meaning there. If there's enough interest, I'll post the whole list. Col. G. L. Sicherman gls@windmill.att.COM ------------------------------ From: anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Anthony J Stieber) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:17:07 GMT In article cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us (gordon hlavenka) writes: > Exactly. No uplink calling on Airfone. Never had it. Possibly never > will, for political rather than technical reasons. Imagine an > insurance salesman or 12-year-old prankster (or terrorist!) calling up > to random airplanes. Now try and find a _cost-effective_ way to > prevent these calls. The only reason to be able to do uplink calls would be to call someone back after leaving a message or something similar. Simply have the phone number of the Airfone change, and have that number be current only for that flight. Phones from which calls are not made are totally inaccesable. Several digit extensions would probably be needed to prevent someone from randomly dialing Airfone extensions and stumbling across an active line. Anthony Stieber anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu uwm!uwmcsd4!anthony ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 05:04:20 GMT In article mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: > I've been told that the following two pieces of legislation are before > the Senate, but cannot identify them from Congressional Record and > similar references. Can anybody fill me in? > (1) A ban on radio receivers that can tune cellular phone frequencies. > (Listening is already illegal but the receivers themselves aren't.) I've been told that this is part of the FY 92 funding for the FCC, but have not yet confirmed it. > (2) A ban on private consulting in electronics, "S. 1706," recently > mentioned by a letter writer in Robert Pease's column in Electronic > Design. (There is a S. 1706, but it deals with import duties on > certain industrial chemicals.) > [Moderator's Note: What is this 'ban on private consulting in electronics'? > Please tell more. When does private become public or legal? PAT] I've been told that this has to do with amending section 1706 of the Internal Revenue Code, and that a "ban on consulting" is not exactly what's involved ... but have yet to confirm this or get the details. At least now I have a scent to follow. Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Bell Science Series on Video Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:41:12 GMT john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Those of you who are over forty will remember a series of television > programs sponsored by The Bell System. A product of the fifties, these > were excellent films featuring Dr. Frank Baxter as host explaining > such things as meteorology, time, biology, and physiology. Highly > produced, these programs utilized puppets, animation, and well-written > scripts to inform and entertain young and old alike. Unfortuately, > even I did not own a VCR before 1974. I'm only 37 and I remember them well. I remember one from TV, and the rest from seeing the 16mm film version in junior high science classes. Now if they only have them in Beta ... :-( Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 23:20 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: New Phone Number Intercept On Sep 7 at 22:24, TELECOM Moderator writes: > Speaking of live operator intercepts, are there still any of those > situations where the operator responds but cannot hear the caller > because the LD carrier does not open the mouthpiece until the call has > supervised, which it will never do with an operator? > Are all the OCC's opening the talk path now? PAT] It was AT&T that (exclusively?) participated in this practice, and it began some years ago. It was put in place to prevent the practice of "black boxing" and also to protect itself from itself. It seems that many of the AT&T PBXes sold and installed by none other than AT&T had misprogrammed DID circuits that never supervised. Any call made to such lines was a "free" call. And we are not talking about just a few systems. This mishandling was rampant. AT&T was losing big bucks on long distance because of the incompetence of its own installers and that of its contractors. Also, there were a few unscrupulous customers who intentionally programmed DID circuits to never supervise. The fix was to not enable caller to callee audio until the circuit was supervised. This way the caller could hear call progress tones, but no two-way communication could take place. A complaint from a customer describing this condition would result in the dispatch of service personnel to reprogram the System 75, 85, or whatever. To my knowledge, the OCCs never bothered with this practice. And I believe AT&T is still doing it. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: A.G.Minter@bnr.co.uk (Andrew G. Minter) Subject: Re: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? Organization: BNR Europe Limited, Harlow, GB Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 10:01:45 GMT In article millar@rapnet.sanders. lockheed.com (Jeffrey R. Millar x7047) writes: > I have two answering machines which hang up on callers. The problem > apparently began in May ... but we didn't notice it because it > manifested itself as intermittent loss of the latter part of messages. I had *exactly* the same problem with once of these fancy new Audioline answering machines (forget the number) here in the UK. On some days the machine recorded for longer than others. Interestingly, I discovered that if I disconnected the answering machine and let the line ring for a really long time (1-2 minutes) and reconnected the machine it worked perfectly for several hours. British Telecom visited three times (we got a young engineer who proudly told me he had just joined the company and finished the training course). Eventually they gave up, insisting that the machine must be faulty. However, thanks to a helpful retailer, we tried several identical machines with same result. After a couple of weeks of messing around (and losing messages) I gave up and spent some more money on a really nice Panasonic. I get the impression that Panasonic address a global market and assume that their machines will be connected to antique phone systems with really lousy lines. At any rate, our machine seems to be bomb proof! Andrew G. Minter | Email: A.G.Minter@bnr.co.uk Principal Research Engineer | Phone: +44 279 403165 BNR Europe Limited | Fax: +44 279 451866 London Road, Harlow | ESN: 742-3165 Essex CM17 9NA | Telex: 81151 BNR HW G ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: Strange MCI Problem Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:13:16 GMT In article , wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) writes: > I had a strange thing happen to me tonight. I called my aunt and > after dialing heard nothing; no ringing or noise at all, so I tried > several more times. At first I thought it might be that the speed > dial lost the end of the number so I dialed it (well actually pushed) > the number manually ... still no luck > Is this what can happen with a SS7 problem? The ringing through but no > voice path getting opened? Not according to what I've read. Call set up protocol with SS7 (By the way, I strongly doubt you were SS7 connected) currently utilizes "distant end" ring back which is a strong indication that all went well with YOUR LEC and MCI, but the ball was dropped by the distant LEC, when your aunt answered. The good news is that since "cut through" did not occur, a billing record was never completed either ... whew! > Is MCI connecting their SS7's to the LEC's yet? Not officially yet, full SS7 connectivity between LEC's and IXC's is on a lottery basis for priority of who gets connected first. However, there is much testing of interworking of networks at all levels which is going on and must be completed before such interconnections are turned up to live traffic. (Hint ... if the post dialing delay is in the order of four to six seconds, your are not yet SS7 connected between your LEC and IXC ... that's about the length of time it takes to transmit FG-D data over Multi Frequency trunks up to the IXC and back to the far end LEC). Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} | (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: cc_paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul) Subject: Re: Ending Automated Calls Reply-To: cc_paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf N. Paul) Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 13:44:05 GMT In article reilly@staff.dccs.upenn.edu (G. Brendan Reilly) writes: > It seems that if you wanted to end automated calls you would simply > have to get the exchange of the cellular phone in Washington DC and > start bombarding them with automated calls. I'm sure that when the > congressional staffers and such have to put up with this crap they'll > decide "something must be done in the public interest." Except that I wouldn't trust the congressional staffers to get it right, whatever they decide to do in the "public interest". They might just decide that ANY calls initiated by a machine should be illegal -- bye-bye dial-up UUCP, SLIP, PPP, FIDO, etc., not to mention auto-redialling FAX machines or network FAX servers ... Regards, Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center wnp@rcvie.co.at Alcatel-Elin Research Center +43-1-391621-122 (w) Ruthnergasse 1-7 +43-1-391452 (fax) ELIN RESEARCH A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe +43-1-2246913 (h) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Sep 92 09:45:33 EDT From: Alec Isaacson Subject: New "Call Completion" from Cinci Bell I was listening to the radio last night and I heard a commercial from Cincinnati Bell offering a service called "Call Completion". The commercial went on to say that if you call 555-1212 (rather than 411) for directory assistance you can hit a touch tone 1 after the number is looked up and be connected to that number. (Then it went on to rave about how you will never need to fumble for pen and paper again :) The verbal "fine print" said this service cost $0.35 a pop, fee waived for busy numbers, not available in certain areas or on rotary phones. Alec D. Isaacson AI4CPHYW @ miamiu.acs.muohio.edu isaacson @ rogue.acs.muohio.edu (NeXt Mail) Miami University, Oxford, OH ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: First ESS Was in New Jersey (was Illinois Bell Now Allows ...) Organization: AT&T Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 13:57:01 GMT In article the TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive > and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back > in the 1960's ... Sorry, wrong answer ... "The first application of electronic local switching in the Bell System occurred in May 1965 with the cutover of the first 1ESS switch in Succasunna, New Jersey." [EOBS, P413] (EOBS = Engineering and Operations in the Bell System, 2e) dave ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: First ESS Was Not in Morris Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:35:24 GMT > TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive > and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back > in the 1960's ... and we had it routine use in various exchanges as > early as 1974 downtown. We had lots of centrex in use in the 1960's. > The company has always been involved in the community with numerous > charitable donations and services. PAT] Morris, IL was the test site for an early electronic switching system that used gas-filled triodes as its switching fabric. The system was found to be unreliable, and it was never deployed elsewhere. The first of the AT&T switches to be called ESS (which actually used magnetic reed-relays, but were software-controlled) was installed in 1965 in Succasunna, New Jersey. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:11:47 GMT nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes: > Busy numbers shouldn't be added to the Forbidden Numbers list, > and numbers that answer and present modem tones won't be. Only > numbers that answer, but don't present modem tones, should end up on > the Forbidden Numbers list. This makes sense; if a number is > answering but not attached to a modem, there probably isn't a modem > there and the calling end should stop calling and annoying somebody. > If the receiving system is down, that's OK. Either the modem > doesn't answer the phone, or it answers the phone and brings up a data > connection, even if no data can be transmitted. The only real problem > comes with some old systems where, when the system went down, a voice > message was switched on. But that's rare today. Actually, there's another problem. Take USR modem. Put X5 in the Initialize string. Now call a Telebit that puts the PEP tomes first. Result? The USR reports a result code of VOICE almost immediately and hangs up! This was true of a USR dual standard bought a couple of years ago. I don't know if it is still true. So even if a modem answer, it has to answer in a way that the *calling* modem recognizes. Then you get into situations like the one I saw mentioned recently. Supposedly, US modems think that Australian ring signals are busy signals! (Anyone know the truth about this?) Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #696 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24159; 10 Sep 92 2:30 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31385 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:05:15 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00312 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:05:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:05:00 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209100505.AA00312@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #697 TELECOM Digest Thu, 10 Sep 92 00:05:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 697 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? (Olivier Giffard) Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? (Richard Cox) Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls (Bob Frankston) Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question (Bob Frankston) Re: Information Wanted About Clearing Houses (Don Ford) Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls (David G. Lewis) Re: Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line (Justin Leavens) Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Chris Schmandt) Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (A Klossner) Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses (Steve Forrette) Re: Weird Intercept (Jeff Garber) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Jeff Garber) Re: Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology (John Zambito) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: giffard@anchor.cs.colorado.edu (Olivier Giffard) Subject: Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 23:17:00 GMT All phone numbers in France were changed to eight digits on October 23, 1985 at 2300 hours. The actual switching was done in less than a minute and you could a real time display of the change on a special news broadcast on TV after the Minister of PTT pushed "the" button. The change was advertised to the general public about a year before it took place. The previous numbering scheme was on the form (AC) XX XX XX or (A) CXX XX XX. The number in parentheses was the area code. Paris had area code 1 with seven digits numbers. Since the change there are two dialing zones: the Paris Region and the rest of the country. Numbers outside the Paris region became (no area code) AC XX XX XX Numbers within the Paris Region became (1) AC XX XX XX Numbers for the city of Paris became (1) 4X XX XX XX Example: A number in Rouen that was (35) 71 84 00 is now 35 71 84 00 A number in Lyon that was (7) 342 45 67 is now 73 42 45 67 A number in Versailles that was (3) 237 89 01 is now (1) 32 37 89 01 A number in Paris that was (1) 787 11 11 is now (1) 47 87 11 11 During the first few days we would have a recording instead of a dialing tone reminding us to dial eight digits. Then for a few month, if you dialled only six or seven digits there would be a timeout and a recording. Plans currently exist to eventually have all numbers in France be of the form (Z) XX XX XX XX. (ie to implement more zones.) To reach someone in the same zone you just dial eight digits. to reach someone in another zone you dial 16 + zone code (ie now 1 for Paris, nothing for the rest) + eight digits. You have to wait for a second low-pitched dial tone after 16. (It comes immediately on digital exchanges and with a delay of 1/2 to two seconds on analog exchanges.) Olivier Giffard Chorus Systems, Inc. og@chorus.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 15:07 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers Reply-To: mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk C. Moore at BRL.MIL asks when France went to eight digit numbers. I can look up the exact date if no one else beats me to it! Of course before France went to eight digit numbers, they used a two + six approach: two digit area code and six digit local number. So, to anyone calling from outside France, the change made no difference -- the caller still dialed the country code and eight digits. Paris was different -- indeed it still is. Effectively it has nine digits (an area code of 1, with eight digit local numbers). Before the change Paris had two separate single digit area codes for different "zones", and seven digit local numbers in each zone. The plan was for there to be four [or five] zones from 1995, each with a 1 digit area code (prefixed by a "0", instead of "16", when dialing from other zones). However this plan is being reviewed because users have said that they would prefer to have standard nine digit national numbers that can be dialed unchanged from anywhere within France. Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future for the NANP: dialling ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of whether they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other Digest readers think this would be acceptable? Richard Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 222 747111 Fax: +44 222 711111 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls Date: Tue 8 Sep 1992 11:53 -0400 0+ing as another, unintended side effect. It allows you to make a call from some restricted phone systems. At some resorts, for example, you cannot make a call charged to your phone. But the phone are smart (OK, the network behind them) and permit some local calls as well as 1-800 and 0-xxx calls since the latter could be charged to a credit card. I'd also assume that human operators might even get an indication that the calls must be billed to a card. Of course, 0-700 calls are still charged to the caller. Actually, I didn't test this since I wanted to be nice and not present strange charges to the owner. Even worse, with something like 1-800-CALL-ATT you can place any call this way! Since I wanted to be nice and not bill calls to the resort owner, I didn't really test this. Are there protocols that would control this? ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question Date: Tue 8 Sep 1992 11:55 -0400 Might be trivial, but how about using the vibrate mode and detecting it. Perhaps something as simple as a change of state of a microswitch that it would rest on? ------------------------------ From: dwford@uswnvg.com (Don Ford) Subject: Re: Information Wanted About Clearing Houses Date: 8 Sep 92 17:19:02 GMT Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc. Sharon Kroo (sharonk%pelham.UUCP%bnrmtl.UUCP@Larry.McRCIM.McGill.EDU) wrote: > Would anyone have some info on clearing houses? > They are used in order to simplify the billing and administration > between various telecommunications service providers. I know of some > clearing houses in Europe but none in North America. > [Moderator's Note: This was previously handled in the USA by a > department within AT&T called 'Separations and Settlements'. Who is > doing it within this country now? PAT] The North American Exchange Carrier Association, NECA, handles this on the wireline side. NECA is closely tied to BELLCORE, but not a part of BELLCORE. On the cellular side similar functions are provided by several "clearing houses" such as GTE Telecomm Services and EDS. Don Ford U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc. (206) 450-8585 ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls Organization: AT&T Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:28:00 GMT In article capek@watson.ibm.com writes: > I tried to use the AT&T Alliance Conferencing service, whose number is > 700-456-1000. I dialed and got a "cannot be completed as dialed" > message. I tried 700-555-4141 to confirm that AT&T was still my > default carrier, and it was. It turned out that for the Alliance > number, one must dial 0 + 700 ... even though the 0 is not necessary > for 700-555-4141 call. What's going on here? > Is the leading 0 some sort of acknowledgement by me that this is a > chargeable call? If I dial the 0, is it presented by my LEC to AT&T > in a different way than if I don't dial it? Yes; that's the key. 0+/0- calls can be (and are, in the case of AT&T) presented to the IXC on different trunks than are DDD calls. Calls to an AT&T operator are routed over OSPS access trunks (OSPS = Operator Service Position System); OSPS trunks provide different capabilities than do FG-D access trunks. The additional capabilities are required to handle such things as coin traffic. I don't know if such things as calling card, collect, and in particular Alliance(tm) teleconferencing service specifically require OSPS trunks. However, these access trunks may terminate on different switches with different capabilities than do FG-D