Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05655; 6 Dec 93 6:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13169 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19545 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:06 -0600 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 03:52:06 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312060952.AA19545@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #801 TELECOM Digest Mon, 6 Dec 93 03:52:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 801 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC (Bill Mayhew) Re: CD-ROM Telephone Directory (Ken K.P. Lo) Re: Carrier For 800 Number? (Russ McGuire) Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Erik Ramberg) Re: How Many Cellular Carriers in an Area (John R. Levine) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Matthew Landru) Re: AT&T's New Facility (John J. Butz) Re: AT&T _Required_? (Marshall Levin) Re: Instant Modem Banks (Barton F. Bruce) Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (C. Harald Koch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Sun, 05 Dec 1993 15:01:08 GMT It sounds like just the thing you are looking for is from The Complete PC. There is a product called The Complete Answering Machine as well as a companion product called The Complete Fax Machine. I have had a Complete Answering Machine card for several years. I have an old AT&T 6300 w/o monitor that is dedicated to giving a home to the CAM board. You can connect from your demarcation point to the CAM unit. From the CAM, you can connect all your downstream extensions. If you go off hook for more than five seconds (this is user configurable) without DTMFing or outpulsing, the CAM will automatically disconnect the subscriber loop and start reading you the voice mail menu, giving you the opportunity to key in your mailbox number and password. I've noticed that CAM normally supplies local battery to all the extensions when they are on-hook. The local battery is about 15 volts. I've noticed that my one two-line phone shows the circuit as busy becuase the battery is below the nominal 48 volt on-hook. Unless you have equipment downstream from CAM that guages whether or not the line is busy by sampling the battery voltage, you should not have any troubles. CAM has the ability to support one or multiple mailboxes, which is user-configurable. If you are working with a PBX, you can disallow mailboxes that start with 9 or 0, if necessary. CAM can generate hook flashes and can outpulse or DTMF, so it can do just about anything the big time corporate voicemail systems can do. Namely call forwarding, call transfer, delayed voicemail delivery, etc. One thing CAM will not do is call progess monitoring (at least not in my version). I just blind dials when it does a message forward, then after a delay starts reading your message forward greeting. I really don't care, since I use the message forward to activate my pager. I have a couple of differnet mailboxes set up, so I send a different code to my pager depending on which mailbox received a message. Up to seven CAM boards can be installed in a computer. CAM boards can also daisy chain with a Complete FAX and do automatic routing. I don't know anything about a Complete FAX becuase I don't own one. There are some configuration options in the CAM menu for FAX support. Best of all, it is pretty reasonably priced. I've seen it at the Walmart Sam's Club outlet for about $99. Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu amateur radio 146.58: N8WED ------------------------------ From: KKPLO@ELECTRICAL.watstar.uwaterloo.ca (Ken K.P. Lo) Subject: Re: CD-ROM Telephone Directory Organization: University of Waterloo Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 18:16:32 GMT In article Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544. n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) writes: > Regarding discussion of CD-ROM directories, I have noticed that Bell > Atlantic is now joining the club. BA recently advertised a new > service offering their entire white pages for their seven states on > CD-ROM, with monthly updates available. Do you know how much it costs? Bell Canada here in Ontario and Quebec has one selling for Cdn$10,000, with six bi-monthly updates. Does anyone know why they cost so much? Ken K P Lo S3 Rm 105 Box 460 A Student of University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario (519) 725 - 6332 kkplo@electrical.watstar.uwaterloo.ca ------------------------------ From: Russ McGuire Date: Sun, 5 Dec 93 13:01:26 -0600 Subject: Re: Carrier For 800 Number? In article Gerry Palmer writes: > Is there any way left to easily tell what carrier "owns" a given > 800-number? I'm trying to find out who is carrying 800-950-3535, > and have been unable to get any assistance either my local carrier > (Bell of PA) or my preferred IXC (Sprint). Ideas, anyone? I can easily think of three scenario's: 1. The number currently "belongs" to a company or individual. In this case, I can't imagine why you would care which carrier is being used, unless its your number, and then you would probably know the carrier. 2. A Responsible Organization (RESPORG) has reserved the number. A number can be reserved for up to 60 days in expectation of a certain company or person taking the number. A RESPORG may be a carrier, or may be an individual. If you call any carrier who happens to also be a RESPORG (as most of them are), you can request a certain number. If the number is not in use or reserved, they can get that number for you. If it is reserved, they can tell you which RESPORG has reserved it. 3. The number is not being used and it is not reserved. Any RESPORG/carrier can claim it for any of their customers. Of course, all of this only applies to the US and is only true since 800 portability began earlier this year. Since portability, the 800 number is no longer "owned" by the carrier, but rather by the customer. The customer can move the number between carriers and can even split the traffic for a given number among carriers, based on, for example, percentage, time-of-day, or LATA conditions. Russ McGuire Manager, Product Development WilTel, Inc. russ_mcguire@wiltel.com [Moderator's Note: One thing AT&T is still doing that the FCC is going to make them quit doing before long is reserving numbers for imaginary customers who do not exist. They are doing this with 'good' numbners they want to hang on to. I've tried to get 800 numbers for customers of my service only to have the RESPORG tell me that the number 'belongs to' AT&T. When you dial it, it goes to intercept, and no actual customer ever seems to show up, yet the number keeps getting reserved over and over for sixty days at a time. I recently talked directly to a staff attorney at the FCC who asked me to call him personally with a list of 800 numbers in this category and I am compiling them now. PAT] ------------------------------ From: erik_ramberg@SMTP.esl.com (Erik Ramberg) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number Date: 5 Dec 1993 22:29:06 GMT Organization: ESL Inc. In article , fish@teal.csn.org (Dave Fish) wrote: > I've got a question on how a cellular telephone's serial number is > used by the cellular telephone system. If I change a cellular > telephone's phone number to that of another phone in that system will > I make calls charged against that phone number? Or does the phone > system "know" about a phone's serial number? > [Moderator's Note: The phone's ESN or Electronic Serial Number is > matched with the phone number assigned and the tower will reject your > call if the two do not correctly match. The exception to this rule -- > and they are few and far between -- is that for a few certain phone > numbers, the tower is told to either ignore discrepancies in the ESN > or not to bother checking at all. What types of cellular phone numbers > are exempt from validation? Administrative numbers used by the cellular > carrier itself in customer service, maintainence and technical support. > They want it so the technician going out on maintainence can grab any > phone handy and take it with him. Don't forget 911. You can't legally block that number. Erik [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it. PAT]n ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 5 Dec 93 14:49 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: How Many Cellular Carriers in an Area Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Ok, as long as we are talking about cell phones, here is a question that > I have not seen answered. I understand that in an area there are two > cellular carriers - wireline and non wireline. However, here in NJ I > see advertisements for more than two carriers. It seems you can buy > service from Cellular One, NYNEX, or Bell Atlantic - hey wait, thats > three. ... Actually the answer is about ten. Here's why: The U.S. is divided up into lots of cellular "markets". There are 306 Metropolitan Service Areas, numbered by population starting with 001 in New York, down to 306 for off-shore Lousiana and Texas (lots of oil rigs.) The rest of the country is divided into Rural Service areas, each containing one or more counties. Each MSA and RSA has two carriers, the A carrier which is not related to the local phone company, and the B carrier which is. In New Jersey, the division is entirely by county. There are five MSA's within New Jersey: 134 Atlantic City (Atlantic, Cape May) 070 Long Branch (Monmouth) 062 New Brunswick (Middlesex) 121 Trenton (Mercer) 228 Vineland/Millville (Cumberland) Four MSA's in adjacent states include New Jersey counties: 001 NYC (Passaic, Bergen, Morris, Essex, Union, Hudson, Somerset) 004 Phila (Gloucester, Camden, Burlington) 058 Allentown (Warren) 069 Wilmington (Salem) The remaining three counties are each an RSA: NJ-1 Hunterdon NJ-2 Ocean NJ-3 Sussex OK, what does this actually mean for who the carriers are? Here's a little chart, explanations below: A B 134 Atlantic City 00267 Comcast Cell One 00250 BAMS 070 Long Branch 00173 Comcast Cell One 00022 NYNEX 062 New Brunswick 00173 Comcast Cell One 00022 NYNEX 121 Trenton 00575 Comcast Cell One 00008 BAMS 228 Vineland/Millville 00583 US Cell 00250 BAMS 001 NYC 00025 McCaw (AT&T) Cell One 00022 NYNEX 004 Phila 00029 Comcast Metrophone 00008 BAMS 058 Allentown 00103 Vanguard Cell One 00008 BAMS 069 Wilmington 00123 Comcast Cell One 00008 BAMS NJ-1 Hunterdon 01487 Comcast Cell One 00250 BAMS NJ-2 Ocean 01489 Ocean Co. Cell 00250 BAMS NJ-3 Sussex 01491 Sussex Cell 00022 BAMS? BAMS is Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems. The five digit numbers are cellular system numbers. If two entries have the same number, they're the same system. In some cases, two systems are operated as one, e.g., it is my impression that BAMS operates systems 00008 and 00250 together. In Sussex Co., the B operator is listed as BAMS even though system 00022 is NYNEX New York City. This is probably correct, since BAMS is a minority owner of system 00022 due to a lot of it being in New Jersey. (It also covers all of NYC, Long Island, Westchester, Putnam, and Rockland counties in New York, probably the largest system in the country.) "Cellular One" is a trademark licensed by McCaw to two-thirds of all of the A carriers in the country. It's purely a marketing thing; there's little relationship among McCaw Cell One, Comcast Cell One, and Vanguard Cell one. McCaw recently sold itself to AT&T, and it seems likely that McCaw will switch to the better known AT&T name, so who knows what will become of the rest of the Cell One licensees, maybe they'll sell the name to someone else. So I see ten different carriers in New Jersey. Each of them signs up lots of phone stores in their areas to act as agent for them selling equipment and service (`Bud's Fresh Bait and Cellular Phone'.) In each area, there are indeed only two carriers, but since New Jersey has so many areas near each other, you'll be hearing lots and lots of competing ads. Finally, you'll often find various special roaming arrangements among nearby carriers. I don't know about New Jersey, but for example, here in Boston, I have service with NYNEX, but if I use my phone in Contel territory in Vermont, I pay 52 cents/min rather than the standard roaming rate of 85 cents/min plus $3/day. Some systems even have `home roaming' plans where in some roamer areas you pay the same rate as in your home system. If there is home roaming available, it can be cheaper to get a phone from a neighboring system than at home. It looks like I'd have gotten better rates here in Boston if I'd gotten my phone in Montpelier VT because Contel charges home roaming rates for Boston. On the other hand, my phone would then have a Vermont number, and Contel just sold their Vermont properties to NYNEX who will doubtless fix that little loophole. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 5 Dec 1993 23:25:31 GMT Organization: Project SAVE International In article zeta@tcscs.com (Gregory Youngblood) writes: > [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but > they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence > users they can't. PAT] Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800 number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems. But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump quarters in.) I've contacted both AT&T and Sprint about this. AT&T's response is that they are not responsible for blocking the calls, and that I should talk to the university. (The university's phone "experts", BTW, respond with "what's 10XXX?") Sprint replies with a noncommittal "we'll look into it." I've basically given up. ACUS rates are not exorbitant, and unlike the previous writer's description, AU does not take any markup at all. But I'm offering the information in case anyone wants to fight it. Matthew B. Landry President of Project SAVE mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu [Moderator's Note: Next time they ask you 'what is 10xxx?' tell them to quit talking so stupid and pretending like they don't know anything. Tell them if they don't know what 10xxx is, they have no business operating a large system like that. If you ask, the FCC will send you a copy of the rules; make copies of what you are sent and give it to the 'telecom experts' with a note attached short and sweet and to the point: "How far are you going to push this? Will it have to go to litigation?" See what their answer is to that. I'd also go right on around them to the VP of telecommunications for the University or whatever the person's title is and give them a copy also. Also, make sure the campus newspaper is aware of it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 05 Dec 93 15:09:35 EST From: jbutz@hogpa.ho.att.com (John J Butz) Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility Dave Niebuhr writes: > AT&T announced in yesterday's {Newsday} that it will begin laying > fiber optic cable from Shirley, Long Island, New York (one mile from > my home) to France (I forget the place). This cable will travel > underground from the AT&T site to the Great South Bay where it will be > buried in a one-step operation, thence across Fire Island, and on out > to the 30 foot contour. Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to Washington, DC. After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor. On Friday morning, both vessels were docked. However, on the Sunday return trip, only one boat was still in port. Perhaps to Long Island is where the second ship went? I've been sailing on the Great South Bay out of Islip and it looks deep enough to handle an ocean going vessel. Also, the Robert Moses causeway bridge to Fire Island would definitely provide clearance for a fairly tall ship. However, I've been fluke fishing enough times to tell you that most of the Great South Bay is pretty shallow. Dave, perhaps you could go on a recon-mission and let us know if the AT&T ship is there? 8-) > The late G. Marconi (I can't spell his first name :-( ) had his > transmitting station in Rocky Point prior to RCA taking it over. One of my favorite resting spots on my bike loop is Twin Lights Historic Lighthouse, in Highlands, NJ. Since Twin Lights is one of the highest points on the Atlantic seaboard, it was a natural choice as a site for one of the first commercial Marconi radio towers. The site operated as a relay station between ocean going ships and the ship owners in downtown Manhattan (NYC). Legend has it that market speculators would try to intercept the messages received by the relay station and guess what each ship was carrying. Commodities futures could then be purchased while the ships were still several days at sea. When the ships arrived in NYC to deliver their cargo, prices would rise, but those early "insider-traders" would be able to exercise their futures and purchase goods at the lower price. Pretty sneaky. J Butz jbutz@hogpa.att.com AT&T - CCS ------------------------------ From: mlevin@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Marshall Levin) Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_? Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Mon, 06 Dec 93 07:37:11 GMT > [Moderator's Note: No, you have that wrong. No telephone company or > COCOT or Alternate Operator Service (AOS), or reseller of the local > telephone network can force you to place calls via a certain carrier > or deny you the right to use the carrier of your choice (as long as > that carrier wants your business and operates in your area, etc). That > is the law. There is no such law where the *recipient* of a phone call > is concerned. The *recipient* can choose to accept calls from any > carrier, or only the carrier of his choice. Speedway refuses to accept > calls from other than the AT&T network because AT&T gives Speedway a > commission on the traffic they handle. Speedway, as the *recipient* > of the call, has the right to do that if they wish. In other words, > no one is forcing you to use AT&T to call 503-520-2222, but Speedway > says unless you do (call via AT&T) they don't wish to connect with > you since they are being paid by AT&T for the time you spend on line > with them. Regards the [any carrier <=> any traffic] thing you mentioned, > also exempt are 800 numbers since the recipient is the one paying for > the call, and 900 numbers, again since the recipient is the one who > has the billing arrangements with the carrier of choice. PAT] So, theoretically, I could call AT&T, since they are my carrier, and say I don't want to receive any calls placed via another carrier? And then they have to honor this request, and configure their system to stop other calls? Would the subscriber have to pay for such service? Intersting -- when I tried calling speedway via MCI I just got a busy signal -- is this wat the software tells it to do? Where does it get the signal not to accept -- I'm not really clear on how this works technically -- what sort of signaling system is used? Marshall Levin [Moderator's Note: AT&T does not have to do anything of the sort for you unless they find it to their mutual advantage to go along with your plans. It is your job to identify the source and routing of the calls. Let's say you get a huge amount of incoming traffic; umm .. maybe four or five thousand calls per hour; that is a figure which will put you in a good negotiating position with any carrier. Now for every call a carrier hands off to your local telco to be in turn passed on or delivered to you, they have to pay your local telco some amount of money; let's say five cents per minute to use round numbers. Now you go to the various carriers to cut a deal: You say to them instead of paying the local telco five cents per minute, how about if they bring a T-1 right to your POP (or point of presence) and pay you some amount of money instead? Sprint and MCI offer to give you three cents per minute if they can avoid giving the local telco five cents per minute. But AT&T says they'll give you three and a half cents per minute ... okay! Sold to the highest bidder. The carriers all know that at your volume of traffic you are generating a lot of business for them, and they are more than happy to make another penny or two per minute if they can. So you decide AT&T (or Sprint, MCI, take your pick) has the best offer. The selected carrier then programs their switch in such a way that whenever *they* see a call to your number, they pick it off and route it directly to those new wires they installed next to your building. The local telco never sees the calls. In the meantime, if someone calls via some other carrier, that carrier continues to do as always: hand the call to the local telco who in turn delivers it to you normally via your main directory-listed telephone number. So your 'regular' phone will continue to ring off the hook all day and night just as it always has, but you answer those calls with a recorded message *that you program and are responsible for handling* saying something like "I won't talk to you since you did not call via the carrier I chose. Hang up and dial 10-my-code to get through." The only people who change anything is the carrier you selected to handle your calls; they watch for them to come through the network and pluck them off, and hand them to you directly. Everyone else continues to call your regular number and you refuse to deal with them however you wish. Under the law, the carrier you want to use cannot divert traffic from other carriers; all they can do is agree to watch for traffic to you and give it special treatment. Since you see it coming in on special lines, you know it is from them and accept it. As I said early on in this note, unless you have heavy inbound traffic, none of the carriers is going to be interested. It costs them money to have special lines direct to you. If an analysis of your traffic does not demonstrate to the carrier how they can save many, many thousands of dollars per month a few cents at a time, and split it with you so that both of you make money in the process, they are not going to be interested. And if you are handling inbound traffic of several thousand calls per hour, any carrier would love to have an exclusive on it. Even Speedway, with much less traffic per hour (but longer connect times per call) is very lucrative to AT&T. So you would be doing what the carriers cannot do under the law: force people to call a certain way, and it is quite legal as long as you, the recipient make the decision. When the Amoco Oil/Diner's Club Credit Card office was in Chicago many years ago, the Sales Authorization unit was pulling in that kind of traffic on 800 numbers from AT&T. It is unlikely any residence or most businesses would qualify at all, but you never know these days, given all the changes in the industry. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Barton.Bruce@camb.com Subject: Re: Instant Modem Banks Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society Date: 05 Dec 93 16:23:38 -0500 Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) writes: > In article Martin McCormick datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu> writes: >> In recent postings, several people told of modem banks which can >> be attached directly to a T1 and use DSP to simulate 24 dial-up modems. There are two vendors in this area. Primary Access has been 'it' for years, and their original hardware only included internal x.25 PAD functionality. They do support all sorts of T1 signalling including FG-B and FG-D. They have noticed the demand for something other than x.25, and you should check with them. They probably have product by now. USR is developing a similar product, but allows front-ending with whatever service is currently cheapest. If POTS analog lines make most $ sense, use them. When telco wakes up, swap ONLY the front end card(s) and go to T1. Primary Access does 20 T1s per full RACK. USR does 2 T1s in either 5 1/4 or maybe 7" of rack space (I forget which). USR initially has (yuk) x.25 simply because a LARGE customer needing it was funding development. They are painfully aware that most everyone else calling has comments too rude to repeat about x.25. They may be foolish enough to delay time to market by building the terminal server TOTALLY themselves, or may 'buy' someone's basic design and s/w and build a card to run in their shelf on their busses. Fear/Pride in using NIH components can be very costly. Even DEC uses someone else's LAT code in their latest terminal servers!! And DEC (and about everyone else) is smart enough to use a lot of 'cisco' in their HUB pluggable routers. So we will soon see how smart/stupid USR really is. USR claims that at about $1,000. per port (list -- discounts available, of course) they will be 1/2 the Primary Access price. YUK!! This market needs some more players. You may find that buying s USED Mitel SX200D PBX with T1 cards and ONS line cards and a recent Generic that supports T1 gets you from T1s to pots analog and into a bank of analog modems for less than a used channel bank. But check carefully in "Telcom Gear" because there have been some used channel banks loaded with FXS cards going for very low prices. Rack these up with somthing like piles of ZyXEL 1496E (not even the + ones) and you get a LOT for the $ albeit with a LOT of cables and potential labor and support hassles -- but student labor is inexpensive at .edu sites ... ------------------------------ From: C. Harald Koch Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized Organization: Alias Research, Inc., Toronto ON Canada Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1993 06:07:27 GMT In Mathew Englander writes: > This is news to me. Does this mean that residents of Thornhill, St. > Catharines, etc. can expect to get calls from people trying to phone > Mexicans? > [Moderator's Note: Well, I don't think so unless the caller is using a > very, very old areacode map/index. How long has the code been gone > where Mexico is concerned? Five years perhaps ... PAT] Many Mexican businesses are *still* publishing 905 on letter-head and business cards. So yes, people in the new 905 area code will probably get phone calls destined for people in Mexico ... C. Harald Koch, Network Analyst Alias Research Inc. Toronto, ON chk@alias.com chk@utcc.utoronto.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #801 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa18408; 7 Dec 93 17:45 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11008 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14673 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:05 -0600 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:10:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312072010.AA14673@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #802 TELECOM Digest Tue, 7 Dec 93 14:10:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 802 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Patrick K. Simpson) '94 Conference on Mobile and Personal Communication Systems (J-P. Gaspoz) International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Stewart Fist) Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Alex Cena) Research Assistantship - High Speed Wireless Networking (Joseph B. Evans) MCI on the Move (Vancouver Sun via Sid Shniad) My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Marc Sira) Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (David Gast) 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Gary Huntress) TDD Software Wanted (Michael A. Hoffhinus) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Ron Richolson) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Rich Mintz) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Curtis Bohl) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: xm8@sdcc12.ucsd.edu (patrick k. simpson) Subject: World Congress on Computational Intelligence Date: 7 Dec 93 03:52:47 GMT CALL FOR PAPERS Extended Deadline for Papers December 31, 1993 For the First Time ... The 3 Most Exciting Technologies in Engineering Today Under One Roof Presenting the IEEE WORLD CONGRESS ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ICNN FUZZ-IEEE EC IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation 3 Conferences ... 1 Great Location ... 1 Inclusive Registration PLUS ... A Special Symposium Combining the Interests of All 3 Meetings into a Single Comprehensive Forum June 26 - July 2, 1994 Walt Disney World Dolphin Hotel Orlando, Florida IEEE WORLD CONGRESS ON COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE Orlando, Florida, June 26-July 2, 1994 Sponsored by the IEEE Neural Networks Council The 1994 IEEE World Congress on Computational intelligence consists of three IEEE International Conferences: The Third IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, and The IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation. The registration fee for the Congress covers admission to all three of the Conferences as well as to a special five- day Symposium entitled "Computational Intelligence: Imitating Life." This Symposium will be held Monday, June 27, through Friday, July 1, 10:20 am to 12:40 pm. SPECIAL SYMPOSIUM COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: IMITATING LIFE THE SYMPOSIUM addresses critical and emerging technologies and issues relating to biologically, psychologically, and linguistically motivated models that exhibit various facets of computational intelligence. The paradigms discussed include learning, reasoning, evolution, search, and optimization each of which often uses life imitating metaphors for guiding model building. Machine learning from data, neural and fuzzy information processing, approximate reasoning, and evolutionary computation are examples of computational intelli- gence approaches addressed by Symposium speakers. The Symposium provides a unique forum for cross-fertilization between the areas of neural networks, fuzzy logic, and evolutionary computing. SYMPOSIUM presentations are explicitly targeted toward the identification of challenges, issues, and potential solutions for problems arising in computa- tional intelligence. THE SYMPOSIUM consists of 3 public lectures, 10 plenary talks, and 30 mini- symposia presentations, covering Neural Networks (21), Fuzzy Logic (13), and Evolutionary Computation (9). Contributions include recent research that has implications for further progress, state-of-the-art reviews, and discussions of important applications in fields such as biology, signal and imaging processing, robotics and control. Presenters have been chosen from academia and industry and represent the leaders in their fields from throughout the world. THE SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS "Computational Intelligence: Imitating Life," will be published and available at the Congress for each participant. Proceedings will later be distributed by the IEEE Press. INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL THREE CONFERENCES Papers must be received by December 31, 1993 Papers will be reviewed by senior researchers in the field, and all authors will be informed of the decisions at the end of the review process. All accepted papers will be published in the Conference Proceedings. Please submit the following: - Send one original and five copies of the paper. Six total. - Papers must be camera ready on 8 1/2 x 11 white paper, two-column format in Times or similar font style, 10 points or larger with one inch margins on all four sides. - Do not fold or staple the original camera-ready copy. - Four pages are encouraged, however, the paper must not exceed six pages, including figures, tables, and references. Papers over six pages will not be considered. - Papers must be written in English. Authors are encouraged to use the WCCI LaTex template with the IEEEtran. sty style sheet. (The format is similar to that used in IEEE transactions.) These documents can be FTP'd using the following instructions: FTP FTP.AI.SRI.COM LOGIN: ANONYMOUS PASSWORD: Subject: '94 Conference on Mobile and Personal Communication Systems Organization: EPFL A few collegues of mine are interested in publishing a paper related to the management of Personal Communication Systems (PCS) / Universal Personal Telecommunications (UPT). Are there any conferences covering or addressing these topics scheduled for !94 ? The deadline for submitting the paper should of course not be out-of-date. Thank you in advance. JP ------------------------------ Date: 07 Dec 93 06:33:34 EST From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: International Calls via Cable or Satellite In Australia we use the access code 0011 for voice calls, and 0015 for fax calls. The difference is primarily in the fact that the fax call will always be placed via cable if cable is available. There are also some differences in the fact that bit-stealing is turned off, and some modification to the time-out of the echo cancellation. Stewart Fist ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 09:12:30 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS. But who will be providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for availability. I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T. I'm specifically interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the world. Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest or to me directly? Alex Lehman Brothers acena@lehman.com Opinions are mine not my employers. ------------------------------ Subject: Research Assistantship - High Speed Wireless Networking From: evans@hamming.uucp (Joseph B. Evans) Date: 7 Dec 93 08:37:48 CDT Organization: Elec. Eng. & Comp. Sci., Univ. of Kansas Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) for High Speed Wireless Networking Research University of Kansas Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Telecommunications and Information Sciences Laboratory (TISL) Lawrence, Kansas TISL is looking for qualified, creative individuals with a desire to pursue graduate research and education in high speed wireless link and networking technologies. The position requires an undergraduate or MS degree in EE, ECE, or CS with credentials for admission to the University of Kansas Graduate School. Good communication skills, strong self-motivation, and the ability to work as part of a team are required. A background in communications systems and/or networking is desired. The individual will join a team of faculty and students pursuing sponsored research in high speed wireless communications networks and in the hardware and software development of a prototype high speed wireless Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) system. This position is an opportunity to develop the telecommunications technology of the future. TISL has state-of-the-art communications and computing facilities. We are a founding member of the MAGIC gigabit testbed and have experiential ATM and long distance SONET facilities. Within TISL, faculty and students address challenging research issues in various aspects of telecommunications, ranging from high speed networks to wireless communications systems and advanced spread spectrum techniques. The interaction between the laboratory and the other EECS faculty contribute to the stimulating intellectual environment. The University of Kansas is located in Lawrence, a city of about 75,000 people, which is situated in the rolling hills of eastern Kansas, about an hour's drive from Kansas City. The city of Lawrence has a long history and retains may interesting reminders of its colorful past. The community has 1,257 acres of public parks, indoor and outdoor community swimming pools, an arts center, an historical museum, and an active community education and recreation program. Interested applicants should submit two copies of both a resume and cover letter requesting application forms to: Dr. Victor S. Frost Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering Director, Telecommunications and Information Sciences Laboratory University of Kansas 2291 Irving Hill Road Lawrence, KS 66045-6929 Phone: (913) 864-4833 FAX: (913) 864-7789 e-mail: frost@eecs.ukans.edu ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: MCI on the Move Date: Mon, 6 Dec 93 16:47:42 PST U.S. PHONE GIANT PLANS MEXICAN CONNECTION Don't be surprised to see MCI International link up with a Mexican telecommunications partner to take advantage of expanded free trade, says the president of the New York-based company, Seth Blumenfeld. "We are certainly in the process of exploring options and opportunities in Mexico," Blumenfeld said in a telephone interview, adding that their corporate strategy is to create partnerships with other telecommunications companies. MCI International is a subsidiary of MCI Communications Corp., based in Washington, D.C. It is the second largest phone company in the United States after AT&T and the fifth largest in the world. Canadians recognize MCI as the U.S. partner of Stentor, the alliance of nine Canadian telephone companies that includes BC Tel, and as a partner of British Telecom in the U.K. Blumenfeld said that MCI provides telecommunications services to 18 per cent of the U.S. domestic market, which is worth $60 billion and grows at seven per cent annually. "A one per cent market share is worth $600 million as I calculate it and we've averaged a 1.0 to 1.5 per cent gain each year," Blumenfeld explained. In pursuing a corporate strategy to increase market share in the U.S., MCI also wants to keep its multinational customers happy by providing seamless service across the globe, he said. -- Vancouver Sun -- Sid Shniad ------------------------------ From: aa382@freenet.carleton.ca (Marc Sira) Subject: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Organization: The National Capital Freenet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 00:51:21 GMT I recently replaced my phone with a middle-of-the-line Radio Snack Duofone model (I was given it after my older, better phone gave up the ghost). I've noticed in a gradual awareness kind of way over the last couple of months that this phone makes a little beeping-ticking sound every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Yeah, I should be sleeping at this hour instead of waiting around for my phone to tick. No, it's not particularly loud enough to keep me awake, but I am curious about it. The ringer on the phone does seem to be sensitive to the line condition; taking my modem off-hook or putting it on-hook while it's on the same line produces a similar, louder noise from the phone. I imagine a second extension would have the same effect. So presumably there's a small glitch in the line voltage or something at 4:46 AM nightly. Any ideas what the phone company is doing to the line every night that would cause this behaviour? [Moderator's Note: Telco is doing line testing of the phones on your exchange. Your phone is sensitive enough that it notices this when it occurs. Roll over and go back to sleep. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Reply-To: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 06:58:04 GMT I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo does not work at all either). Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the instruction manual, to have any dip switches. Any ideas what I need to do? Get a new card? Thanks, David ------------------------------ From: ghuntres@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Gary Huntress) Subject: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 17:29:23 GMT I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift. In fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I left. I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones rather than the "bag" type. My in-laws will be travelling between MA and FL using the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and outbound calls (once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!" phase). I'm not worried about standby or talk times of the little phones, but I had not realized that they were 0.6 watts versus three watts for the bag phones. So here is my question: Is the east coast cell coverage sufficient so that 0.6 watts is enough power to always (or virtually always) be able to send and receive calls? None of the sales droids had a clue. Any info appreciated. Gary Huntress huntress@npt.nuwc.navy.mil ghuntres@nyx.cs.du.edu [Moderator's Note: I imagine the east coast is as saturated with coverage as the Chicago area, and here, the 0.6 watt phones do fine. Under rigorous conditions, obviously three watts will give a little more punch as needed, but I've never seen an instance here where the lower power did not do as well. Really, it is a personal preference most of the time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: michaelh@uhunix3.