access trunks, and the service may only be implemented on switches with OSPS access trunks (OSPS switches, natch). > Also, where was the message generated? By the LEC or by AT&T? I'm not sure; I could postulate how it could be either. > If the latter, is there a technical reason why they couldn't easily > have figured out what I wanted and what I was doing wrong, and told > me, rather than forcing me to call around to find out. If the latter, probably because there are any number of 700 numbers that could be dialed by the user that can not be completed if dialed 1+, some of which can be completed if dialed 0+ and some of which that can not be completed regardless of whether dialed 0+ or 1+, and given the rapidly changing nature of the number space, the DDD network elements may not know at any given point in time whether a given 700 number is valid, but only dialable as 0+, or invalid. And I'm guessing it's better to give a "cannot be completed as dialed" announcement upfront, than to give a "must be preceded by a 0" announcement for a 1+ dialed call, and then give a "cannot be completed as dialed" announcement for a 0+ dialed call to the same number. Disclaimer: Even though my group is called "switching and ISDN implementation", I'm just hypothesizing. I don't know enough about LEC routing (or, for that matter, AT&T's routing) to say categorically one way or the other. I just know enough to get myself into trouble ... David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens) Subject: Re: Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line Date: 8 Sep 1992 11:49:53 -0700 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA In article PGloger.es_xfc@xerox.com writes: [a story about how some probably now ex-employees of AT&T tried to use a 900 number to rip off AT&T] > (No, none of us think rip-offs are good. Yes, all of us expect 'most > large company phones to be blocked against outgoing 900 calls.) Blocking 900 numbers outright is a tough proposition for some people like me, since more and more computer vendors are adopting 900 numbers for customer support past warranty periods. My phone is blocked for 900 numbers but we have at least one vendor who doesn't want to support me unless I call their 900 number (product out of warranty). I'm doing battle with that right now, no one can understand why any employee would need to call a 900 number. Justin Leavens Microcomputer Specialist University of Southern California ------------------------------ From: Chris Schmandt Subject: Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder Organization: MIT Media Laboratory Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:36:13 GMT In article tc@cdc.hp.com (Alan TC Penn) writes: > I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The > function of this device is to route the incoming phone message > directly to either an answering machine or a modem. Some modems have this built in, I hear. For what you want, this may be the cheapest way to go. I recently got a "selective ring processor" listed in the AT&T Sourcebook (800-451-2100). They sell a two number version for $100 and a three number version for $130. I'm happy with the three number version I'm using. It has (switch enabled) lockout so you can prevent one device from going on the line if another is offhook. I have found this useful to prevent me from accidently barging in on an incoming fax, as I have the ringer turned off on the fax machine. Incidently, this approach was suggested by several comp.dcom.telecom readers in response to my query about voice/fax switches last month. chris ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line Date: 8 Sep 92 20:19:56 GMT Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon Bill Campbell writes about US West cellular service in Seattle: > "This service [voice mail] costs about $5.00/month plus air > time if I call for messages on the cellular. There's no charge > if I call in for my messages from a land line." What fun. GTE Mobilnet, the wireline carrier down the road in Portland Oregon, does just the opposite: I can retrieve my messages for free from my cell phone, but it costs money to retrieve them from a land line. They charge airtime for calls forwarded to a landline, but at about 1/3 the usual rate. They don't charge for "uncompleted calls." It turns out that they don't do this via call supervision -- they just charge for any use of airtime that lasts a minute or more. If you let that call ring for more than a minute, you pay. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew) ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:47:23 GMT In article tmetro@ds5000.dac. northeastern.edu (Tom Metro) writes: > What does a CPC pulse "look" like? What type of circuitry is typically > used to detect it? What are the timing specifications for when it > should occur with respect to the call termination? And what simple > test can I perform to see if my phone service provides CPC pulses? A CPC pulse is just a momentary interruption of line current. Thus, the line goes "dead" for a period of time. I think common durations are in the 500-1000 msec range. Here's a question of my own: Are there any modems that detect the CPC signal? A common problem with our Hayes Ultra 9600's that we have for dialup are that if the 9600 bps negotiation fails for some reason such that "NO CARRIER" is returned instead of a fallback to 2400, the modem at the host end is apparently still trying to negotiate, and remains offhook for another 30-45 seconds. This means that if you immediately retry the connection, you get a busy signal. It would be nice to have the modem immediately reset when it sees the CPC indicating that the caller has gone away. I've never seen this in any modem (not that I've looked very hard), and wonder why it is not a standard feature. It would seem to me that detecting loss of loop current would not be an expensive feature to engineer. And if a line doesn't give CPC, then the modem would act as it does now anyway. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 02:27 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Weird Intercept In article Mike Morris wrote: > Also 714-259-0020 thru 0029 are nonbilling intercepts. These numbers go into the Centrex at Pacific Bell's Edinger (Tustin, CA) offices. These three buildings contain a central office (Santa Ana-Tustin), a business office, an engineering department, and two separate TOPS (operator) offices (Tustin I and Tustin II). I was a TOPS operator in Tustin II in 1988. I believe Tustin I handles calls from 213 and 818 (and now probably 310) area codes, while Tustin II handles 714 calls from LATA 730 (Los Angeles) and 619 calls from LATA 730 and LATA 732 (San Diego). The interesting thing about LEC operators handling calls from different LATAs is that obviously they cannot connect calls between the two LATAs. Often I'd tell a Los Angeles area customer that San Diego was out of my service area and then turn around and complete calls within San Diego for other customers. Since 619 exists in both LATAs, it was difficult to decide if calls within 619 were in the same or different LATAs, and if calls from 714 to 619 and vice-versa crossed LATA lines. The TOPS terminals, of course, wouldn't allow calls to be completed between the LATAs. I wonder if any other LECs have the same operators serving multiple LATAs or if this is fairly uncommon. Note: I no longer work for Pacific Bell (so don't blame ME :) Jeff Garber My opinions are just that. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 02:29 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) writes: > The big question is "Why are people still doing installations > with quad wire?" Among other reasons previously cited, quad usually can be easily obtained in a beige jacket. I recently had a heck of a time trying to paint the outside jacket of some twisted pair I bought because it was dark grey. Some of the wire had to be exposed, and grey would have stood out too much so I painted it beige to blend better with the wall. I was really tempted to resort to using the quad instead since it was already the right color (I have tons of it), but since it was a fairly long run I decided instead to hassle with painting the twisted pair. Jeff Garber My opinions are just that. ------------------------------ From: jvz@pt.com (John Zambito) Subject: Re: Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology Organization: Performance Technologies, Incorporated Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:21:14 GMT apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) writes: > Why do telecommunication professionals always say -48Vdc not +48Vdc? According to Bellcore: "Because of corrosion problems, the use of supply potentials that are positive relative to ground reference is not recommended." John Zambito, Performance Technologies Incorporated jvz@pt.com 315 Science Parkway, Rochester, New York 14620 uupsi!ptsys1!jvz ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #697 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25322; 10 Sep 92 3:14 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32324 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:03:26 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04781 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:03:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:03:16 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209100603.AA04781@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #698 TELECOM Digest Thu, 10 Sep 92 01:03:16 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 698 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Working Assets Long Distance (Robert Woiccak) Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? (Gerald Ruderman) Re: Oops, Lost the Reporter (Scott Fybush) Re: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation (Gerald Ruderman) Re: Disasters and Computer Communications (Pat Turner) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Tom Coradeschi) Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (backon@vms.huji.ac.il) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Chris Cox) Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (John M. Sullivan) Re: Help With Motorola Advisor (Ben Black) Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (Guy Sherr) Re: 911 as an Area Code? (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 08 Sep 92 23:12:15 EDT From: Rob Woiccak Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance I received a mailing from Working Assets the other day advertising their services. It's a pretty slick-looking advertisment too, offering you a free pint of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream as well as 30 free minutes of calls once and free calls to select business and political leaders once a month. They advertise their long distance rates as "guaranteed to be lower than AT&T, MCI and Sprint." (though one wonders in lieu of the earlier post that someone made regarding the huge initial phone bill). There is a men- tion of up to 15% off on volume discounts and a 20% discount on calls to other Working Assets subscribers. Services include: - 100% fiber-optic sound - Convienent "dial 1" calling - Low, competitive rates - Volume discounts - 24-hour operators - Free calling cards - Direct international dialing - Friendly customer service The Guarantee: "If you're not completely satisfied with Working Assets Long Distance after three full months of service, we'll pay to switch you back to your original carrier." The Catch: "By signing this coupon, I authorize Working Assets Long Distance to be my primary long distance carrier. I understand that my local phone company may apply a small, one-time fee and that to help offset this cost, (whether or not it is applied), Working Assets will give me a credit equal to 30 minutes of free interstate calling. The credit will be at the 3,000 mile night/weekend rate and will be issued after my third full month of service. Offers void where prohibited. Guarantee offer valid for one year from start of service. Free Speech Day calls limited to four three-minute calls per month. Rate comparisons effective 8/1/92 and subject to change." On the surface, it doesn't *look* like a bad deal and the idea of having 1% of your phone bill going to a good cause (they contribute to Planned Parenthood, Greenpeace, Rainforest Action Network, Oxfam America, Amnesty Inter- national, National Coalition for the Homeless, and Fund for a Free South Africa among others) is a nice one. I do wonder how much the rates are raised to defray the operating costs after the contributions are made. I'd be interested in hearing from any other subcribers as well. Environmentalists will be happy to know that WALD says they use 100% recycled paper and soy-based inks (when possible) for their bills and that they plant 17 trees for every ton of paper used. Rob Woiccak - rewoicc@erenj.bitnet - Exxon Engineering - Disclaim! Datclaim! [Moderator's Note: I got a mailing from them today with the same information you mention above. My only complaint is there are a couple of organizations they support which I would never under any conditions want to receive my money (since I disagree with their stated goals and principles); otherwise I might give them one of my lines just to see how good they are. Now if they allowed one to choose from a list of several organizations, and check off those one wished to support, that would be different. Its the same reason I give direct to organizations of my choice rather than through United Way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman) Subject: Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? Organization: Rational Systems, Inc. Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 03:33:40 GMT In article toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) writes: > The reseller salesperson/owner tried to make dialing the 14 or so > extra digits and lack of one-plus dialing (he doesn't have > arrangements with the local telco to offer one-plus dialing) a > "feature" because you can keep your existing long distance company for > "emergencies". When I lived in an area served by GTE with only two connections between the CO and the long distance network I found the "emergency" feature of a reseller very handy. Their conection to the outside world was always working when my 1+ connection was blocked by failure or overloading. Gerald Ruderman geraldr@ratsys.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 20:42 EDT From: fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us (Scott Fybush) Subject: Re: Oops, Lost the Reporter Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) writes: > Friday morning (Sept. 4), I had KYW news-radio (1060 AM in > Philadelphia) tuned in. Al Novak was reporting live from Cherry Hill > (nearby in New Jersey) and then I heard a dialtone for a few seconds. > The woman who was the "anchor" back at the station then broke in and > said "Oops, I think we lost Al Novak." I guess Mr. Novak was using a > telephone? What kind of telephone could he have been using? > [Moderator's Note: Apparently a regular dialup line, or perhaps a > cellular phone on his end to a regular POTS line in the studio. PAT] I work at one of KYW's sister stations, and I assume the equipment we use is similar to what KYW uses. At WBZ, reporters in the field usually file from bag phones. Sometimes they do live shots from the bag phones, other times they feed reports in advance. When they do live shots, they dial into one of two direct lines into the newsroom (as opposed to one of the newsroom's four PBX extensions -- we've found the PBX doesn't deliver sound quality quite as good as New England Tel service delivered directly from the switch.) Each of the two dial-in lines is connected to a pot on the anchor's board through a Gentner digital hybrid which can feed station audio (pre-delay) back through the phone line. I should mention that most of the live reports actually are fed not from the bag phones themselves, but from separate cellular phones mounted in the station news cars. Reports from the State House are fed back to the station through a dedicated, high-quality 15kHz line. Weather reports are fed by phone from State College, PA using a two-line Comrex frequency extender to give frequency response out to about 10 kHz or so. Sometimes the Comrex doesn't work properly and the audio sounds tinny and distorted. This is a common problem. Reports from other Group W stations in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA, and Sacramento arrive via a satellite hookup. It's designed very oddly ... the station having something to feed dials up a number in Washington DC via an ordinary POTS line, enters a DTMF code to signal certain stations or all of the Group, then feeds the audio. It's a kludge that doesn't produce much better audio than feeding the stations directly via POTS, but it is more expedient than feeding each station individually. As for reliability, if the cell phone sounds bad when the reporter calls in to do a live shot (reporters always call in a minute or two before air and talk to an editor before going on air), the editor may decide not to go live after all. Calls being dropped on air are rare. It happens, though. At one special event here, the Tall Ships Weekend a few months back, all our cell phones in the field went dead. It turned out the cell phone company hadn't charged the batteries before giving us the phones for the day :-( Fortunately, our reporters also carry two-way radios, so they filed over those instead. We've had better days than that one :-) All in all, it's a lot easier to get a report from a remote location for radio than it is for TV, and for every time the cell phone goes dead on the air, there's another time when rain fade or something else gets in the way of a TV live shot (anyone remember the correspondents for TV trying to send live pictures over Ku-band during Hurricane Andrew?) Scott Fybush -- fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us These opinions are mine only and do not reflect those of WBZ or of Group W Broadcasting. ------------------------------ From: GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman) Subject: Re: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation Organization: Rational Systems, Inc. Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 04:58:54 GMT In article George S Thurman <0004056081@mcimail.com> writes: > It was, in fact, so popular that by 1966, AT&T had to do something > about the gigantic unpaid settlements for years of calls made out of > Cuba to the whole world -- on AT&T's tab with all the world's other > communications entities. The balance owing AT&T was enormous, and > Castro had no intention of paying. Obviously, his huge unpaid balance > was simply an item he felt was tit for tat. It's easy to see how > Castro (and certainly his Russian masters) must have enjoyed the dual > economic "get-back" and embarrassment Florida City was causing the > hated U.S. during the deeper years of the Cold War. I recall reading a while ago that it used to be common for Cubans to call the US collect and that quite a large amound of money accrued to AT&T this way and that Castro (at least once upon a time) did not owe ATT any money. This article makes me think I remember this backwards. Gerald Ruderman geraldr@ratsys.com ------------------------------ From: turner@rsiatl.UUCP Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 06:24 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: Disasters and Computer Communications Reply-To: turner@dixie.com > I need some information regarding methods of emergency data > communications. Imagine a disaster team in a crisis area, with a > laptop computer and no electricity or phones. What is readily > available (hardware-wise) to facilitate this? Any suggestions are > appreciated; I'm guessing some type of sattelite system. I can think of a couple of things; 1) VSATs (Very Small Aperture Terminals) use a .5 to 1 m dish with a 3w PA, and will do voice, ISDN, DS0 and DS1 as well as downlink video. CA Dept of Forestry uses them in emergencies. 2) Imarsat: Small earth stations similar to VSAT, except use lower frequencies. World wide coverage. Very popular with news organizations and disaster relief groups. Will do digital and analog transmission. 3) Cell phones and modems. Many carriers use microwave links to the MTSO, and have backup power. 4) Packet Radio on VHF, UHF, and HF freq's. AX.25 is the most available protocal. Standard land mobile radios can be used. See my earlier note about the FAA's use of PK-232 TNC's for their emergency nets. 5) If your the telco, just haul in a portable C band microwave link and aim it at existing antennas. This is used by Bellsouth in a "DMS-100 on wheels". Three frequencies and two polarizations are available for several thousand VF circuits. 6) For real bandwidth call Alascom :-). 7) Point to point microwave links are available, but two towers or high buildings would be required. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 17:35:45 EDT From: Tom Coradeschi Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET writes: > I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not > been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. For > Are there any folks out there who have experience in creating a new > newsgroup, and are willing to moderate a discussion and run a vote for I'm not sure that this is such a great idea. The propagation delay thru Usenet (due to the nature of the beast) is such that news tends to travel rather slowly. Sure some very well connected sites (anyone hanging off UUNET, for example) will get news quickly, but many of the rest of us are in veritable backwaters. Not really the greatest way to get out timely or critical information. ------------------------------ From: backon@vms.huji.ac.il Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Date: 8 Sep 92 20:35:16 GMT Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem In article , tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) w rites: > Perhaps it's worth bringing this up somehow with an appropriate > organization such as the Red Cross? What'd it take, a 386 box in > their national headquarters to run things from? Probably worth the > money! > [Moderator's Note: Actually, it would be quite easy. If someone wants > to donate the 386 and the required UUCP software, I'd set it up in the > Chicago Red Cross or else my own office. PAT] The National Headquarters of the American Red Cross in Alexandria VA seems to be on the Internet as: red-cross.org If I'm not mistaken, I think there *is* a BITNET/Internet moderated list on network emergency response planning called HELPNET which I think is available from Listserv@ndsuvm1 Josh backon@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL ------------------------------ From: ramrod!chrisc@lmt.mn.org (Chris Cox) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: LaserMaster Technologies, Minneapolis, MN USA Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:57:00 GMT In article rjhawkin@mothra.syr.edu (The Virtual Kid) writes: > Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word > -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:". I believe that he only truly international pronunciation of the '#' character is the sharp sign - as in music. It seems that that is how Sun Microsystems describe it. I'm not saying that they are linguistic experts, mind you! Certainly in REAL English (as opposed to American English) it is NOT a symbol for the word pound. You are correct, however, in stating that it is commonly used to denominate the word number. Chris Cox W0/G4JEC chrisc@ramrod.lmt.mn.org LaserMaster Technologies Tel: (612) 944-6069 7156 Shady Oak Road Fax: (612) 944-5544 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 ----- For mail of a more social nature, please use ----- chrisc@moron.vware.mn.org -or- chrisc@biggus.g4jec.tcman.ampr.org ------------------------------ From: sullivan@warschawski.geom.umn.edu (John M. Sullivan) Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#" Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:05:48 GMT In article rjhawkin@mothra.syr.edu (The Virtual Kid) writes: >> The # sign? The POUND sign! > Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word > -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:". Well, I certainly pronounce it that way, as in "number-include stuh-die-oh dot h", but around here "hash" (for "hash mark") seems quite popular. It is called the "pound sign" because it has been used for centuries as a symbol for pounds avoirdupois (as opposed to pounds sterling). You can probably find it marking the weight of many large shipping boxes. John Sullivan ------------------------------ Date: 08 Sep 92 19:58:43 EDT From: Ben Black <76672.2564@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Help With Motorola Advisor If you can't find help locally, try the Broadcast Professionals forum on Compuserve. There is quite a bit of message traffic there about pagers, plus the man who designed many of Motorola's paging products hangs out there. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 05:02 GMT From: Guy J. Sherr <0004322955@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes Bell Atlantic has had Remote Call Forwarding in Maryland (that's C&P of Maryland) for quite some time. Since I am a resident of DC though, it was not offered to me until this month. In this neck of the woods, it runs $.74/month more than regular Call Forward and the two services are mutually exclusive. To get it, I broke up the service package that included forwarding to get this product (it is known as Ultra Call Forward here). It is something of a nuisance to have to dial a ten digit number, a four digit PIN, 72# and the target number when I am at home. It does not ring the new station, and it works right away. Also, there is a different access number if I am calling in long distance. In this area, it is getting really hard to know which is which before I get a bill ... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 13:01:06 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code? Most of the 516 area (Long Island, NY) and part of 914 (Westchester County, NY) currently don't require the leading 1 in front of an area code, nor does at least the San Jose part of area 408 in California. I guess this would change later in preparation for NNX area codes. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #698 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11436; 11 Sep 92 2:23 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12600 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:11:20 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13998 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:11:11 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:11:11 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209110511.AA13998@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #699 TELECOM Digest Fri, 11 Sep 92 00:11:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 699 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson FCC Requests Additional Comments on Docket 89-79 (Mike Riddle) I-Net Awarded Air Force Contract (Montgomery Gazette via Paul Robinson) Vermont Payphones (Tony Harminc) ISDN Messaging and Answering Demonstration (Steve Rogers) X.25 Communication With EPABX (Vishwas Joglekar) Variations in Dialing Standards (Richard Cox) Need List of Future 210-NXX Codes (Alan Toscano) GTE Community Involvement (Steven Lichter) Telepath Problem (Paul Botts) Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes? (Bohdan Tashchuk) Automated Calls (Ben Black) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 07:14:26 CST From: Mike.Riddle@ivgate.omahug.org (Mike Riddle) Subject: FCC Requests Additional Comments on Docket 89-79 Reply-To: mike.riddle%inns@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE The FCC has taken some action to reconsider some aspects of the access charge pricing issue within its Open Network Architecture proceedings. Here's a copy of the press release from the FCC: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS SOLICITED WITH RESPECT TO ISSUES RAISED IN PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE PART 69/ONA ORDER CC DOCKET 89-79 Released: August 14, 1992 "On July 16, 1992, the Commission adopted a Memorandum Opinion & Order on Second Further Reconsideration, FCC 92-325, released Aug. 6, 1992. That decision addressed the Docket 87-313 price cap new services test issues raised in petitions for reconsideration of the Part 69/ONA Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4524 (1991). It did not address the other issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration of the Part 69/ONA Order. These issues include the pricing standard for basic service elements (BSEs), the elimination of bundled feature groups, and maintenance of the status quo with respect to access charge treatment of enhanced service providers (ESPs). Before acting on the remaining issues raised by the petitions for reconsideration, we give parties an opportunity to update the record in light of intervening events, such as the effectiveness of federal ONA tariffs. "Interested parties should file comments on the request by September 30, 1992, and reply comments by October 30, 1992, with the Secretary, FCC, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. A copy should also be sent to Mark S. Nadel, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC, Room 544, 1919 M St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554, and to the Commission's contractor for public service records duplication: Downtown Copy Center, 1114 21st Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036. Copies of the petitions can be obtained from the Downtown Copy Center at (202) 452-1422. "We will treat this proceeding as non-restricted for purposes of the Commission's ex parte rules. See generally, 47 C.F.R. 1.1200- 1.1216. For further information contact Mark Nadel, Policy and Program Planning Division of the Common Carrier Bureau, at (202) 632- 6363. "- F C C -" My comments: The Open Network Architecture Basic Service Element Pricing scheme, adopted on July 11, 1991, as part of docket 89-79, will require usage-based access charges be imposed on the enhanced service providers using the new, unbundled, "basic service elements" of open network architecture. This will be a per-minute charge that is paid by the ESP to the LEC and will not be any form of a "tax" levied directly upon the end user. ESP's are folks like GEnie, Compuserve, PC Pursuit, and Starlink, to name the ones the common modem user might be concerned with. Since these companies are in business to make money, the increased access charge will be ultimately passed on to the end user -- the public. But again, it's /not/ a tax, and it doesn't go to the government. It is a federally mandated charge that goes to the local exchange carrier. My personal assessment is that this change is ill-conceived and should not be implemented. As long as the charge is cost-based, the LEC is going to do okay financially, and the public will not be gouged. But it seems to me that the FCC, particularly with its relaxation of the accounting rules in several "ONA price cap" decisions over the last year, has demonstrated its fondness for the telcos rather than the public. While it is true that the "current exemption for ESPs has been retained," that is, the ESPs may continue to use the bundled feature groups to buy the services they need and not pay increased charges, an obscure part of the 1991 ruling requires "feature groups to be eliminated at a future date." When that future date arrives, the ESPs will be forced to buy the Basic Service Elements they need, at a much higher price, which will be passed on to consumers. The impact will also be to non-modem users, since these charges affect data systems used a lot more widely than might be imagined. For example, the credit card verification terminals use data-packet networks that involve local dial-ins, and thus will incur the higher charges. Exactly how that charge will be distributed among the carriers, the credit card companies, the service bureaus, and the stores is open to conjecture, but you're probably safe in assuming the consumer will hold the bag when it's all over. Mike inns.omahug.org +1 402 593 1192 (1:285/27.0) ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 18:33:32 EDT Subject: I-Net Awarded Air Force Contract Montgomery County [Maryland] {Gazette}, Sept 9, 1992 page A-40 By Bill Borda, Staff Writer Bethesda-based I-NET, Inc. has won a contract worth nearly $40 million from the Air Force for telecommunications and computer services. The contract call for I-NET "to enhance (the Air Force's) telecommunications systems through computer applcations," said Jeff Rosolio, the company's vice president of administration. Rosolio said the contract covers a broad range of services, including systems engineering, technical, logistic and management services. The contract calls for I-NET to do work on the telecommunication systems at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., Gunter Air Force Base, Ala., and Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., he said. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 20:30:10 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Vermont Payphones I spent a few very pleasant days of vacation in Vermont, and noticed a couple of curious things making calls from payphones: 1) I didn't see a single COCOT. Are they illegal in the state? 2) A very high proportion of NETel payphones had rotary dials. Tone service was clearly available to residence and business customers, but I didn't see a single payphone with keypad in Stowe or surrounds. 3) The NETel payphones seem to have several different default LD carriers. I would have thought the LEC would sign up with a single carrier for all its phones. Sometimes the default was AT&T for both 1+ and 0+ calls; in other cases it was AT&T for 1+ and (say) USSprint for 0+. 4) While making a calling card call from one of the rotary dial phones with USSprint as default, I had some problems: I dialed 0 416 745-xxxx, waited *forever* (i.e. 20-25 seconds :-) ), got a Sprint message asking me to key in my calling card number or hit 0 for an operator, waited *forever* for the timeout, got the Sprint operator who seemed slightly surprised that all I wanted to do was make a calling card call, gave the card number to him, waited a short *forever* (about 10 seconds), he said "there -- just validating your card, it's going through now", and I was dumped into a ringing tone followed by "the card number you have entered was not valid -- please try again". Grump! Of course by this time the operator was long gone, and I had no way of rekeying the number. I started the whole thing again, this time told the operator what had happened and asked him if my Bell Canada calling card (old format number) should work and to please stay on the line until validation. He said it should, and he would. He didn't, and it didn't. I dialed 10288, told AT&T all about it, and was connected in a few seconds. So who was right? Should my Bell card number work with Sprint? Do US LEC cards work with Sprint ? Tony H. ------------------------------ From: srogers@tad.eds.com (Steve Rogers) Subject: ISDN Messaging and Answering Demonstration Organization: EDS Technology Architecture, Dallas Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:38:10 GMT [Received in the mail, and passed along to the Digest.] Dear Telecommunications and Messaging Industry Professionals: We are pleased to invite you to attend the October 28, 1992 meeting of the North American ISDN Users' Forum (NIUF) Messaging and Answering Group. This meeting is part of the October 26-30, 1992 NIUF being held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Gaithersburg, Maryland. The NIUF has created a strong user voice in the implementation of geographically consistent ISDN and ISDN applications and has helped to ensure that the emerging ISDN environment meets users' application needs. More specifically, the NIUF Messaging and Answering Group focuses on how messaging and answering applications can be realized in an ISDN environment. Applications include defining ISDN interfaces for Voice Mail, Electronic Mail and Fax Mail, Transparent Networking of Voice Mail Systems (VMS), Centralized VMS, Unified Message Retrieval, and Unified Message Notification. At this meeting you will have an opportunity to preview a prototype ISDN application which provides an integrated desktop, including a single user interface for notification and retrieval of voice, email and fax messages. This service demonstrates functionalities addressed in the following NIUF applications: Unified Message Retrieval (Application #160009.0) and Unified Message Notification (Application #810035.0). Included as one of the TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92) applications, this service is being developed specifically for use with standardized ISDN utilizing X.25 packet messaging over the ISDN D-channel. TRIP '92 will bring together members of the telecommunications industry to showcase real life uses of ISDN and the national scope of the ISDN network. We encourage participation from messaging vendors, enhanced service providers, RBOCs, and businesses with their own messaging needs. With your involvement, we can make these and other ISDN applications a reality. For more information about the North American ISDN Users' Forum and registration material, please contact Dawn Hoffman, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Building 223, Room B364, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, at 301-975-2937. Sincerely, Glenn Ehley, Siemens Stromberg-Carlson Chair, NIUF ISDN Implementors' Workshop --------------- Steve Rogers srogers@tad.eds.com DS Dallas, Texas ------------------------------ From: vishwas@cse.iitb.ernet.in (Vishwas Joglekar) Subject: X.25 Communication With EPABX Organization: Department of Computer Science,IIT, Bombay Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 12:51:11 GMT I am working on some data communication project. We have Oki iox 1200 EPABX I would like to know how to use this exchange in getting X.25 network connectivity. We also have Digital Multi Key Telephone Instrument (MKT DTE-II BE) which has an RS 232 port. Please mail to me directly. I will summarise. Thanks in advance. Vishwas Joglekar I.I.T. Powai, Bombay 400 076. India. Internet : vishwas@cse.iitb.ernet.in ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 15:43 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Variations in Dialing Standards Reply-To: mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com writes: >> What about pulse dial? Well, yes, pretty much the same all over the world >> New Zealand and Sweden being exceptions. There is a difference in the >> make break ratio, but a good modem can change this. Don't forget that the digit mapping (number of LD pulses versus number keyed or dialled, does vary. In New Zealand if you DIAL 7, the phone sends THREE disconnects. In some other countries it would send EIGHT! The work around is to "translate" the digits before you ATD them. Richard Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 222 747111 Fax: +44 222 711111 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ From: atoscano@attmail.com Date: 10 Sep 92 20:03:21 GMT Subject: Need List of Future 210-NXX Codes Does anyone have a list of NXX codes which will be making the move from NPA 512 to 210, later this fall? I've made several phone calls to Southwestern Bell, but haven't yet found anyone with an "official" list of prefixes. They only seem to have a list of cities. With the split only two months away, I would think a list of prefixes should be available by now. (Perhaps an automated 800 number like Illinois Bell had for the 312/708 split.) If any reader has such a list, or knows where I might obtain one, please send email to: . A Alan Toscano Voice: +1 713 216 6616 AT&T Mail: atoscano CIS: 73300,217 ELN: 62306750 ------------------------------ From: steven@alchemy.uucp Date: 10 Sep 92 20:36:00 UT Subject: GTE Community Involvment Well Mr. Higdon you failed to check your facts on that one. For years GTE has supplied its people to work with the LA Raiders on its Food Day game. Each year well over 500 GTE people are at the GTE sponsered GTE West Golf Classic which is used to support a shelter for battered wives. It sponsers Public TV programs and many other local community events in its service areas. If you were to contact your area public affairs office they could tell you more. We were also involved with over 1000 volunteers in the 1984 Olympics in LA. We were at the Super Bowl in Pasadena and will be there again for public service. 'GTE People' is not very well known. It is the volunteer group over 1500 strong within the company volunteering when needed. Maybe we should blow our horns more often, but we are more interested in just doing our community service and not caring if anyone really knows about it since we do and that is all that really counts. Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif COEI Mad Dog (Steven) Sysop: Apple Elite II -- an Ogg-Net BBS UUCP: steven@alchemy.UUCP (714) 359-5338 1200-2400 bps 8N1 ------------------------------ From: prb@chinet.chi.il.us (Paul Botts) Subject: Telepath Problem Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:29:57 GMT My new Gateway 2000 Telepath fax/modem works fine except for one big problem: I can't get it to work with software (games) or bbs's that don't use the data compression and error-correction protocols (MNP5, v.42, and etc.). The software and bbs in question both work just fine with my generic el cheapo 2400 internal modem, and with the old Hayes 2400 external at the office. But they won't work with the Telepath. The guy that runs the BBS said I need to turn off the datacompression and error correction stuff, but I can't find a way to do it. I've had long conversations with Gateway, and they've suggested different initialization strings to use, but they haven't worked (one of them actually disabled the damn thing altogether! The other just didn't change anything). My comm software, by the way, is Crosstalk for Windows, which has no provisions to accomplish this, either. Haven't any of these people ever heard of "backward compatibility"? Am I just out of luck? Do I have to waste a second slot on the old modem, just to communicate with this BBS and software and anybody else not using the modern protocols??? Help! Any informed input MOST welcome! Paul Botts prb@chinet.chi.il.us ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 16:35:48 -0700 From: sequent!islabs!fasttech!zeke@uunet.UU.NET (Bohdan Tashchuk) Subject: Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes? Several recent messages have mentioned there will soon be a change from three-digit to four-digit long distance carrier identification codes. Why is this change necessary? I've only ever had a use for three different codes: 10222, 10288, and 10333. I'm sure that sophisticated users need many more than this, but are four digits really necessary? Is there a reluctance to re-use old codes freed up because of mergers, bankruptcy, etc? How soon will this change occur? Will it be in an upward-compatible fashion? Will I still be able to dial 10ATT when I need to avoid AOS scum? ------------------------------ Date: 10 Sep 92 19:58:38 EDT From: Ben Black <76672.2564@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Automated Calls Since you're directing the teleslime toward the DC cellular prefix, why not word the message like this ... "I am an automated message delivery service. I am calling you