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Michael A. Hoffhines) Subject: TDD Software Wanted Organization: University of Hawaii Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 17:41:30 GMT Is there any software that emulates a TDD (Telecomm Device for the Deaf?). This ought to be straightforward, but my local phone company says that you 'have to buy their TDD hardware'. Say it ain't so! I don't care what kind of computer, although UNIX-based sources would be helpful. Michael Hoffhines michaelh@Hawaii.Edu University of Hawaii ------------------------------ From: rrich@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Ron Richolson) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 7 Dec 1993 08:47:06 -0600 Organization: Kansas State University mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) writes: > In article zeta@tcscs.com (Gregory > Youngblood) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but >> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence >> users they can't. PAT] > Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. > Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T > ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always > the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not > work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800 > number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones > here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems. > But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump > quarters in.) [ stuff deleted ] Here at the campus where I work we have a slightly different arrangement. The state of Kansas requires all of its state agencies to use what is called KANS-A-N. This is a long distance arrangement that was started years ago before there was competition. We are still stuck with it. All of our long distance calls are automatically switched to this system. It is more expensive but we have no choice. We have our own telephone switching system on campus. It is automatic. We are currently building a new dorm (the only one that is on this campus). It will be interesting to see if the students are also required to use KANS-A-N. Ron Richolson Associate Professor amateur call: KA7FYA KSU-Salina rrich@matt.ksu.ksu.edu 2409 Scanlan Salina, KS 67401 (913)-826-2675 ------------------------------ From: rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 7 Dec 1993 15:02:19 GMT Organization: California State University, Chico > [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but > they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence > users they can't. PAT] Yes they can. I lived in a college dorm for two years, and an additional year in college-owned apartments. The first year, I could make 10xxx1 calls with no problem. Then, they blocked it. I complained and talked with the guy in charge here, claiming that it was in violation of the FCC's rules about having to provide equal access to long distance carriers. The administrator here said he knew what I meant but that college campuses fall in a special category by the FCC that don't have this restriction. He said, as it stands now, college campuses will have to provide 10xxx1 dialing by (I think) 1996, and certain groups are lobbying hard against this mandate. At the time I checked here on the net or elsewhere (I don't remember) and what he told me was confirmed. I tried several times to change my 1+ long distance carrier. Sometimes nothing would happen at all, other times I'd get calls from confused representatives at Pacific Bell or the long distance company about the "special status" of my line. 1-700-555-4141 always responded with "AT&T". It blew my mind. In addition to this restriction, we had to pay a per minute charge for LOCAL calls, since because the school dorms fall under the category of a business, that's the rate Pacific Bell resells local service to them. The rep said that outgoing long distance calls are basically routed through whatever LD company they want them to, whenever they want. It's presumably to find the best deal, but they take this option away from the customer. Operator assisted calls were contracted out to Sprint only. If was possible, either by asking the local operator (0) or the LD operator (00) to manually ask to be connected to another long distance company. You could also dial 950-10xx to hook into other LD companies. The problem is that you had to have a phone card or other non-1+ dialing and billing arrangements with that company, and that was always slightly more costly than the 1+ rate they force fed us. The school had just bought the apartments and rewired them all to connect to the school's Centrex system instead of Pacific Bell. I asked if I could stay on a Pacific Bell line, and they said no. The whole situation really made me angry. The school would print out its own itemized bills quoting any long distance prices it chose. Obviously, this excluded me from the discount plans available from being a direct customer of the larger carriers (like the overseas discounts, which would have really been helpful). By the way, I'm at California State University, Chico. If any of you is informed on the current status of this matter and knows for sure that this form of call blocking is illegal, please advise me of such and I will contact our student legal organization. Thanks, Rich ------------------------------ From: EXTMO4H@mizzou1.missouri.edu Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Organization: University of Missouri Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 09:07:38 CST In article mbl@ml7694a.leonard. american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) writes: > In article zeta@tcscs.com (Gregory > Youngblood) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: It is the university's phone system alright, but >> they can't block 10xxx; not to a captive customer base of residence >> users they can't. PAT] > Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. > Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of that uses AT&T > ACUS service connected to the campus phone system, the story is always > the same. You can only use ACUS from the campus phones. 10XXX will not > work. If you want to use a calling card, you need to dial the 800 > number for access. (Or you can use a public phone. The public phones > here belong to C&P, and they are able to use 10XXX with no problems. > But there, you have no choice but to use a calling card, or to pump > quarters in.) I just checked out our University phone book. They allow alternate access via either 9+ 950-XXXX, 9 + 1-800 numbers or 9 + 10xxx+0. I assume that these only allow calling card access, rather than billed back to the calling number. The university sells residence hall students the same WATS LD service that is used by administration at a flat per minute rate, down to $0.11 / min. Curtis Bohl Computer Programmer/Analyst extmo4h@mizzou1.missouri.edu 4-H Youth Development Alternate: bohlc@ext.missouri.edu Programs (314) 882-2034 University of Missouri-Columbia ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #802 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22190; 8 Dec 93 7:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25335 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:13:03 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25042 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:12:43 -0600 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 04:12:43 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312081012.AA25042@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #803 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 93 04:11:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 803 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Second Vote Brings Success to c.d.t.t. Advocates (TELECOM Moderator) Windows Telephony 1.0 Country List (Toby Nixon) Broadband Technologies, Inc. (Randy te Velde) From a Qualcomm Press Release (Alex Cena) Union Losing Telco Jobs? (Eric N. Florack) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 03:47:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Second Vote Brings Success to c.d.t.t. Advocates Usenet has decided to have an unmoderated telecom newsgroup. That is their priviledge of course, but expect the signal to noise ratio to go downhill fast. Obviously, none of the -- ahem! they like to call them 'tech' -- messages will get out to the Digest mailing list people unless you have chosen to subscribe the new list they have started for that purpose. I'd like to think that now that the advocates of unmoderating the telecom newsgroup on Usenet have gotten their way that their constant flaming and harassing activities will come to a halt. Beautiful dreamer, I ... there is no doubt in my mind that the flaming will go on for several more weeks at least; that is what so many Usenetters get off on and are nourished by. I think it is almost a kind of spiritual nourishment for many of them. I had forgotten how nauseating it is to read 'news.groups' after having ignored it for a few years until of necessity I had to start scanning it again to keep up with this mess as it unfolded day by day. At least now I can unsubscribe 'news.groups' from my .newsrc and get back to reading more pleasant things. Really, I am happy for them; now they have a place to do their thing. Maybe now I will get to do my thing as well, but something tells me not to count on it very much. Something tells me the Digest will get bombarded with all sorts of cross-postings (but none or few of the replies). I know I certainly do not want TELECOM Digest confused with the unmoderated group, and I'd prefer not to see the articles I run here one day show up there the next as they do now in alt.dcom.telecom, but eliminating all that is going to be very difficult. Anyway, that's where it stands. They'll be doing their own thing henceforth and hopefully permit this Digest the same courtesy without the constant bickering and flaming for which Usenet is famous, and which has caused so much of my time to be wasted in recent months. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: tnixon@microsoft.com (Toby Nixon) Subject: Windows Telephony 1.0 Country List Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 19:53:16 GMT A few months back, I posted a request for help in putting together a list of all the countries in the world, their country codes, and their long distance and international direct dialing procedures. I received responses from many, many people all around the world, for which I am most grateful. Many of you requested that I post the list back to the net when it was completed. Well, I won't claim that it is really complete yet (we're still missing some dialing rules for a few countries), and I doubt it ever will be done considering the continuing national boundary changes, planned dialing rule updates in EC countries, etc., but here is what we shipped in version 1.0 of Windows Telephony (for those of you who are interested in this list but don't want to download the whole 3-megabyte SDK to get it). Note that in the dialing rules "E" means dial the country code, "F" means dial the city/area code, "G" means dial the local number, "I" means dial the city/area code (but they are not defined for all areas of that country), "W" means wait for a second dial tone, "," means wait a fixed period of time before proceeding. If the entry for a country has no rules at all, it most likely means we were never able to get any information on that country; if the "long distance" rule is blank but there is an "international" rule, it most likely means that that country does not use city/area codes and all calls within the country are "local" (in terms of dialing procedures, although probably not in terms of toll charges). Thanks again to all of those who helped to put this list together. Any help you can offer in keeping it updated will be most appreciated by both me and by Windows users around the world. Toby Nixon Program Manager - Windows Telephony Microsoft --------------------------- Country Country Long International Name Code Distance Direct Dial Afghanistan 93 Albania 355 0FG 00EFG Algeria 213 00EFG American Samoa 684 Andorra 33 16WIG 19WEFG Angola 244 0FG 01EFG Anguilla 1 1FG 1EFG Antigua 1 1FG 011EFG Argentina 54 0FG 00EFG Armenia 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Aruba 297 00EFG Ascension Island 247 01EFG Australia 61 0FG 0011EFG Australian Antarctic Territory 672 Austria 43 0FG 00EFG Azerbaijan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Bahamas 1 1FG 0011EFG Bahrain 973 0EFG Bangladesh 880 0FG 00EFG Barbados 1 1FG 011EFG Barbuda 1 1FG 011EFG Belarus 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Belgium 32 0FG 00EFG Belize 501 0FG 00EFG Benin 229 00EFG Bermuda 1 1FG 011EFG Bhutan 975 117EFG Bolivia 591 0FG 00EFG Bosnia and Herzegovina 387 0FG 00EFG Botswana 267 0FG 00EFG Brazil 55 0FG 00EFG British Virgin Islands 1 1FG 011EFG Brunei 673 0FG 00EFG Bulgaria 359 0FG 00EFG Burkina Faso 226 00EFG Burundi 257 90EFG Cameroon 237 00EFG Canada 1 1FG 011EFG Cape Verde Islands 238 0EFG Cayman Islands 1 1FG 011EFG Central African Republic 236 19EFG Chad 235 15EFG Chile 56 0FG 00EFG China 86 0FG 00EFG Christmas Island 672 Cocos Island 672 Colombia 57 9FG 90EFG Comoros 269 10EFG Congo 242 00EFG Cook Islands 682 00EFG Costa Rica 506 00EFG Croatia 385 0FG 00EFG Cuba 53 0FG 00EFG Cyprus 357 0FG 00EFG Czech Republic 42 0FG 00EFG Denmark 45 009EFG Diego Garcia 246 00EFG Djibouti 253 00EFG Dominica 1 1FG 011EFG Dominican Republic 1 1FG 011EFG Ecuador 593 0FG 00EFG Egypt 20 0FG 00EFG El Salvador 503 0EFG Equatorial Guinea 240 00EFG Estonia 372 8,FG 8,10EFG Ethiopia 251 00EFG Faeroe Islands 298 009EFG Falkland Islands 500 01EFG Fiji Islands 679 05EFG Finland 358 9FG 990EFG France 33 16WIG 19WEFG French Antilles 590 19WEFG French Guiana 594 19WEFG French Polynesia 689 19WEFG Gabon 241 00EFG Gambia 220 00EFG Georgia 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Germany 49 0FG 00EFG Ghana 233 00EFG Gibraltar 350 00EFG Greece 30 0FG 00EFG Greenland 299 009EFG Grenada 1 1FG 011EFG Guadeloupe 590 19WEFG Guam 671 011EFG Guantanamo Bay 539 Guatemala 502 0IG 00EFG Guinea 224 00EFG Guinea-Bissau 245 114EFG Guyana 592 19WEFG Haiti 509 0FG 00EFG Honduras 504 00EFG Hong Kong 852 001EFG Hungary 36 06WFG 00EFG Iceland 354 90EFG India 91 0FG 00EFG Indonesia 62 0FG 00EFG INMARSAT (Atlantic-East) 871 EFG INMARSAT (Atlantic-West) 874 EFG INMARSAT (Indian) 873 EFG INMARSAT (Pacific) 872 EFG Iran 98 FG 00EFG Iraq 964 FG 00EFG Ireland 353 0FG 00EFG Israel 972 0FG 00EFG Italy 39 0FG 00EFG Ivory Coast 225 00EFG Jamaica 1 0FG 00EFG Japan 81 0FG 001EFG Jordan 962 FG 00EFG Kazakhstan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Kenya 254 01EFG Khmer Republic 855 Kiribati Republic 686 09EFG Korea (North) 850 99EFG Korea (South) 82 0FG 001EFG Kuwait 965 00EFG Kyrgyzstan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Laos 856 14EFG Latvia 371 8,FG 8,10EFG Lebanon 961 00EFG Lesotho 266 00EFG Liberia 231 00EFG Libya 218 00EFG Liechtenstein 41 0FG 00EFG Lithuania 370 8,FG 8,10EFG Luxembourg 352 00EFG Macao 853 00EFG Macedonia 389 0FG 00EFG Madagascar 261 16EFG Malawi 265 101EFG Malaysia 60 0FG 007EFG Maldives 960 00EFG Mali 223 00EFG Malta 356 00EFG Marshall Islands 692 Martinique 596 19WEFG Mauritania 222 00EFG Mauritius 230 00EFG Mayotte Island 269 10EFG Mexico 52 91FG 98EFG Micronesia 691 Moldova 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Monaco 33 16WIG 19WEFG Mongolia 976 Montenegro 381 0FG 00EFG Montserrat 1 1FG 011EFG Morocco 212 0IG 00EFG Mozambique 258 00EFG Myanmar 95 0EFG Namibia 264 09EFG Nauru 674 115EFG Nepal 977 00EFG Netherlands 31 0FG 09EFG Netherlands Antilles 599 0FG 00EFG Nevis 1 1FG 011EFG New Caledonia 687 1900EFG New Zealand 64 0FG 00EFG Nicaragua 505 0FG 00EFG Niger 227 00EFG Nigeria 234 009EFG Niue 683 Norfolk Island 672 0101EFG Northern Mariana Islands 670 1FG 011EFG Norway 47 095EFG Oman 968 00EFG Pakistan 92 0FG 00EFG Palau 680 Panama 507 00EFG Papua New Guinea 675 05EFG Paraguay 595 0FG 00EFG Peru 51 0FG 00EFG Philippines 63 0FG 00EFG Poland 48 0FG 00EFG Portugal 351 0FG 00EFG Qatar 974 0EFG Reunion Island 262 19EFG Romania 40 0FG 00EFG Rota Island 670 1FG 011EFG Russia 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Rwanda 250 00EFG Saipan Island 670 1FG 011EFG San Marino 39 0FG 00EFG Sao Tome 239 00EFG Saudi Arabia 966 0FG 00EFG Senegal Republic 221 0FG 00EFG Serbia 381 0FG 00EFG Seychelle Islands 248 00EFG Sierra Leone 232 Singapore 65 005EFG Slovak Republic 42 0FG 00EFG Slovenia 386 0FG 00EFG Solomon Islands 677 Somalia 252 19WEFG South Africa 27 0FG 09EFG Spain 34 9FG 07WEFG Sri Lanka 94 0FG 00EFG St. Helena 290 0EFG St. Kitts 1 1FG 011EFG St. Pierre and Miquelon 508 19WEFG St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1 1FG 0EFG Sudan 249 00EFG Surinam 597 002EFG Swaziland 268 0EFG Sweden 46 0FG 009EFG Switzerland 41 0FG 00EFG Syria 963 FG 00EFG Taiwan, Republic of China 886 0FG 002EFG Tajikistan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Tanzania 255 0900EFG Thailand 66 0FG 001EFG Tinian Island 670 1FG 011EFG Togo 228 00EFG Tokelau 690 Tonga 676 09EFG Trinidad and Tobago 1 1FG 01EFG Tunisia 216 0FG 00EFG Turkey 90 9,FG 9,9,EFG Turkmenistan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Turks and Caicos Islands 1 1FG 0EFG Tuvalu 688 Uganda 256 00EFG Ukraine 7 8,FG 8,10EFG United Arab Emirates 971 0FG 00EFG United Kingdom 44 0FG 010EFG United States of America 1 1FG 011EFG Uruguay 598 Uzbekistan 7 8,FG 8,10EFG Vanuatu 678 00EFG Vatican City 39 0FG 00EFG Venezuela 58 0FG 00EFG Vietnam 84 0FG 00EFG Wallis and Futuna Islands 681 19WEFG Western Samoa 685 0EFG Yemen (P.D.R.) 969 Yemen Arab Republic 967 00EFG Zaire 243 00EFG Zambia 260 00EFG Zimbabwe 263 09EFG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 17:30:12 EST From: Randy te Velde Subject: Broadband Technologies, Inc. I am seeking information about Broadband Technologies, Inc. (BBT), which is marketing fiber-to-the-curb and video dialtone equipment to the RBOCs, for a study at Polytechnic University in New York. As a potential consumer of switched high-bandwidth digital services, I am particularly interested in the business potential of marketing these services to the home. I think most readers of this news group would enjoy seeing wide deployment of advanced interactive services. Unfortunately, if the business community sees little financial reward in creating the necessary infrastructure for these services, the promise will be a long time coming. BBT is a spin-off company (from Siecor) established in 1988, which is betting its future that fiber-to-the-curb is the deployment method of choice. Thus far, it has not sold equipment in any great quantity, but it has conducted small trials with six of the seven RBOCs, GTE, and a few companies abroad. According to the prospectus occasioning its initial public stock offering (November 3, 1993), BBT believes that by the time it is able to manufacture in quantity, switched video services can be provided to the consumer at the average rate of $1,580 per home passed, including all labor and equipment, not including the cost of retiring current facilities. One assumtion underlying this figure is that an average of eight homes can be served with coax from its "optical network unit", the device that (normally) terminates the fiber loop at the curb. One outside plant engineer told me that the current structure of outside plant facilities would force the average down to four or five homes per ONU. I would enjoy comments about the feasibility of these figures. Also, I am interested in exploring the feasibility of competing technologies. Will we all get stuck with fiber-to-the-node systems, which allow limited interactivity for the consumer? Is ADSL for real? And if so, how will it be switched? Can we get what we want from it (HDTV, high bandwidth interactive services), or will it force us to make due with less? Please direct replies to Randy te Velde ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 17:48:42 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: From a Qualcomm Press Release BUSINESS WIRE 12/07 QUALCOMM uses Coral Systems software to support seamless roaming on wireless networks LONGMONT, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Coral Systems announced an agreement with QUALCOMM Inc. (NASDAQ:QCOM) of San Diego, for the use of Coral Systems' Home Location Register (HLR) software technology. QUALCOMM will use this software to enhance the seamless roaming capabilities of its Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) technology wireless communications systems. The HLR is an intelligent network component that permits routing of calls to wireless users regardless of the user's location, enabling service providers to associate phone numbers with people, rather than places. Currently, the Coral Systems' HLR provides an industry standard method of passing information between wireless networks to deliver calls, authorize service and forward any custom calling features a subscriber may have, such as call-waiting, or three-way calling. This process occurs at the time the call is connected and is in full compliance with the cellular industry's inter-system IS-41 specification, put forth by the TIA TR45.2 Committee. ``The flexible and modular design of Coral Systems' HLR enables us to utilize relevant portions of Coral Systems' software in our CDMA HLR product,'' said Richard Sulpizio, QUALCOMM's senior vice president and chief operating officer. Currently, QUALCOMM and other telecommunications industry manufacturers are preparing products for the implementation of CDMA digital service in the United States and international wireless markets. QUALCOMM will provide both CDMA subscriber phones and infrastructure equipment for CDMA wireless sytems. The HLR stores service profiles, Mobile Identification Numbers and Electronic Serial Numbers for account verification when subscribers are calling from areas served by other carriers. The local cellular network and subscriber's phone exchange signals and the cellular network notifies the HLR of the subscriber's location, so that other cellular networks can deliver calls and subscriber services. "Coral Systems' HLR expands a carrier's core business of connecting subscribers with their calls by providing seamless roaming," said Eric Johnson, Coral Systems president and chief executive officer. "We're proud that QUALCOMM chose software from Coral Systems as the design best suited to the task." QUALCOMM Inc. develops, manufactures, markets, licenses and operates advanced communications systems and products based on digital wireless technology. QUALCOMM's products include the OmniTRACS(R) system and digital wireless telephone systems and products based on CDMA technology. The company also develops and markets a range of VLSI devices. Coral Systems Inc. develops, markets and supports UNIX software applications for the wireless telecommunications industry. Coral's Wireless Intelligent Network products, which include the FraudBuster(tm) fraud detection system, Home Location Register (HLR) and IS-41 Data Message Handler (DMH), are designed to bring realtime capabilities to cellular, ESMR, and emerging personal communications networks. Products are distributed worldwide through strategic partnerships with Sun Microsystems and Computer Sciences Corp. Note: OmniTRACS is a registered trademark of QUALCOMM Inc. FraudBuster is a trademark of Coral Systems Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 12:29:18 PST From: Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com Subject: Union Losing Telco Jobs? shniad@sfu.ca (Sid Shniad) passes on to us an article by Kim Moody, entitled: "How Union Jobs Are Being Lost In an Expanding Industry" The article wails and moans about the loss of union-controlled jobs. > Unlike the old phone companies, the operations in the newer > services are mostly nonunion. Cellular is almost completely nonunion; > cable is about 5% union; broadcasting 15%; and publishing, newspapers > and printing about 30% union. > For all the talk of a new hi tech information industry, the means > of milking telephone are more about dumping union workers than about > technology. What the article fails to point out is that the/ unions themselves/ are responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to represent, out of the market. This, more than any other factor is the reason the old-style unions are fading. Regardsless of any other factor, companies whose primary goal is to make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably move to operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin. Such is the nature of competition in a free marketplace. (This is still America, and not the Worker`s Paradise that Marx wanted ...) > In the long run, it proposes a new national regulatory agency to > oversee the entire information industry. In practice, however, the CWA > has sometimes supported those aspects of deregulation that allow the > Bells into new services. Gee, bigger government. More regulation. /Just/ what we need. Why doesn`t the union understand that more regulation means FEWER jobs in the long run, because of hurt business? > Also, as District 1's Peres points out, the workers in cellular > and cable perform the same type of work as phone company workers, but > for about $4-6 an hour less. And how much of that $4-$6 dollars goes directly to /union coffers/? How much of that increase is the paying consumer suposed to deal with, without finding a better, cheaper company with which to do business? /This is helping the workers?/ At every turn, the CWA and other similar unions have sought to limit the free marketplace, in favor of their own powerbase, regardless of the consequences to it`s own rank and file, let alone anyone else who might be affected. > As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for > Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for > 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping > opportunities the new technology promises.<< Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV? Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the free market. No sale. /E ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #803 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26036; 8 Dec 93 17:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14145 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:48 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15812 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:24 -0600 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:11:24 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312081911.AA15812@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #804 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 93 13:11:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 804 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Local Loop Deregulation in California (Russell Blau) Async/ENET Bridge Router Solution For 14.4 (Sam Ghandchi) Voice Response Hardware/Software (Jeff Kenton) New Numbering Plan in the Works? (Eric Valentine) Making a PBX (Henry Alan Segal) Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (A. Padgett Peterson) Caller ID Approved in Wisconsin (Milwaukee Journal via Gary Breuckman) Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Sharif Torpis) Help Needed With Cellular Connection (James R. Brosnahan) Needs PC Add-on Card For Voice-Mail (Yee-Lee Shyong) Calling Cards, 'Easy Access' and PBX's: Answers (Kriston J. Rehberg) Re: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK (David Hough) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Tim Tsai) Re: 900mhz Cordless Protocols (Ralph Sprang) Re: Tropez 900Mhz Digital Cordless (Patri Friedman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 18:24:07 EST From: Russell Blau Subject: Local Loop Deregulation in California Replying to: Note 39954 in newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom From: pushp@nic.cerf.net (Pushpendra Mohta) > On what date will multiple telcos be able to provide the local loop in > California? > [Moderator's Note: To the best of my knowledge, there is no scheduled > date for this where residential or small/medium size businesses are > concerned. In some cities, large businesses have a service called > Metropolitan Fiber available to them and they can justify the cost. Pat, first off, I won't commercialize the "net" by mentioning that MFS Telecom (formerly Metropolitan Fiber Systems) does operate in the Los Angeles and San Francisco business districts and is expanding to San Jose and Silicon Valley. :-) Second, the California PUC order that opened up intra-LATA toll competition also contained a provision authorizing competition in the provision of PBX trunks and Centrex "loops"; these are the services used by most mid-to-large size businesses (say, more than five or ten phone lines) to obtain dial tone. As you probably know, however, that order was withdrawn due to the controversy over parts of it having been written by Pacific Bell, so it is not known at this time when (if ever) it will actually take effect. I would anticipate that, if and when the PUC clarifies its policy and if the provision allowing competitive Centrex/PBX stands, there will likely be an announcement from MFS shortly afterwards regarding the offering of competitive local dial tone services for small business customers (five to thirty-five lines) in those areas the company serves. Russell M. Blau Swidler & Berlin, Chtd. rblau@cap.gwu.edu Washington, D.C. Tel: 202-424-7835 Fax: 202-424-7645 [Moderator's Note: Don't worry in the least about 'commercializing the net'. Usenet now has their own unmoderated telecom newsgroup, and on this list I don't care what you talk about as long as it is not absolutely blatantly commercial. PAT] ------------------------------ From: samg@netcom.com (Sam Ghandchi) Subject: Async/ENET Bridge Router Solution For 14.4 Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 21:26:54 GMT I am looking for a bridge router with multiple ASYNC ports and one or more Ethernet ports which can handle 2400 to 14.4 mps traffic. I need to route IP and IPX. OSPF support is also a plus. I have heard of BReeze1000 and DR BOND, but I do not know how reliable those products are. Any feedback is appreciated. TIA, Sam Ghandchi samg@netcom.com Please forward any information to: Sam Ghandchi 966 Westlynn Way, Unit 1 Cupertino, CA 95014 samg@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: jkenton@world.std.com (Jeff Kenton) Subject: Voice Response Hardware/Software Organization: Kenton Systems Corporation, Weston MA Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 14:25:58 GMT Does anyone have any recommendations for voice response hardware and software? What I want is a system that can answer the phone, ask some pre-recorded questions, get some input from the keypad, and produce a recorded response (depending on the input, of course). Has anyone used this sort of system before? Jeff Kenton (617) 894-4508 jkenton@world.std.com [Moderator's Note: Have you considered the BigmOuth package? It does what you are asking for and seems to work okay. I use it on one of my phone lines here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: etxelv@eua.ericsson.se (Eric Valentine) Subject: New Number Plan in the Works? Date: 7 Dec 1993 14:45:20 GMT Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden Reply-To: etxelv@eua.ericsson.se Having worked in the Class 5 market over there for awhile, I should know this, but don't. My understanding is that the current numbering scheme, while being patched in the short run when an area code gets overloaded, is due for a "complete" revamping In The Not So Distant Future. As far as I know, this goes beyond the extension of IC codes but I don't know how far or if, indeed, this is an industry equivalent of an urban legend. Isn't Bellcore responsible for handling the number plan and aren't they trying to shift the responsibilty for it back to the Feds because of the fear of legal hassles with the independents? Does anyone have the Straight Poop or know what the number migration strategy might be? ------------------------------ From: segalh@ecf.toronto.edu (SEGAL HENRY ALAN) Subject: Making a PBX Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 20:11:53 GMT I would like some advice. (I am in computer engineering at University of Toronto.) I have been offered a summer job here at U of T to build a small "PBX" for a number of offices here. Each office has one telephone line going into the room with five about people in each office. Currently, there is only one telephone in the room -- this is obviously a major inconvenience. The solution would seem to be a system that would: 1 - Answer the phone; 2 - Play a message stating "Press 1 for Mr. Smith, 2 for Mr. Johnson, ..."; 3 - Interpret the number that is pressed; and 4 - switch the phone to the appropriate line. 5 - If time permits, make a mailbox service. ("To leave a message for Mr. Smith, type 7".) I believe this is called a PBX. (Am I right?) Questions Q1) To answer the phone, what must I detect? Is it simply that one of the four incoming wires goes to a high voltage? Is the system, in general, a digital system or an analog system? Q2) To play a message, I would send the sound along the wires. Is this sound in digital form or analog? Which wires would be involved here? Q3) How do I interpret when a number is pressed? Also, how could I detect a number being pressed WHILE I am playing my message. (This would be done by impatient callers who already know what the message will say.) Q4) As for the switch, can I implement this with a simple transistor-representing-a-switch ? (I am envisioning writing a program in assembly language, downloading to a Programmable Logic Array, and using Memory-Mapped-I/O to set the gate of one of the transistor-switches to high thereby turning on that transistor.) Are there any problems with this approach? I have practically no experience with telephones, but I know some electronics, particularly digital electronics. Is this type of project finishable in a summer by a student, or should I turn down the job and recommend that they buy a PBX from NT or some other company? (And how much would that be?) Any comments would be much appreciated. [Moderator's Note: I think if you proceed with this you will be trying to re-invent the wheel. There are lots of hardware cards and software programs out there doing this now. Two which come to mind are BigmOuth for somewhat smaller applications and the Dialogics card for larger, more heavy duty use. Both have the ability to answer the phone, play the messages you described and transfer calls around. If you want to make a little money for yourself, buy one of these pre-packaged, set up the prompts and routing of calls as desired for your client and sell it to them at a nice mark up. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:38:32 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com writes: >> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for >> Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for >> 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping >> opportunities the new technology promises.<< > Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV? > Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the > free market. Do not think this is apples vs oranges. Cable worked because it filled a need that local programming was not. Right now I am paying U$300.00 per year for "basic" service (not the brain-dead economy service but also no "premium" channels) this gives me about 40 tunable channels of which I usually watch 9 (TNT, TLC, Nickelodean, USA, AMC, BRAVO, Family, Sci-Fi, and Comedy). This is *enough* (C). Other channel watching is usually limited to occasional movies and Jeopardy. Somehow, I doubt that adding another 460 channels would change my habits much and, since the foregoing is *enough*, would not be willing to pay any more. At one time I subscribed to Prodigy but dropped it for lack of benefit. Of course since I live in Orlando 8*), home shopping has no advantage; EVERYTHING is cheaper here. (Last Christmas my wife wanted to be able to exchange video tapes with her cousin Debbie who lives in England so she needed a PAL-NTSC converter. After pouring over TV magazines and calling all over the country, the most cost effective one with decent viewing quality -- an AIWA -- was found about two miles from my home. Now they are happy -- except now they want ham radio sets to cut down on long distance telephone costs ...) The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel listing ? Channel 9 is the "listing" channel and takes about two minutes to scroll through the next hour and a half. Same comment. I suspect that this is part of the problem that has kept satellite receiver sales down, sensory overload. Why else whould the Internet Gophers, Archies, and WWW retrieval mechanisms be so popular -- and these people are probably the "brightest and the best". So for 500 channels to work, a listing would have to be downloaded (daily ?, weekly ?) to a storage device that could be set up for selective retrieval. Could it be done -- certainly. Will it ? Enough, Padgett ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Caller ID Approved in Wisconsin Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 06:02:15 PST From the _Milwaukee Journal_ (two articles, 12/2/93 and 12/3/93) (WI) Ameritech Caller ID plan wins approval from PSC Unless opponents go to court, Wisconsin residents soon will be able to see the phone numbers of whoever is calling them. The state's Public Service Commission on Thursday approved a caller identification phone service -- generally known as caller ID -- that Ameritech and PTI Communications Inc. have asked to sell in Wisconsin. The service is to be offered for about $6.50 a month. [ The article goes on to explain blocking approved ... Ameritech will offer per-call blocking to everyone by dialing a code, and per line permanent blocking for law enforcement and social service agencies.] State Senator Lynn Adelman (D-Town of Waterford) says he will sue to block the PSC decision. Adelman and the American Civil Liberties Union want phone companies to offer per-line blocking to everyone free of charge. ------------------------------ From: storpis@kaiwan.com (Console Cowboy) Subject: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number Organization: Anarchy in the U.K. Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 01:12:45 GMT I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800 number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why? Sharif Torpis Senior Consultant storpis@kaiwan.com Black Lodge Engineering [Moderator's Note: Has it continued other than that one burst of calls? Getting to the bottom of these things is next to impossible without a lot of research, but if it continues, let's look into it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jrb@datascope.com (James R. Brosnahan) Subject: Cellular Connection Organization: Datascope Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 08:28:19 GMT Has anyone had experience dialing into a Motorola Cellular with S1936C cellular connection? I am able to establish the carrier (ie:2400bps), yet no protocol (ie:LAPM). Any comments or suggestions? Thanks, jimb internet: jrb@datascope.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 11:21:24 From: apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) Subject: Needs PC Add-on Card For Voice-Mail Can anyone provide me any information about PC added-on card for voice mail? CAPABILITY: 1. Two lines per card (better) 2. records direction/introduction message directly from handset 3, DTMF receiver 4. voice file replay [Moderator's Note: Gee, this is the day for voicemail products to comm- ercialize the net. Try the Dialogics people. I think they are in Parsippany, NJ. Their card handles up to four lines at a time. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Calling Cards, 'Easy Access' and PBX's: Answers Reply-To: Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 09:54:19 EST From: V2ENA81%OWEGO@zeta.eecs.nwu.edu There has recently been some misinformation blowing around the Telecom Digest about calling cards and "Easy Access" numbers regarding PBX's at universities and businesses. Here's a copy of my notes from a phone conversation last night with an AT&T customer service rep at 1-800-CALL-ATT. I am in no way endorsing AT&T. In fact, I don't use AT&T calling cards anyway. 