today to solicit your support for ___________ legislation. If you are a member of the House, press 1. If you belong to the Senate, press 2." Ben Black ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #699 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14172; 11 Sep 92 4:09 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18990 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:44:57 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22260 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:44:47 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:44:47 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209110644.AA22260@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #700 TELECOM Digest Fri, 11 Sep 92 01:44:52 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 700 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Contel and Spanish (United Press International / LANTRA via Jeff Garber) New AT&T Fax Mailbox (dquist@ben3b01.attmail.com) Develswitch RS232 Connectivity Product (Ben Armstrong) Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere? (Simon Streltsov) USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? (Andrew Burt) Here We Go Again ;( (Jack Winslade) Leased Line From Hell (Pat Turner) SONET Rings (Butch DeLaVega) Cellular Frequencies (Jeff Garber) Need Information on NEC "Electra 616" KSU (Jim Miller) Telephone Radio Link Wanted (olsen@eos.ll.mit.edu) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 03:56 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: Contel and Spanish I saw the following article in the LANTRA list, where topics relating to natural language translation are discussed, and I thought the article would be of interest to TELECOM Digest readers. Begin posted article: From UPI: Contel Agrees to Change Spanish Language Requirement By WILLIAM D. MURRAY SAN FRANCISCO (UPI) _ Contel of California Inc., which provides phone service to the Central Valley, agreed Monday to change its practice of forcing Hispanic workers to use their Spanish language skills on the job. The announcement ended years of litigation over the policy that forced Hispanic customer service representatives to speak Spanish, despite the fact that many were American-born and had limited bilingual skills. "This settlement takes a major step towards ending discrimination against Hispanic workers," said Morton Bahr, president of the Communications Workers of America, the union that pressed the suit. "By forcing Hispanic employees to use Spanish, Contel got many benefits while subjecting the workers to discriminatory burdens on the job." Anna Esqueda, one of the five women named as plaintiffs in the suit, said she felt embarassed when explaining services because of her limited Spanish skills. "I knew that I couldn't adequately explain the service choices and so did Contel," the American-born Esqueda said. "I tried my best, but if it had not been for the mandatory language policy and my being Mexican, I would never have been placed in this embarassing position." Esqueda said when she took the job with Contel, she was not informed that she would have to speak Spanish. "I wasn't ever told when I was applying for the job that I would have to speak Spanish," she said. "And even though we were told to speak Spanish on the phone, the company did not allow us to speak Spanish to each other." The latter was the focal point of the CWA lawsuit, which was filed in September, 1990. "Without being told when hired that they had to provide translation, without receiving any training, our members would be pulled away from their work to assist customers who did not speak English," said CWA District 9 Vice President Janice Wood. "To add insult to injury, Contel not only didn't pay them for doing special work, they penalized them for making fewer calls." The consent decree signed by U.S. District Judge Ronald Whyte also listed a set of standards that Contel had agreed to follow under the direction of the court for the next three years, including the posting of jobs that are specifically designated for Spanish-speaking customer service representatives and training classes in bilingual skills. However, the decree did not list monetary compensation for the five women plantiffs. When asked, attornies for the women said they could not comment on that aspect of the case. The CWA said compensation for future use of Spanish on the job would likely be written into any new collective bargainning agreement. Esteban Lizardo, the Director of Language Rights for the Mexican- American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said the decree could set a precedent within the state. "This happens over and over in a number of companies in California," Lizardo said. "Hispanic workers are forced to speak Spanish simply because of their nationality and are not compensated for it. This could set a precedent within this state and end this practice." Contel could not be reached for comment. End posted article. Perhaps Contel will do what Pacific Bell has done and start a translation center. If a business office representative or operator gets a non-English speaking customer on the line, they conference in the translation center where representatives are specifically hired to interpret (it's ALL they do ALL day long). Jeff Garber My opinions are just that. ------------------------------ From: dquist@ben3b01.attmail.com Date: 10 Sep 92 12:13:21 GMT Subject: New AT&T Fax Mailbox I thought this may be of some interest to TELECOM Digest readers. Dave NEW AT&T CALLING CARD FEATURE *****PRESS RELEASE***** FOR RELEASE WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1992 BASKING RIDEGE, NJ -- AT&T today announced AT&T Fax Mailbox, a new service that will allow travelers to receive faxes whenever and wherever they travel. With AT&T Fax Mailbox any AT&T cardholder can establish a mailbox number to which faxes can be sent at any time and stored up to eight days. Like voicemail, the mailbox is personalized with the owner's name, assuring senders that they've reached the right party. In addition, senders can leave a 45-second voice memo along with each fax. Mailbox owners can access thier messages via an 800 number from any touchtone phone or fax machine by inputting their AT&T Calling Card number or AT&T Universal Card calling card number. There is no monthly subscribtion fee for maintaining a mailbox, enabling customers to pay for this service as they use it. The cost to receive a domestic fax is $.70 per page; each voice memo is $.35; and all charges are billed to the AT&T card. "Sending and receiving faxes while on the road have become almost as common as calling the office, and now AT&T makes it almost as easy," said Lila Goldstein, AT&T Market Manager, Fax Mailbox. "When business travelers give their AT&T Fax Mailbox number to their clients or employees, they can selectively retrieve their faxes at their convenience and in a confidential manner. They pick the time and the place, and time zone differences no longer matter. In addition, people sending business travelers faxes no longer have to be concerned with detailed itineraries to ensure that materials get to the right place at the right time." AT&T Fax Mailbox customers are able to scan messages and determine when a fax was sent and the number of pages. They can retrieve the fax immediately, send it to a fax machine in another location, save it for a later time or delete it. In addition, most customers with pagers can be "beeped" at no charge, when faxes come through to their mailbox. International travelers also can take advantage of AT&T Fax Mailbox by using AT&T's USADirect (R) Service. If a customer is accessing the mailbox from a non-U.S. location, he or she pays USADirect charges, the fax charge of $.70 per page printed or directed to another fax located in the U.S. and $.35 for each voice note. If an international user directs the fax to another international location, the charges will include USADirect costs as well as international fax charges, which range form &.70 to $3.70 per page. Customers will receive a separate bill from AT&T for Fax Mailbox charges. People interested in signing up for this service can call 1-800-446-2452. ------------------------------ From: Ben Armstrong Subject: Develswitch RS232 Connectivity Product Date: 10 Sep 92 14:40:40 AST Organization: Dymaxion Research Limited, NS, Canada Is anyone out there still using a Develswitch (manufactured by Develcom Electronics)? For those not 'in the know' the Develswitch is an RS232 connectivity product. We have a five-shelf unit, which when fully populated with boards could handle up to around 256 RS232 connections. We want to know if there are any remaining in production as we are considering replacing ours. Please respond via E-Mail to RR@dymaxion.ns.ca or call the number below and ask for Rod Regier (pronounced re-GEER). Ben Armstrong, Software Development bus: (902)422-1973 Dymaxion Research Ltd., fax: (902)421-1267 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2 Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca ------------------------------ From: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov) Subject: Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere? Date: 10 Sep 92 13:53:09 GMT Reply-To: simon1@bass.bu.edu (Simon Streltsov) Organization: Boston University I'm looking for a service; someone who can receive my fax and route it to me by e-mail as a TIFF file or after running a character recognition program. I saw sometime ago someone on panix(?) was offering it, but I was unable to find a reference. Please, e-mail, I'll summarize. Simon Streltsov, Boston University simon1@bass.bu.edu ------------------------------ From: aburt@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (Andrew Burt) Subject: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 16:02:52 GMT I'd like to talk to someone at USWest about this deal I've been reading about in the paper, some sort of on-line directory / cooperative thing with the French -- can someone suggest a contact at USWest I could talk to who's involved in this? Today I just read in the {Rocky Mt. News} that it will be $15/month + $.15/minute for -- are you ready -- nothing more than an on-line phonebook. (You get software, or for $300 flat or $12/month more, a simple terminal.) Supposedly just unveiled for Minneapolis. Excuse me, but have we entered the 1970's yet? Unless people are awfully gullible (I hope not), or this is a whole lot better than it sounds (I hope so), this ain't gonna fly. Reason #1: Maybe at $.50/month it would work. Geez, I pay $14/month for one phone line! Your average person is not going to shell out this much when phone books are virtually free (and mostly easier to use). How often do you REALLY look things up in the phone book or call directory assistance? If it were worth $.10 to look something up (about what it's worth to me on-line), this implies I need to look up 150 items a month. And if one search takes a couple