1) It is currently NOT necessary for PBX's owned by businesses, universities, and other institutions to provide 10 + XXX + 0, generally known as an "equal access" number, for telephone cards. This is currently in litigation, and the obligation to do so has not yet become law. However, "equal access" numbers have been required for pay phones and regular home phones for some years now. Most phone companies maintain a 1-800 number for people who can't get 10 + XXX + 0 access on their desk telephone. However, it is still possible to find customer operated coin operated telephones (COCOT's) that will BLOCK access to both the 10 + XXX + 0 code and will silence touch-tone access to an 800 number such as AT&T or MCI's alternative 1-800 number which they provide for people without access to 10 + XXX + 0. (This happens to be illegal for public phones and you should call AT&T or your local branch of the Public Service Commission for more information if you find such a telephone). 2) AT&T says that the rates for calling card calls are the same whether you use the 1-800 contact number, the 10 + XXX + 0 number, or direct 0+ dialing on a private phone. 3) AT&T rates for calling card calls are whatever the direct dialing rate is for normal calling plus $0.80 surcharge per call. The rates are the same whether you dial through 1-800-321-0288, 10 + ATT + 0, or 0+ dialing. 4) AT&T is not permitted (reasons unknown) to add a calling card account to an *existing* VISA/Mastercard/Discover card account in the United States unless you get a *new* "Universal" brand VISA/Mastercard (which are both co-issued by AT&T and a large bank) which you can link to your phone credit card. MCI, on the other hand, can link its phone credit card to an existing VISA card at one, particular large bank (you can research this yourself). You can, however, get an AT&T card either as a traditional credit phone card or as a pre-paid debit card but the credit card requires an application process with a check of your credit rating, BUT, thankfully, these cards are NOT tracked by credit reporting agencies. That's all. Kriston J. Rehberg | Internet: krehberg@vnet.ibm.com Associate Programmer/Analyst | IBM Internal: V2ENA81 AT OWEGO ENSCO, Incorporated | or (AFS): v1ena81@legend.endicott.ibm.com IBM Corporation, Owego, NY USA | phone: (607) 751-2180 or tie: 662-2180 ------------------------------ From: dave@llondel.demon.co.uk (David Hough) Subject: Re: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 16:31:23 GMT In article Mary Anne Walters writes: > I am interested in information on Internet connections in the UK. > Since there is a charge per minute for even local calls, what kind of > charges are we talking about for SLIP, if the modem is hooked up all > day? I've been told there is some kind of dialback option offered from > Internet providers (as an aside: who else other than PSI offers > connectivity in Britain?) and would like specifics on that. There are a couple of thousand (based on the last figures I saw) customers using Demon Internet Services, me being one of them. Most users are not on-line all day; I tend to dial up in the morning when it is nice and quiet, which leads to a better response from the Demon machines. It is possible to get Demon to dial up when email arrives, but I wouldn't expect many private users take advantage of it. There is a list of UK Internet providers in /pub/archives on ftp.demon.co.uk if anyone is interested (I haven't looked, but I have seen mention of it). > I was also told "no one" has more than one phone line over there. Is > this true? And if so, how do people hadle internet access from home > and still be able to use the phones? Quite simple really ... when I am on-line, no one can phone me up. Not that I would want to talk to anyone at 6am anyway! I know a few people who have two lines, although the second one tends to be a dedicated fax line in such cases. You will find that most UK households manage perfectly well with only one phone line -- if it is in use then tough, ring back later. A residential line costs 80-100 pounds a year so a second one would need a fair bit of justification in most household budgets. I have to admit that from this side of the Atlantic it is amusing to see the perceived need in the US to have more than one phone line at home. Do people in the US use the phone more than people over here, or is it just that everyone in the house needs their own phone as a status symbol? I daresay that cost plays a big part in the different outlooks in the US and the UK. Dave G4WRW @ GB7WRW.#41.GBR.EU AX25 dave@llondel.demon.co.uk Internet g4wrw@g4wrw.ampr.org Amprnet ------------------------------ From: imt2691@acf4.nyu.edu (Tim Tsai) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Date: 8 Dec 1993 09:35:09 GMT Organization: New York University I got a flyer from Escort just the other day and they are now selling the Escort 9000 direct for $299 (express shipping free) until 12/22/93. I'd buy one in a heartbeat if I am not so broke.. :-( Apparently they have a "EscortPlus Club" and you get 10% off all their items if you join the club. Tim ------------------------------ From: rsprang@Internet.cnmw.com Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 09:08:28 EST Subject: Re: 900 Mhz Cordless Protocols Benjamin McLemore recently posted re: 900 Mhz Cordless Protocols: > 1: Are any of the digital cordless phones direct-sequence spread > spectrum? What advantages does this actually have over > frequency-hopping (AT&T, Tropez)? The Escort 9000 (900 mhz cordless phone) is a direct sequence spread spectrum product. The advantages of direct sequence over frequency hopping systems are more a function of the implementation, rather than inherent superiority of either approach. The Tropez product is not spread spectrum, according to a review in "Spread Spectrum Scene" magazine. To our knowledge, our product is the only 900 mhz spread spectrum phone currently available. > 2: Given that Cylink manufactures the spread-spectrum chip for the > Escort phone (from the Economist article), and that Cylink is recently > in the news as a manufacturer of the Clipper chip, what does this mean > for the security of the new cordless phones to law enforcement > scanning? Were they designed to be easily broken from the beginning? Cylink does not manufacture the spread spectrum chip used in the phone, but does hold patents covering some aspects of this technology. Cincinnati Microwave has licensing agreements with Cylink, allowing us to use their technology in our part. The Escort phone was not designed to be "broken" by law enforcement agencies, and does not contain a "clipper" chip or equivalent device. Spread spectrum communications are inherently difficult to decode, and the Escort phone provides an extremely high level of security. > 3: Just how much information can be digitally spread out into the > 900-928 frequency range? Given Metricom 56Kbps modems and cordless > phones, when will the error rates get too high for this band to be > useful? One key advantage of a direct sequence system is high immunity to jamming. While other transmissions in this band do interfere with the transmitted signal, these "jammers" are processed out when the received signal is despread. As a result, our telephone is very resistant to interference from other signal sources, including other Escort 9000 telephones (each phone has a unique spreading sequence). Our product is the only US designed and assembled 900 mhz phone on the market. We are currently running a holiday sale on the phone. Call (800) 433-3487 for more information. Ralph Sprang Staff Engineer Cincinnati Microwave ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Tropez 900Mhz Digital Cordless From: tsa@cellar.org Date: Wed, 08 Dec 93 17:02:52 EST Organization: The Cellar electronic community and public access system Has anyone had any experience with the Tropez 900mhz digital cordless phones? They cost about 200$, are digital, have passwords, and all that neato stuff. Anyway, has anyone used them? If so, what was your maximum range before degradation became unacceptable? Could max range be increased by putting the base antenna above the house? I am looking for a cordless phone that will operate at a range of approx. 1/2 mile. Is this completely impossible? Or if I get a good 900mhz, mount a directional (I only need it to work at long range in a single direction) antenna, is it possible? Patri Friedman Libertarian, atheist, techno-rat, in-line hockey player, SCAdian, HS Senior, SysOp, and occasional dreamy-eyed romantic. -=-=-Free backrubs to qualified individuals!-=-=- [Moderator's Note: Welcome to the Digest, Mr. Friedman. I don't recall seeing you here before. We've had some recent messages on 900 mhz phones and it could be you'll find some answers in recent back issues. On the subject of welcomes to new readers, I wave my hand to the couple dozen new participants now on line with us via utsa.lonestar.edu who have signed up for the mailing list. Welcome aboard, one and all. Remember, to use the Telecom Archives by email, you need to send your *formatted* text to the email service. If anyone needs a help file for this, just let me know. And Mr. Friedman, next time you are in Chicago I really could use one of your backrubs, thanks! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #804 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26438; 8 Dec 93 18:32 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10424 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:56 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18828 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:29 -0600 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:29 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312082031.AA18828@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #805 TELECOM Digest Wed, 8 Dec 93 14:28:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 805 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Chaos Communication Congress 1993 (Bjoern Kriews) Re: How About IntraLATA/Limited InterLATA Toll Competition? (John R. Grout) Cable TV Local Monopoly (David Devereaux-Weber) Starting up a 900 Number (Rich Mintz) Take Care of Your Telephone Credit Cards (Nigel Allen) Response to Anti-Union Messages in the Digest (Sid Shniad) Wanted: Centralized Software Upgrade Management for User Net (P. Knighton) Dual Mode (was Re: Roaming, CDMA, TDMA etc.) (Phil Price) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bjoern Kriews Subject: Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 18:29:43 MET "Ten years after Orwell" 10th Chaos Communication Congress, Hamburg, Germany The Chaos Computer Club invites the global community to participate in the Chaos Communication Congress in Hamburg and celebrates the tenth anniversary of this convention. This hackers' meeting, taking place annually at the end of December, has become a traditional event which is characterized by a colorful mixture of absolute chaos, serious discussion and detailed presentation. Computer enthusiasts, scientists from well-known institutions, lawyers, politicians, artists and, of course, hackers as well as data-travellers and Internauts from many countries are going to meet at the 'Eidelstedter Buergerhaus' on December 27th-29th for an interdisciplinary exchange of data and other experience. Not only concentrating on technical topics, political and social issues will be focal points of discussion this year. After ten years of creative future concepts the time has come to look for achieved goals and new visions for the future. This year's list of topics: The so-called "great peep attack" (a proposed law reform allowing state authorities to listen in, even in private rooms, in order to fight organized crime) affects every German citizen and is considered one of the most important issues of the year. - What is technically possible? - What is planned and/or wanted politically? - How do the right of privacy and ban of encryption software fit together? Well-informed speakers talk about state-of-the-art technology and legal limits. Public discussion forums invite you to form your own opinion. Money always serves for interesting talk: - How can we improve Electronic Cash? - How to print your own money; - How to wash it if it's dirty; - How to open electronic cash machines without damaging them; It's up to you to add to this list ... Hardly noticed by the public, the female part of the hacker scene is growing. Female hackers' activities have become a regular part of the congress, the workshop on feminine computer handling is one of the key events. For the first time, there will be a Women Only room with lots of equipment to try out, opportunity to ask and learn as well as to discuss and create. Other highlights: Discussions and workshops on - citizen networks and electronic democracy; - ISDN, MODACOM (german mobile radio data network) and Beepers; - Bluebox versus Telekom; - Electronic Warfare; - Chip- and other cards; - inventory differences; - underground radio stations; - Computer recycling; - lockpicking; - MIME and *ostscript viruses; - copyright law and the GNU generation. Furthermore: the Hackcenter, the Chaos Cafe, the Chaos Archive, the movie theatre (among others: educational propaganda films by the former East German Ministry of State Security), a Zerberus BBS, the Internet-FreePort and lots of other things we forgot to mention. Feel free to contribute more interesting topics, workshops or presentations. Anyway, the hottest news for computer enthusiasts and hackers will be those you won't find in the press. What: 10th Chaos Communication Congress When: December 27th - 29th 1993 Cost: DM 42,- Three-day-ticket Where: Eidelstedter Buergerhaus Alte Elbgaustr. 12 D-22523 Hamburg +49-40-5710523 Contact: Chaos Computer Club Schwenckestr. 85 D-20255 Hamburg Germany Phone: +49-40-4903757 Fax: +49-40-4917689 E-Mail: ccc93@t42.ccc.de Press contact: Phone: +49-161-2447146 (european afternoon, please) For reservations in an inexpensive hotel (approx. DM 30,-/night), mail to: sleep@drdhh.hanse.de #!/bin/thanks to P. Kane for the word 'InterNaut'. ------------------------------ From: grout@sp96.csrd.uiuc.edu (John R. Grout) Subject: Re: How About IntraLATA/Limited InterLATA Toll Competition by LEC's? Reply-To: j-grout@uiuc.edu Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:40:52 GMT goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > In article ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack > Decker) writes: >> My idea is this: Allow local telephone companies to carry toll calls >> to ADJACENT LATA's only, on the condition that LEC's must compete with >> each other and the IXC's for intraLATA traffic. In other words, on a >> call to an adjacent LATA, you'd have the option of using a 10XXX code >> to force the call to go via your LEC rather than your long distance >> carrier. On an intraLATA call, you'd have the option to your your >> LEC, or any other LEC operating in your LATA that has toll >> capabilities (for example, as a GTE customer I'd be able to select >> Ameritech [formerly Michigan Bell] to handle my intraLATA calls by >> dialing Ameritech's 10XXX prefix). Note that no defaults would >> change ... if you didn't dial a 10XXX code, your call would be handled >> as it is now.... >> What do you think of this idea? > I've had the same thought for some time now. One really annoying > problem with the LATA rules is that they create "Chinese walls" along > their boundaries. Is Nashua to Lowell really that different from, > say, Lowell to Boston? The latter are farther apart but within a > LATA. The LATA boundaries were set up to, more or less, represent the actual LEC equipment to provide local service and (to an extent) first level toll switch equipment which existed at that time. Admittedly, all the local areas which are in interstate LATAs (e.g., the Kansas part of the Kansas City, Missouri LATA, the part of Greenwich, CT in the NYC LATA) were placed there because much of their _local_ service was provided by interstate facilities ... so, even if NET had equivalent facilities between Lowell and Nashua and Lowell and some other equivalent point southwest of it in the Boston LATA (which I doubt), the LATA boundaries wouldn't recognize that. However, if people want to serve _parts_ of contiguous LATAs_ (in effect, partially redrawing LATA boundaries now) ... > A blanket waiver for contiguous LATAs does a lot to solve this. If such a waiver made an LEC serve _all_ of a contiguous LATA with a mileage-oriented tariff, it does _not_ help much. For example: New Jersey Bell offers competitive (and low-priced) toll service to NYC proper and Philadelphia proper from the adjacent NJ counties ... but, since they don't serve _all_ of the NYC and Philadelphia LATAs, they can restrict their investment and price their service appropriately. If they were required to serve _all_ of those adjacent LATAs with a mileage-oriented tariff (e.g., to charge the same for a call right across the Hudson upriver from Old Tappan to Tarrytown as one downriver from Jersey City to Lower Manhattan), they would probably have to charge _more_ for calls to NYC and Philadelphia proper. If an LEC isn't allowed to serve _parts_ of a contiguous LATA (or charge lower rates for part of a LATA than for another based on the cost of facilities, or some other market-oriented cost), in effect, the LEC would be operating a captive IXC and be forced into performing the same kind of cross-subsidization that mileage-oriented IXC tariffs do already ... removing much of the incentive to provide competitive inter-LATA service of their own. There is _one_ relatively minor incentive for an LEC to provide inter-LATA competition ... the "coin factor". As far as I know, the only place in the country in which AT&T faces competition for _any_ coin-paid DDD inter-LATA calls are those NJB service areas mentioned above ... would more LEC inter-LATA competition help keep down the rates for relatively short coin-paid DDD inter-LATA calls? I think so. John R. Grout INTERNET: j-grout@uiuc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 10:29:34 CDT From: weberdd@clover.macc.wisc.edu Reply-To: weberdd@macc.wisc.edu Subject: Cable TV Local Monopoly In Volume 13 : Issue 795, Trenton del Rey Gallowglass writes: > *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access? > I read somewhere that in the few communities (in the US) that have > more than one local cable operator that there are more channels, > better service, and lover prices than elsewhere. Many cable TV franchises are non-exclusive, which means the franchise authority would allow a second operator in. However, most operators comply with an unwritten code that says that they won't compete with each other in a market. Furthermore, if an operator wanted to compete, it would be difficult to find a lending institution to loan them money to do so. > I also don't understand why the courts (I think it's them) don't seem > to be moving faster in allowing competition for the local dial tone. Local telephone service is regulated at the federal level by the FCC and at the state level by a state public service commission. Competition will not be easy, nor will it solve all phone problems and make all service cheaper. If competition is allowed, will companies also be able to pick and choose markets? Would it be fair to mandate that the former regulated company must provide service to anyone who asks, but new "cream skimmers" can come along and skim the high volume customers? If that scenario should happen, the old company would need to raise rates to make up for the losses; resulting in even more defections, until the only customers left are the highest cost, lowest revenue customers, in whom the "skimmers" have no interest (like homes seven miles outside of town, and residential customers on fixed income). Some people who live in dense urban areas feel that they shouldn't have to support higher-cost rural customers. However, one of the good things about our telephone system is that 99% of the people and companies are accessible by phone. If we start losing phone customers, the value of phone service to the remaining customers is diminished. Furthermore, as more competitors come online, the pressure on the numbering plan gets greater. We are running out of area codes and prefix codes. More competitors will accellerate the problem. I also believe that competition will be good for consumers and the industry, but we've got to implement the changes carefully. David Devereaux-Weber (608) 262-3584 (voice) MACC Communications; B263 (608) 262-4679 (FAX) 1210 W Dayton St. weberdd@macc.wisc.edu (Internet) Madison, WI 53706 ------------------------------ From: rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) Subject: Starting up a 900 Number Date: 8 Dec 1993 15:09:50 GMT Organization: California State University, Chico I'm looking into offering a 900 service. So far, it looks like to start out I'll need to contract with a "service bureau" which leases T1 lines from the long distance carrier. I'd greatly appreciate it if any users with experience in this area would email me information they think would be useful to me about starting such a service. I'd be especially interested to know of positive and negative experiences with particular service bureaus. Also, with such an arrangement, is it possible to have the service bureaus forward calls to a number going into my home? I'd like to include some PC-based automated voice services. Many thanks, Rich [Moderator's Note: One person you should contact for more information on this is former Digest participant John Higdon . He's been in the 900/976 racket for years, and made a bundle at it with 'services' directed toward the gay community. I'm sure he could explain the way service bureaus work in detail. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Take Care of Your Telephone Credit Cards From: nigel.allen@canrem.com (Nigel Allen) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 07:04:00 -0500 Organization: CRS Online (Toronto, Ontario) Here is a press release from AT&T. AT&T SAYS 'TIS THE SEASON TO BE CAREFUL WITH CALLING CARDS For further information, journalists should call: Jon Mellor 908-221-5017 (office) 908-874-8964 (home) BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- AT&T warns consumers that calling- card-number thieves love the holiday season, too. As shoppers and travelers use their long-distance calling cards in malls and transportation hubs, they should be aware that their calling-card numbers are at the top of some criminals' wish lists. Consumers should protect their calling cards as they would protect credit cards or cash. AT&T offers the following tips: o When entering calling-card numbers on public phones, obscure the card, keypad and hand movements from prying eyes. If possible, use a phone that reads the magnetic strip on the back of your calling card. Most AT&T public phones are equipped with a card-swipe or card-insert feature. o A criminal will pretend to have a conversation on one public phone to hear what's being said at the next phone. If you must read your card number to an operator, speak softly to avoid being overheard. o Customers should call their calling-card providers to learn what safeguards those companies offer. For instance, AT&T Personal Choice Calling Card customers can easily memorize their card numbers, so they don't need to carry or expose their cards to place calls. And all AT&T calling-card customers can put restrictions on their cards that prevent the cards from being used for international calls--the favorite use of calling-card thieves. o Report stolen calling cards or suspicion of fraud to your long-distance company immediately. The company will cancel the calling-card number and issue a new card to you. AT&T Calling Card customers should call 1-800-CALLATT. For a free brochure detailing these tips and other ways for consumers to protect themselves, call AT&T on 1-800-851-0439. [Moderator's Note: Indeed, it is the season for fraud. Statistics from mercantile and business associations show that the biggest day each year for fraud where stolen credit cards and bad checks are con- cerned is ... you guessed it! December 24, Christmas Eve. The fraud artists will start coming out of the woodwork all next week and the week after. Be alert. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: Response to Anti-Union Messages in the Digest Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:18:16 PST I am responding to Eric Florack's diatribe that seems to have been generated by reading the Labor Notes article I uploaded. (I ignored some similar anti-union shots that came across earlier.) "What the article fails to point out is that the unions themselves are responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to represent, out of the market." Eric doesn't adduce any evidence to substantiate this claim. In fact, real, inflation-adjusted wages -- in the unionized telephone industry and other sectors -- have been declining for more than ten years. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good diatribe. Let's just use this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless accusations. "This, more than any other factor is the reason the old- style unions are fading. Regardless of any other factor, companies whose primary goal is to make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably move to operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin. Such is the nature of competition in a free marketplace. (This is still America, and not the Worker`s Paradise that Marx wanted ...)" If news about unions and their views of developments in the telecommunications industry is going to generate rabid responses, perhaps it was wrong to have sent it to this list. I thought -- perhaps mistakenly -- that folks on this list might be interested in information like this story from Labor Notes. "Gee, bigger government. More regulation. Just what we need. Why doesn`t the union understand that more regulation means FEWER jobs in the long run, because of hurt business?" This is an interesting argument. Regulation kills jobs. Ergo, regulation is bad. What evidence is there that regulation kills jobs? None provided here. Yet another leap of faith in workings of The Free Market. However, when the normal workings of said Free Market generate staggering loss of jobs -- for example, a recent {Wall Street Journal} article reported that the Fortune 500 employed 16.2 million people in 1990, versus 11.8 million in 1993 -- then this is treated as just a natural unfolding of the workings of the world. > Also, as District 1's Peres points out, the workers in cellular > and cable perform the same type of work as phone company > workers, but for about $4-6 an hour less. "And how much of that $4-$6 dollars goes directly to union coffers? How much of that increase is the paying consumer suposed to deal with, without finding a better, cheaper company with which to do business? This is helping the workers?" If one didn't know better, it might appear that you have something against unions, Eric. Do YOU have any idea how much of the $4-$6 goes into union coffers? From your argument, I gather you believe that two major sources of high prices in the US economy are inflated union dues and wages. But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it that companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas expansion, takeovers, etc.? How did they manage to hide the profits they are using in these ventures from the rampaging red hordes in their unionized ranks? Forgive me for having disturbed the folks on this list with stories that disturb their consideration of the technical aspects of the communications industry. I will not trouble you with such material in the future. Sid Shniad [Moderator's Note: Part of -- maybe the majority of -- the 'rabid responses seen here come from the Dungheap Net (Usenet). They can get pretty far out sometimes. As you know Sid, I sent you a separate note a few minutes ago noting that most of the readers here like to see two, or three or four sides to every story. No, I don't think we want a constant flow of union announcements any more than I want a constant flow of AT&T press releases. But some of each a better and more well-rounded journal help produce. Anyway, the Usenet people now have their very own unmoderated telecom forum to trash out, so maybe they will quit spilling their venom here for a change. PAT] ------------------------------ From: P.Knighton@axion.bt.co.uk (Paul Knighton) Subject: Wanted: Centralized Software Upgrade Management for User Network Date: 8 Dec 1993 17:51:35 GMT Organization: BT Labs, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, UK Reply-To: P.Knighton@axion.bt.co.uk Does anyone know of any software to meet the following requirements:- Consider a range of software products which evolve and must be released and distributed to a growing network of users, many of whom are potentially accessible via modem. Each user may use some/all of these products and records are kept of which products they currently use (and at what release). Currently, the upgrade medium is magnetic tape and transport the GPO. A utility is required which can:- i) Maintain a customer database (name, company, address, networking connection mechanism (if available) including authentication) on some central host. ii) Using the customer database, remotely upgrade one/some/all customer's remote hosts, i.e. for each product with a new release which they also use, upload an upgrade to them via modem. ii) For each customer effected subsequently update the customer database as appropriate. All help/advice much appreciated. Regards Paul A. M. Knighton Network Modelling: Sales & Support Group Software Development Division, MLB 5 51, BT Laboratories, Telephone : (+44) (0)473 649156 Martlesham Heath, Facsimile : (+44) (0)473 640279 Ipswich, IP5 7RE, Suffolk, ENGLAND. Email (Internet) : pknighto@axion.bt.co.uk ------------------------------ From: pprice@qualcomm.com (Phil Price) Subject: Dual Mode (was Re: Roaming, CDMA, TDMA etc.) Date: 8 Dec 1993 10:15:36 GMT Organization: Qualcomm Inc. In article , lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) wrote: > [ lots of interesting technical stuff deleted here] > I understand roaming and have done so in a couple of occasions within > the US. Sorry to misunderstand you. > My home company is GTE Mobilnet of Northern CA. I also have > been told that I could roam in many countries that used AMPS and had > roaming agreements I guess. > My question really was, not all phones are dual mode, in fact I wasn't > aware that many were. Perhaps most of the new ones are but there must > be a large inventory of existing phones out there which are not. But > for argument's sake, let's say they are. Does that mean, that no > matter which of the digital technologies being promoted now, your > phone (if dual mode) will work anyway given that roaming agreements > are in place? Or is it that the cellular company will offer both forms > of transmission (AMPS and one of the digital ones) and if you have a > phone capable of digital transmission then it will work anyway and > since it's likely to be dual mode, it will work when digital is not > available. That's about right. BUT, the phones are usually programmed to use digital if it is available -- the main driving force for the introduction of digital systems is (from the perspective of the service provider) to increase the available capacity for users (i.e. more money for the same bandwidth ;-). AMPS is supported because of the existing subscriber base. Actually, TDMA, E-TDMA and CDMA all rely on the AMPS system for access functions (i.e. setting up calls etc.) -- initially, signalling is done on the analog channels and the base station tells the phone to switch over to one of the digital modes or use analog if there is no support available for the digital mode. CTIA were working on an all-digital system (like GSM), but I lost track of that about a year ago -- anyone know anything about it? Hope this helps, Phil ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #805 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00382; 9 Dec 93 10:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03920 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for eweinberger@gn.apc.org); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:20 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28678 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:00 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 01:02:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199312090702.AA28678@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #806 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 01:02:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 806 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (David Leibold) CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes (Jeff Robertson) European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 (D.E. Price) Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company (Jack Decker) Four-Bit ADPCM (Stewart Fist) NAPLPS and RIP Inquiry (Jim Choate) Telecom Mouse Standard? (Jim Choate) Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Jason Demarte) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 00:45 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (djcl note: the Canadian telecom regulator, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, made the following decision last week. Needless to say, business groups in Canada are not particularly enthusiastic about the idea of local measured service after a given monthly calling allowance. In summary, the scheme will not be in effect until at least 1995, which is when Bell Canada expects to have its digital switching and billing systems in place. Business groups like the CBTA mentioned in the decision are warning that residence customers will be next to get hit with local measured service. Without further ado, the decision text (subject to the odd typo, official version available from CRTC) ....) [from text of CRTC decision] Ottawa, 2 December 1993 Telecom Letter Decision 93-18 To: Bell Canada Interested Parties Re: Bell Canada - Tariff Restructuring for Business Access Services On 22 April 1991, the Commission wrote to the telephone companies referring them to the February 1991 finding of the Terminal Attachment Program Advisory Committee (TAPAC) that, owing to technological development, mutually exclusive technical definitions of PBXs and key telephone systems (KTSs) were no longer practical. The Commission noted that rates for PBX trunks and KTS access lines were generally dependent on the classification of equipment on which they terminated, and that the TAPAC finding called into question the relevance of tariffs based on that distinction. As a result of the Commission's letter, the telephone companies filed tariff revisions or reports of plans to set rates independently of terminal equipment type (with the exception of AGT Limited and the New Brunswick Telephone Company Limited, whose rates did not depend on the type of terminal equipment). The Commission has since approved tariff revisions for BC TEL, and Newfoundland Telephone Company, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited and Newfoundland Telephone Company Limited. By letter dated 25 November 1992, the Commission denied tariff revisions proposed by Northwestel Inc., and directed the company to file proposed tariff revisions that would be revenue neutral. Bell Canada (Bell) filed reports setting out three approaches to restructuring its tariffs for Business Access Service. These approaches are described below: Blended Rate: This approach provides for a common rate for individual lines and PBX trunks. Bell rejected this approach because of its effect on customers, specifically, individual-line rates would climb by 4% to 63%, while PBX trunk rates would drop by 10% to 43%. In addition, rates for services related to individual lines and PBX trunks would be affected and, in order to achieve revenue neutrality, further rate increases would be required. Sliding Scale: The sliding scale approach would entail replacing PBX and individual line rates with an ascending rate scale. The scale would vary with the size of the channel groups (1, 2-5, 6-10, 11-20 and over 20 channels). Each rate increase along the scale would be based on the value of incremental PBX trunk rates. Bell submitted that the sliding scale approach assumes that higher efficiency (i.e., increased usage volume and decreased blocking) is achieved with greater capacity. Illustrative rates developed to achieve revenue neutrality indicate that KTS customers would be subject to increases of 13% to 44%, while PBX trunk customers would see decreases of 11% to 27%. The ascending scale could be applied only to access line groups equipped with hunting. Lines from a customer's terminal not equipped with hunting would thus be rated at the lowest level, although, when terminated on sophisticated equipment, they can generate high outgoing usage to the public switched telephone network. Threshold Pricing: Under this approach, a business customer would pay a flat rate for the access channel and a specified amount of usage, i.e., the threshold. Outgoing calls exceeding the threshold would be charged for on a per-minute basis. The threshold would not apply to the user's incoming traffic. The threshold would vary by rate group bands to take into account usage differences. Bell based the thresholds for the illustrative rates on a six-month subscriber line-usage study, commenced in April 1992, of 24,000 business access lines of various types. Based on Bell's illustrative rates, 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line and 10% of PBX trunk customers would pay increased charges. As indicated above, Bell rejected the blended rate approach because of its impact on customers. Bell submitted that threshold pricing is more appropriate than the sliding scale approach because it takes into account large differences in usage. In particular, Bell submitted that it ensures billing certainty for the majority of customers, while reflecting a user-pay philosophy. Bell stated that implementation costs would be higher than for the sliding scale approach, but that threshold pricing would permit the introduction of usage sensitive local business services, which could provide additional revenues to help offset the local access shortfall. Bell proposed to file a final rate structure in the fourth quarter of 1994. The Commission received comments on Bell's reports from the Canadian Business Telecommunications Alliance (CBTA), the Government of Ontario, Smart Talk Network (STN) and Unitel Communications Inc. (Unitel). The Commission is of the view that threshold pricing is the most equitable of the three approaches. Blended rates would result in rate increases for small users in excess of 70%. The sliding scale approach would result in increases for KTS cutsomers of up to 45%, while PBX customers would see reductions of up to 27%. Threshold pricing, on the other hand, can be implemented with no increase in customer billing for the vast majority of customers. Indeed, based on Bell's illustrative rates, threshold pricing would lead to increases for 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line customers, and 10% of PBX trunk customers. Unitel objected to the threshold pricing approach, relying on BC TEL's response to a Commission interrogatory related to that company's access filing. In that response, BC TEL concluded that a report by Economics and Technology, Inc. (ETI) on local/access pricing indicates that local usage- based costs are dropping to the extent that usage-based pricing is not justified. The Commission disagrees with this interpretation of the ETI report. The report provides views both for and against usage-based pricing. In fact, the report states that, because the evidence is ambiguous as to whether there are gains to be realized from using local measured pricing as a principal means of cost recovery, most U.S. regulators have chosen a combination of flat-rate and usage-based pricing. While the Commission agress that usage-based costs are in decline, it considers that they remain a