minutes (to wade through the clunky menus) this is already at $.30 a search. If I use this "a lot" and look up 100 items a month, I'm looking at $45/month for this! Fubar. Reason #2: Services that DO get away with charging $15/month offer one whale of a lot more, e.g., even lowly old Prodigy is a better deal. I'd sooner spend my bucks on Compu$erve. (And if you've followed my posting history, you know I think they charge too much, considering how much is available on the Internet for much less, e.g., via Nyx for $0, or CSN at $2/hr.) [Let me admit my prejudice here is that information should be and can be cheaply (if not freely) accessible; and that information access is a necessity, not a luxury.] Reason #3: Videotex. Blech! I think MS-windows and X have proven that even non-computer-geeks can read decently small size fonts on screens; we don't need to regress to the middle-ages here with 40 character wide screens (which the picture showed; or is it 32?). (As for the "transmission speed" argument, I'd rather it be just a straight ASCII text interface; either that, or use it as grounds to justify ISDN for homes.) Reason #4: Another Propietary Program. Presumably we won't be able to dial in with Procomm, or telnet in via the internet. Bag it right there. It'll be too limited for real use (as they always are), buggy, clunky ... Reason #5: Limited access. How are folks in LA going to look up my phone number in Denver? They can telnet or dial into our public library card catalog for free, mind you. [telnet pac.carl.org] My recommendations are: 1) Make it free initially, raise to $.50/month, even $1/month later. Forget any hopes of selling it for more than 1/10th the price of a phone line. 2) Use modern methods of connection, such as telnet or a simple dialup; or use X. If you want to offer videotex, offer the others first. 3) Find some competent people who know how existing services work, especially the internet; I'm guessing by the choice of videotex and pricing that someone involved in this is highly incompetent. Ok, flames on ... Andrew Burt aburt@du.edu [Moderator's Note: Actually, you are not the only person with some serious questions/complaints about this service. By sheer coincidence I received another article on the same topic today from Jack Winslade and it appears next. I'm sure to get REplies and will run them over the weekend as space permits. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 23:02:46 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Here We Go Again :-( Reply-To: jsw@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha Well, gang, it's HWGA time. Will U.S West EVER Learn ?? Tonight, one of the stories on TV news (KETV, ABC affilliate) was US West starting Yet Another electronic yellow pages service (with other information services coming Real Soon Now) in Minneapolis. Yes, they are using that Minitel 'High-tech French method'. The demo looked like the resolution of an Atari 2600 video game. Here's the good part. There's a $.15 per minute charge to use the service. IMAO, I can't see why anyone would pay a per-minute charge to look up info on a system when they can simply flip through the good (??) old-fashioned tree-wasting, bicep-building, landfill-clogging yellow pages, now available in two competing editions. I sure wish Ma Bell would cure herself of this case of anal-cranial inversion and realize that it would be MORE PROFITABLE in the long run to offer the service to consumers for free and save the money/trees/effort it takes to print and distribute directories. (It must be at least a couple of bucks each for something the size of Omaha Metro. Anyone know for sure ??) For some reason, I can't imagine people are gonna beat down the doors of US West in anxious attempts to use this service. Good day. JSW [Moderator's Note: Jack, meet Andy Burt ... Andy, meet Jack! Maybe the two of you can start something going and convince USWest of the error of its ways ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 20:12 EDT Reply-To: turner@Dixie.COM Subject: Leased Line from Hell The following are notes concerning the local exchange carrier's portion of several leased lines in TN. Three of the lines were AT&T's and four MCI's. AT&T tended to pressure SCB to fix the problem; MCI wasn't quite as aqgressive. AT&T notified the customer about the problem, who then alerted MCI. Anyway, the names of the customer and of the contractors have been deleted. Day 1: at 3:44 PM SCB contractor X was digging a trench to lay new fiber when the ground gave way under the backhoe. The backhoe sank 5' into the sinkhole? and crushed the cable. Cable was back in service at 6:35 PM. Day 2: at 8:20 AM contractor X was digging a trench aproximately one mile farther down the cable route when the backhoe cut the cable. SCB said the the cable was improperly marked (probably a loop of excess cable) at this spot. Cable was back in service at 12:00 noon. 25 of 27 miles of the fiber had been trenched. All work was stopped to allow SCB to remark cable over weekend. Day 6: Contractor X cuts newly marked cable at 2 PM. Line was out for at least 3:55 hours. AT&T and MCI pitch fit. AT&T says hand dig remaining mile. MCI says have SCB personnel on site during any construction. Day 15: Contractor Y cuts same cable in different location at 9:45 AM. Cable was back in service at 2:15 PM. Wonder how much work the first contractor gets these days. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: rgdelav@pbhye.pacbell.com (Butch DeLaVega) Subject: SONET Rings Reply-To: rgdelav@pacbell.com (Butch DeLaVega) Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 23:57:40 GMT Hi, I'm new to this newsgroup and have two questions: 1) Could somebody explain uni-directional and bi-directional SONET rings? 2) What is the relationship between SONET and ATM? Thanks in advance ... Butch DelaVega ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 02:34 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: Cellular Frequencies I ask the following questions with no radio knowledge whatsoever. I understand that cellular frequencies are in the 869-894 MHz range. I also understand that scanners now block this range, but one can hear cellular conversations over the 895-920 MHz range with the cellular user sounding more faint than than the land user (it seems to me that one should be able to hear the RADIO user better with a radio scanner). I'm wondering if it is illegal to listen in on these frequencies. In other words, does the law say it is illegal to listen in on cellular calls, or does it specifically mention 869-894 MHz. Why isn't 895-920 MHz blocked on scanners since you can overhear cellular? Also, why would the party on the other end of a cellular call sound stronger than the cellular user? Jeff Garber My opinions are just that. [Moderator's Note: Actually, cellular is at 824-851 megs and 869-895 megs more or less. The one group is base to cellphone; the other is cellphone to base. In both instances, it is over the airwaves, but the transmission from the base, or tower is going to usually be stronger than the other way around. The cellphone transmits to the tower/base/ landline and the tower/base/landline sends this back to the cellphone along with whatever the (landline) caller is saying. The towers are of course fixed in one location while the cellphones are moving around. If you happen to overhear a frequency used by a tower that is close to you it will always be active, loud and clear. Other frequencies may be for a tower several miles away ... it won't come in as well. In the group which is cellphone to base, you will only hear those that are close to you to start with -- usually loud and clear. Once their signal starts to get weak, they'll shift to another tower and the scanner will start cycling again. One 'problem' (smirk!) reported by people who illegally monitor cellular conversations via their scanner is that one never gets to hear the *entire* conversation from start to finish. The scanner will be cycling -- searching for something -- and lock in on a conversation in progress. As one listener put it, " ... about the time the conversation started to get juicy -- really interesting to listen to -- the vehicle moved out of range and the tower dropped the call, giving it to another tower somewhere. I tried stepping quickly around the band manually, but never could find it. " Ahhh -- too bad! It is illegal to listen to cellular calls, period. It is also quite easy to do the mods required on most scanners with 800 megs capability to bring those frequencies in. Some Radio Shack dealers sell the PRO-34 scanner (my model) with a straight look on their face then on your way out the door hand you a crudely photocopied sheet of paper with pictures of the circuit board telling you to pull diode D-3 and D-4 to recover the full band ... but only to be done when the scanner is being exported outside the USA, of course ... of course! PAT] ------------------------------ From: jmiller@wendy.bowlgreen.oh.us (Jim Miller) Subject: Need Info on NEC "Electra 616" KSU Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 22:36:25 EDT Hello, I am doing some consulting work for a local company that has an "Electra 616" key system manufactured by NEC. This system has the capability for six trunks with eight (I believe) extensions. This KSU was installed by a business that is long gone from the building, therefore there is no documentation of any type to be found. I need to find out why one of the extensions is not allowed to dial out, but is allowed to take inward calls and to use the intercom. Is anyone familiar with this system? If so, could you point me to a source of documentation and/or a supplier of extension sets for it? I believe I saw a system identical to this a while ago at a flea market with a GTE logo on it; maybe other companies repackage the 616 and sell it as their own. Any help you could provide would be much appreciated. Jim Miller jmiller@wendy.bowlgreen.oh.us ------------------------------ Subject: Telephone Radio Link Wanted Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 23:24:12 -0400 From: olsen@eos.ll.mit.edu I'm looking for a telephone radio link, to provide a telephone link between two houses, one currently with phone service and one without. I want something that works just like a two-conductor cable but is cheaper, over a range of about 3300 feet (1 km). There is a clear line of sight between the two points (over water). Could anyone suggest a way of doing this? (Cellular service is not available.) I can think of three approaches, of varying cost: 1. Buy a consumer-type cordless phone and fit a directional antenna on it. (cheap) 2. Buy a professional system designed for such applications. ($$) 3. Give up and run underwater telephone cable ($$$). I'll be grateful if anyone can give me advice on this or pointers to suppliers of appropriate equipment. Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #700 ******************************