factor in the local service market. In this context, the Commission notes that threshold pricing includes both flat-rate and usage-based components, with the latter applicable to heavier users. The Commission therefore considers threshold pricing to be consistent with cost recovery requirements in a market where usage-based costs are declining, but have not been eliminated. In addition, this approach may afford customers a certain flexibility in controlling their local access costs. STN and Unitel suggested that threshold pricing targets and penalizes high- volume users, particularly alternative long distance providers, whose access service costs would rise. Bell stated that trunk-side access/equal ease of access arrangements will be in places before any threshold pricing scheme. As to the targeting of market segments, the Commission notes Bell's statetement that differences between light and heavy users exist across the whole local market, i.e., no particular market is targeted. Based on Bell's six-month subscriber line usage study, and using its illustrative rate structure, 16% of users would exceed the threshold and pay usage-based charges. In the Commission's view, pricing approaches that recover greater revenues from the heaviest users should not necessarily be regarded as 'targeting' a market segment. CBTA and Unitel submitted that threshold pricing would eliminate predictability for users generating amounts of traffic large enough to trigger usage-based charges; as a result, their ability to forecast and control their telecommunications costs will be curtailed. The Commission notes that such users have considerable experience in controlling their costs for usage-priced services like Message Toll Service and Wide Area Telephone Service. STN and Unitel submitted that the costs of implementing threshold pricing are too high. Unitel argued that BC TEL's Small Business/ Standard structure should be imposed because it can be implemented more quickly and at a lower cost. The Commission agrees that the implementation time for threshold pricing is lengthy; however, it is tied to the implementation of Bell's new billing system. It is Bell's new billing system, which includes local usage-based billing capability, as well as the provision of digital switching to all its business customers by mid-1995, that enables Bell to apply its proposed rating structure. BC TEL will not be so equipped. The Commission also notes that BC TEL, in reply to interventions filed in support of the Small Business/Standard pricing approach, stated that its criticism of usage-based pricing is based on its own specific circumstances, and that the company may consider usage-based pricing in the future. In addition to the above, the Commission notes that Bell and BC TEL differ in terms of existing rate relationships. The Commission notes Bell's evidence that, based on the illustrative rates, imposing BC TEL's approach in Bell's territory would cause the rates of KTS users to rise by 30% to 80% or more. The Commission also notes that even the smallest users would benefit from no increases in rates, while the smaller users would see substantial increases. Under Bell's threshold approach, only the heaviest users would see the increases. In light of the above, the Commission directs Bell to file proposed tariffs, in the fourth quarter of 1994, to implement threshold pricing. The Commission further directs Bell to provide the following: (1) justification for any differences between the proposed rate structure and rate structures for its other exchange access tariffs; (2) a full subscriber impact analysis; and (3) the effect of the proposed rates on the difference in total compensation paid to the telephone company for line-side versus trunk-side access for competitive long distance providers. Allan J. Darling Secretary General ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 20:49:47 EDT From: DIMBIT@delphi.com Subject: CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes Bell Canada has won approval for a rate charge that would introduce a pay-per-use charge for outgoing local phone calls for its largest business customers. Companies would be billed on a pay-per-use basis once their monthly volume of local calls exceeded a yet to be determined threshold. The new system will go into effect in two years and mean higher phone bills for Bell's biggest business customers, and its long distance competitors. The new pricing scheme proposed by Bell Canada would eliminate the different trunk costs of $48/month and $80.50/month for loop and ground start business lines. It would be one charge for all business customers allowing unlimited incoming call, but a fixed amount of outgoing local calls. Any outgoing local calls beyond the threshold would be charged by the minute. However, none of the new charges, including the access rate, the threshold level and the usage charge have been determined yet. The CRTC told Bell to file the rates by the fourth quarter of 1994. The new rates will likely take effect in late 1995 or early 1996, the utility said in a news release issued yesterday (Tuesday Decemeber 8/93). Six other federally regulated phone companies have adopted alternative schemes that do not have usage-sensitvie charges. -------------------------- Is this the first step toward billing personal calls by the minute? If so, my grandmother (and her rotary phone) may kick the bucket! Jeff Robertson DIMBIT@DELPHI.COM Toronto, ON, Canada ------------------------------ From: dap@aber.ac.uk (D E Price) Subject: European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:12:33 GMT Telecommunications 'World Firsts' at EURIE '93 ============================================== UK Universities have joined forces with British Telecom to bring the European ISDN Event to six locations within the regions and nations of the United Kingdom. Integrated Services Digital Network. ISDN, or Integrated Services Digital Network represents the state of the art in Pan European communications and supports many new applications like Videophones, high quality, high speed facsimile transfer and inter computer communications. The solution provided by ISDN is relevant to almost all sectors of the economy from the smallest companies to International organisations. Business Solutions for Europe '93. The European ISDN Event (EURIE '93) is being held simultaneously in over 70 sites in most European Countries and is being supported by 22 network operators. The event has the full backing and support of the Commission of the European Communities. EURIE is the biggest ISDN event the world has yet seen. The UK National Event, being titled `Business Solutions for Europe '93' occurs simultaneously at six locations. The locations are: BT Business Centre in London Docklands, England; BT Business Centre in Birmingham, England; BT Business Centre in Glasgow, Scotland; University of Salford, Manchester, England; University of Ulster, Londonderry, Northern Ireland; University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales. Worlds Largest ISDN Videoconference as Opening Ceremony. EURIE '93 will be opened by Mr Jean-Pierre Jouyet, deputy head of Cabinet of President Delors accompanied by Mr Michel Carpentier, Director General of DGXIII of the CEC. The opening ceremony will take place in Brussels and will be transmitted by ISDN to a total of 22 centres across Europe. This will be the world's largest ISDN videoconference. Santa Claus, Live from Lapland. As part of Telecom Finland's contributions to EURIE '93, they have arranged for Santa to be accessible live from Lapland via videophone. As we all know, Santa's grotto is based in the town of Rovaniemi on the Arctic Circle in Lapland. He will be talking to his friends from all over Europe. Conference Talks. Some sites will feature conferences in addition to an exhibition of products and services. Further Information. In the UK can be acquired from the British Telecom ISDN Helpdesk Freefone 0800 18 15 14 Elsewhere in Europe, contact your nearest Telecom Operator. ------------------------------ From: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company Date: 9 Dec 1993 04:48:21 GMT Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net Reply-To: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) According to {USA Today Update}, Ameritech has filed a request with the Justice Department asking that they be allowed to offer long distance service starting in 1995. A direct quote from the news item: "William Weiss, Ameritech chairman and chief executive officer, says the plan will mean customers can choose to get local and long-distance communications from a single provider." What this item does not say is whether Ameritech is willing to open up local phone service for competition. If so, and if it's done in such a way that even residential customers have the option of getting their dial tone from someone other than Ameritech, I would be all for it. Somehow, though, considering the way that Ameritech has behaved in the past (for example, totally eliminating unmeasured local service wherever a wimpy PUC would allow it), I doubt that they are really going to do anything that might give their captive customers other options. Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong, and that Ameritech really is going to allow true competition for the proverbial "last mile"! In any case, if anyone comes across more details on exactly what Ameritech has proposed, I for one would be interested in hearing about it. Also, I wonder if the Justice Department will be taking public comments on this? Jack ------------------------------ From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Four-Bit ADPCM Date: Thurs, 9 Dec 1993 00:02:00 I've just come across a reference on fax problems which says the problems in transmission are often caused by: > "4-bit encoding" 32 K bit/sec ADPCM systems which are unsuitable. > 16 K bit/sec or 8 K bit/sec ADPCM systems. I know that most voice trunk calls in Australia (supposedly 80%) are made over 32-bit/sec ADPCM trunks, and fax seems to travel over these quite successfully. But the quote marks around the "4-bit encoding" phrase above, seems to suggest that there are a number of different versions of 32 kbit/sec ADPCM. Is this correct? I had assumed that 32 Kbit/sec ADPCM always used 4-bit codes since it only transmitted the 'difference' between two adjacent samples, rather than the sample size itself. But perhaps I've got it wrong. Is there, perhaps, a variable length (Huffman-like) code being used here? I'd also appreciate a quick outline of 16 Kbit/sec and 8 Kbit/sec ADPCM. I understand that the 16 Kbit/sec version is now widely used in Transatlantic cables, so it must be a reasonably 'lossless' compression system. Does anyone happen to know if it is also used in association with DCMS/DCME or bit-stealing techniques? ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim Choate) Subject: NAPLPS and RIP Graphics Inquiry Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:54:33 GMT Hi everyone, I am interested in contacting anyone about using NAPLPS or RIP graphics for increasing the resolution of online communications. At present I run a small non-inet bbs which supports both of these. Please respond via e-mail. Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu ASCII-ANSI-NAPLPS-RIP 512.458.6084 ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim choate) Subject: Telecom Mouse Standard? Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:55:40 GMT Are there any standards relating to passing pointing information over a modem? In particular I am looking for any discussions on standards if they exist. Please respond via e-mail. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST From: Jason Demarte Subject: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted Organization: Penn State University I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD. If anyone has some any information on this please post me a response, thanks. ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 05:42:29 PST In article gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not. The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the results. Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that can be set separately), or it might not be working. You might also be having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING. So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ... 2->3 (transmit to receive), 4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send), 20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect). Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be echoed back -- if not, the port has a problem. These are the pins for a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 and 1. If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults. It just might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port. For Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches, the command is 'AT&f&w'. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #806 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01256; 9 Dec 93 12:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00773 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for vmorgan@gnu.ai.mit.edu); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:30 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26996 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:10 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 02:14:10 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312090814.AA26996@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #807 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 02:14:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 807 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Jack Decker) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Randal Hayes) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Chas. Frankston) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Matthew Landru) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (Richard Chin) Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Bill Mayhew) Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Carl Oppedahl) Re: Skokie, IL, and Telephone History (James J. Menth) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 9 Dec 1993 01:21:00 GMT Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV :-) , so what follows is my opinion only. In the matter of whether college students must be given access to other carriers, this would really depend on several things: 1) The FCC rules on equal access, especially as they apply to aggregators. 2) Whether a university is put into a special classification that exempts them from FCC rules. Now, assuming for the moment that either the FCC rules don't require universities to give "10XXX + 1 +" access, or that universities are for some reason exempt from such requirements, the next question is whether students have the right to get residential phone service directly from the university. This, in my opinion, skirts around another, much larger legal question: Do universities have the right to require that students live in university housing as a requirement of attending the university? Somehow I cannot imagine that this has never been tested in court, but at the same time, I'd be hard pressed to understand the legal justification for this requirement. It would seem to me not only to violate a student's rights, but to constitute a restraint of trade, wherein the university in competing with other rental housing in the same area and is unfairly requiring students to live on campus in order to keep the university's housing full (which means that they can in turn charge any rental fee they like). To me, this constitutes bundling of services in such a way that the consumer cannot opt to take one service (education) separate from the other (housing). As I say, this may have been litigated in the past, but I would love to know what the court's rationalle was for allowing this sort of thing. But anyway, you're stuck in the university-owned housing and they've decide to run their own phone service in, and disallow you from obtaining phone service directly from the local telephone company. Now another set of questions needs to be answered: 1) Do your state's tariffs require landlords to give telephone companies access to rental units? In other words, if you rented an apartment on the tenth floor of a private apartment complex, and the landlord said, "I refuse to allow the telephone company (or anyone else) to run phone wiring in my building; you'll either have to use a cellular phone or do without", would there be a law or tariff section requiring him to allow the telephone company access to his building for the purpose of installing subscriber equipment for tenants? I suspect that the answer varies by state (or perhaps NO state requires this). If your state does not require this, then basically the university is free to do what it wants in the apartments it owns and operates. 2) If your state DOES require landlords to give the phone company access, are universities specifically excepted from this requirement? If not, then it seems to me that they are obviously in violation of this law when then refuse to allow students to get phone service from the telephone company. 3) Is university housing different, in a legal sense, from other housing? Again, this would probably vary from state to state. Consider that in many areas, you probably would not be able to force a motel operator to let you have a residential phone line run into a motel room, even if you planned to rent it for an extended period. My point is that all housing is not alike, and there may be different rules for housing that is intended to be used by transitory tenants. 4) Are universities or university housing specifically mentioned in any telephone tariffs, or telephone-related legislation in your state? If not, then they probably have to follow the same rules as any other landlord. 5) Is there any prohibition, in law or tariff, on landlords reselling telephone service to residential users in your state? If so, are universities specifically excepted from that prohibition? I think you see what I'm getting at ... find out what is required of landlords in general (you may not have any right to phone service at all!), and then find out if there is an exception for universities. This should all be in either the tariffs, or the legislation governing provision of telephone service in your state. Now, if the laws of your state aren't really helpful, you might still be able to argue that since the university requires you to live on campus, your freedom of speech is inhibited if you cannot get phone service from whomever you wish, or that some other constitutional right is violated. In effect, you'd be asking the judge to find a right to receive phone service from your chosen provider in some provision of the constitution. While this is a really long shot, it certainly wouldn't be the first time a judge has "found" some right in the constitution (that the founding fathers probably never intended in the first place). If you try this, try to get your case heard by a Clinton apointee! :-) :-) And if all that doesn't help, I'd start calling the smaller long distance providers and see if you can find one that offers phone service at "Dial 1" rates even if you use a "950-" access number. Hint: If you're in a smaller town, look in the yellow pages of a nearby large city to find such providers, or call your phone company and ask which long distance carriers offer service in your area. Smaller providers don't always advertise in the yellow pages of every community where they offer service (many offer service throughout an entire LATA, but only advertise in their home city or the larger cities in the LATA). And one final tip: If the earlier suggestion of dialing 950-1022 to see if you get MCI's dialtone (to see if you can access 950 numbers) doesn't work, try prepending a "1" or an "0" first. Some older electromechanical exchanges will allow you to connect to long distance providers via "950" numbers, but only if you dial a "1" or "0" first (the call to the "950" number is still toll-free in this case). Also, if a particular carrier thinks you should be able to reach their "950" number from your exchange and you cannot (and it's being blocked by your local telephone company and not your university's PBX), try lodging a complaint with the PUC -- there are an amazing number of switches that are mis-programmed in such a way that 950 calls don't go through, and calling repair service about these is generally an exercise in frustration. Jack [Moderator's Note: Everywhere I can think of, the telephone company has easement rights which allow them access to your property when there are wires or cables in common serving various subscribers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: HayesR@uihc-telecomm-po.htc.uiowa.edu Date: 8 Dec 93 08:27 CST Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Initially, I must express my opinion that there is NO excuse for a university to charge students MORE than AT&T rates, whether by per-minute charges, or some type of surcharge. With the large traffic volume, it is easy to offer some type of discount, roughly equivalent to the lower rates students could get on their own, and still allow for a reasonable "profit" to help subsidize the telecom department's operation. Anyone who has to gouge their customers to make ends meet should simply be considered less-than good managers. However, I believe I posted information here a while back regarding the aspects of 10XXX blocking/unblocking per the Operator Services Act of 1990. Essentially, those systems that could make 10XXX-0 dialing accessible immediately via simple reprogramming had to do so by March 16, 1992. For those who could modify their systems for $15/line or less to allow 10XXX, they were required to do so by March 15, 1993. And, those installations who required major equipment purchase or upgrade to allow 10XXX have until April 17th, 1997. You must also remember that a switch has to be able to program this out to 10XXX-0XX to disallow international direct dialing, or the institution would have all kinds of non-university business international calls billed to it. Hopefully, no colleges or universities are improperly hiding behind this schedule to avoid upgrades at this time. A simple challenge to the telecom staff (with emphasis that the FCC will be notified) should hopefully get you a legitimate response as to why 10XXX is not currently allowed, and when it will be allowed. > The administrator here said he knew what I meant but that college campuses > fall in a special category by the FCC that don't have this restriction. WRONG! ACUTA (Association of College and University Telecommunications Administrators) attempted to have colleges and universities exempted from the definition of "aggregator" in the verbage of the ACT. I had stated they did not have a chance, since they were dead center in the definition of aggregator as stated in the ACT. The FCC denied ACUTA's request, specifically ruling that colleges and universities were indeed "aggregators" as defined, and were subject to the Operator Services Act of 1990. Th bottom line is -- before someone states publicly that an entity is doing something illegal, I suggest they check out what the legality is, as in the case of the 10XXX/Operator Services Act of 1990, some institutions may simply be following the law to the letter! All of this babbling is simply the opinion of Randal J. Hayes, and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employer (although they may selectively claim the opinions that they like!) randal-hayes@uiowa.edu ------------------------------ From: Charles_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:56 -0400 In article mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) writes: > Well, maybe they _can't_, but they _do_. It happens all the time. > Here at AU, as well as at every university I know of When this topic last came up in the Digest, I asked a friend of mine who works in the MIT telecom department what their policy is. Bear in mind, that until MIT installed one of the first private 5ESS exchanges in the country around 1985, all MIT dormitory rooms had intra-campus telephone service provided via a largely student labor maintained step-by-step system. The dormitory rooms, as well as offices, labs, etc. were all connected to the 5ESS, except that the dorms only got analog service. Anyway, here's my friend's comments. Since I didn't get a chance to ask him permission I'm not identifying him by name: Well, it has been a while since I was in the telephone "loop" here. However here is what I recall of our policies (which we used when we negotiated with the LD providers). I write these from the MIT point of view addressed more or less to a prototypical LD provider wishing to get our business. 1) MIT wishes its students to have access to LD calling services from the MIT owned phones in their rooms. 2) MIT (to NET) wishes (and got) unlimited residential rates (billed by NET to MIT) for local calls within NETs local calling areas (i.e., we have residence trunks going into our 5ESS). We had to win a case in front of the DPU to get this. (Mass. DPU 86-13). 3) MIT will not be a phone service re-seller. All arrangements for LD service are between the student and the LD provider. 4) MIT will *not* block access to other services (for calling card calls). 5) MIT will cooperate and provide technical support to reduce fraudulent calling (i.e., access PINs and Automatics Number Identification). 6) MIT will *not* withhold degrees or in any way take action against students who are in default with the LD provider. Basically MIT wishes to be neutral with respect to any relationship between the LD provider and the student. 7) MIT requests that the LD provider give students a discount. Why? Because we believe that our students, as a subset of the population, are more credit worthy as a group then a similar sized subset of the general population. 8) Service by LD to student must be offered in a non-onerous way. We learned this one the hard way. The first LD company we did business with setup an onerous cash-in-advance debit system of bill paying (i.e., Student had to maintain a positive balance with the provider, or be cut off). We terminated this contract (and all other MIT business with that provider) at the first legal opportunity. [They are *still* burning because of this :-) ]. I believe that our students get a good deal from the LD provider (which is currently AT&T). I don't know if AT&T offers them the various discount plans though. They can always use 950 (or 800) numbers to bypass our arrangement with AT&T. Keep in mind that students do not have a telephone account with MIT, the phone is simply part of their room. I wonder if any of the posters you whose stuff you forwarded to me has the option of opting out of the system and just getting a phone from the local telco? Last I checked (and I'll double check tomorrow during business hours when people are in) MIT students could elect to get their own phone from NET (just like in the days of dormphone). So in essence students have the ultimate choice of ignoring MIT Telecommun- ications and going directly to NET. ------------------------------ From: mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu (Matthew B. Landru) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 8 Dec 1993 23:23:34 GMT Organization: Project SAVE International In article rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) writes: > If any of you is informed on the current status of this matter and > knows for sure that this form of call blocking is illegal, please > advise me of such and I will contact our student legal organization. I am writing this just to advise people that I am currently waiting to hear back from the FCC about this matter. I called their office (being right in Washington DC helps with that :) ) and no one has (as of yet) returned the call. I'll let everyone know if and when I get a straight answer from them. Matthew B. Landry President of Project SAVE mbl@ml7694a.leonard.american.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 11:36:26 PST From: Richard Chin Three or four years ago when I was a student living on campus at Stanford, the university decided that it would be better to own and operate its own phone system. Students (like myself) who lived on campus were compelled to buy both local and long distance service from the university. I believe that AT&T was the carrier for long distance calls but that the university acted as a resller. At the time there was a considerable uproar over the lack of carrier choice for long distance calling, particularly since many students had friends and family overseas. A group of law students challenged the university in court and before the California Public Utilities Commission. The students lost in both forums although I do not remember why. While 10XXX access to carriers of choice would be nice on university campuses, I have not heard of a single precedent in which students have overturned a university's restriction of 10XXX access where the phone system is owned by the university. Richard Chin (these comments are my own) ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:07:17 GMT The difference in power ratio between a 600 mW and 3.0 watt phone is about 7 dB. It is easy to obtain at least as much effective signal gain by attaching an exterior antenna to your phone. Here in northeastern Ohio, Cellular coverage is pretty good in metropoletan areas as well as in corridors surrounding major interstate highways. Cell towers near interstates have shaped patterns that favor improved reception in zones paralleling the road. Where you run into toruble is in country areas that have hilly topology that can block a weak signal. In town and on the highway, I get pretty good results with a 600 mW Motorola phone OEM version that I bought from GTE. What I have is called, "America Series." It is like a flip phone Microtac without the flip down mike; sort of fat and stubby. Despite the dimutive size, audio quality is very good. If you buy service from GTE, the phone is about $179; I got mine from Sears & Roebuck. The phone runs for about 12 hours on a charge. 12 hour batteries are about $30 at Cellular One (same battery as the flip phone). There is a nickel metal hydride battery that gives up to 24 hours of operation. If you use the NiMH battery, you need to use the desk charger -- about $80 bucks. I'm just using the regular NiCd pack, but decided to get the rapid charger anyway. Cellular One had the best price on the charger locally. The America Series does NOT have an external antenna jack unless you use an external cradle / amplifer system that has an outrageous price something like $350. Basically, the cradle amp is an entire cell phone except for the CPU and microphone, hence the cost. If you want power and external antenna, you might as well get any one of the bag type phones that go for around $50 if you purchase service. A few of the hand-held phones can use an external antenna when you use an adaptor cable that isn't expensive; be sure to check that out if you want a hand-held phone but anticipate spending time in rural areas. One other thing about service providers. GTE seems to have available anywhere, a follow-me option that lets you key in *18 in any roaming area to have your calls automatically forwarded from your home area -- at your cost of LD, of course. Cellular One has "Ohiolink" here in-state that is $2/mo that automatically logs you anywhere you roam without having to enter a code; you pay LD charges to the roaming point. For an additional couple bucks (I didn't opt for it) you can get Nationlink that automatically logs you anywhere. Over-all, GTE is probably better if you don't mind pressing *18 when you get to your destination. They say that it might take up 30 minutes for the registration to get back to your home area for forwading. Seems to happen faster than that. The Ohiolink on Cellular One seems to be virtually instantaneous, save a slight delay of a couple of seconds before somebody calling you hears ringing. The air time rates for either carrier are about the same. It pays to check out carefully for any incentive packages. You can play one carrier off the other by mentioning a quote you got. They may offer a few feature for a while to sweeten the pot, etc. GTE has better coverage in the rural parts of Ohio. Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu amateur radio 146.58: N8WED ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? Date: 8 Dec 1993 20:14:38 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In ghuntres@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Gary Huntress) writes: > I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift. In > fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I left. > I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones rather than > the "bag" type. My in-laws will be travelling between MA and FL using > the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and outbound calls > (once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!" phase). > I'm not worried about standby or talk times of the little phones, but > I had not realized that they were 0.6 watts versus three watts for the > bag phones. So here is my question: > Is the east coast cell coverage sufficient so that 0.6 watts is enough > power to always (or virtually always) be able to send and receive > calls? > None of the sales droids had a clue. Any info appreciated. > [Moderator's Note: I imagine the east coast is as saturated with > coverage as the Chicago area, and here, the 0.6 watt phones do fine. > Under rigorous conditions, obviously three watts will give a little > more punch as needed, but I've never seen an instance here where the > lower power did not do as well. Really, it is a personal preference > most of the time. PAT] What most people don't realize is that the specification for analog North American cellular permits the network to command a particular cellular telephone to reduce its RF output level to any of several reduced levels. The idea is to force the telephone to transmit with only just barely enough power to reach the cell antenna, so that the channel may be reused one or two cells away. It is commonplace for a three-watt telephone to be transmitting at only 1.2 watts or 600 milliwatts or one of the levels below 600 milliwatts, for the simple reason that the network told it to do so. In such an area it will be appreciated that the person who happens to have a three-watt unit will only sometimes be better off than the user of a 600-milliwatt unit. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers) Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 ------------------------------ From: jjm@lru3b.att.com (James J. Menth) Subject: Re: Skokie, IL, and Telephone History Organization: AT&T-Little Rock Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 16:11:53 GMT In article pjb@23kgroup.com writes: > When Western Electric's Teletype Corp. was located in Skokie, the > plant (on Touhy Ave.) was the largest open area manufacturing facility > in the world. At it's peak, well into the '70, they received more > orders for Teletype machines in a month than they could build in a > year. It was a very interesting place to visit. I left Chicago in > the early sixties and have no idea what happened to the area. Does > anyone know the fate of the Teletype complex ? In 1956, when Model 28 was king, some of the subassembly operations were moved from Skokie to a facility in Little Rock, Arkansas. This facility was in leased space but land was purchased and 650,000 square feet of air conditioned manufacturing space (largest in the state at the time) was completed in 1972. The Little Rock plant gradually replaced the Skokie facility with the last manufacturing operations, printed wiring boards and LSI manufact- uring, phasing out in the middle 80's. Another milestone was the retiring of the Western Electric and Teletype names after the 1984 divestiture. The last facility at the Skokie location was the Research and Development organization, Teletype's version of Bell Laboratories. The last time I visited R&D (can't recall exact date) the shopping center now on the site had already encroached over half the old tract. I still remember my first visit to Skokie in 1977. It reminded me of a General Motors plant with parts of model 33 machines moving on roof mounted conveyers, coming together at the final assembly area. This triggered lots of memories but I don't have time now for more reminiscing but I will look at the rest of the Digest for responses before submitting again. Jim Menth at Little Rock jjm@lru3b.lr.att.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #807 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01673; 9 Dec 93 13:07 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31249 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:40 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30854 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:18 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:02:18 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312091002.AA30854@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #808 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 04:02:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 808 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T _Required_? (Russell Blau) Re: AT&T _Required_? (Marshall Levin) Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service (John A. Romano) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (John R. Levine) Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response (Ed Greenberg) Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response (Danny Padwa) Re: PC to Alpha Pagers! (Sam Noonan) Re: PC Pursuit; Also Inexpensive 14.4k FAXmodem (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Finally Got REAL Phone Service (Martin McCormick) Re: Call Waiting 14.4 Mod (Laurence Chiu) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 18:26:13 EST From: Russell Blau Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_? In a series of recent articles, you have discussed the fact that some customers are rejecting inbound calls that are not being carried by the recipient's preferred carrier. The articles are too lengthy to quote, but the gist was that you stated that the recipient is free to accept or reject whatever calls it wants, even when the caller is paying. As a lawyer specializing in common carrier regulation, I am not aware of any law or decision that either supports or contradicts the position you took. I don't think that either the FCC or the courts have addressed this question yet. But I don't think the issue is as cut and dried as you suggested. As you described it, the customer in question orders a telephone line (which comes with a number) from their friendly local telco. Then they arrange with their preferred LD carrier to screen inbound calls dialed to that number and route them over a dedicated terminating access facility, not over the telco's lines. Any call that comes into this number over the telco's lines is given a busy signal or a recording by the *customer's PBX*, not by the telco. Now, what happens when an ignorant user (like me) tries to dial this magic telephone number using the "wrong" LD carrier; or, for that matter, as a local call? The recipient's PBX sends back busy signal or a recording. It may or may not also send answer supervision; if it does, I will be charged by my carrier for a one-minute call. If that happens, I will be mad as hell and will complain to the FCC that this is illegal! On the other hand, if it does not send answer supervision, then I won't get billed for the call but my LD carrier *will* get billed by the local telco for access charges for the time it was using the telco's network. (The LD carriers pay for all "access minutes" they use, whether or not a call is completed, as opposed to us lowly end users who only have to pay for "conversation minutes.") It would seem to me that the LD carrier, if it wanted to make a stink, would have grounds to go to the FCC and complain about this arrangement too, since it has no way of knowing that the "magic number" will be blocked by the recipient and therefore will incur excessive liability for calls that can't be completed. Of course, the major LD carriers may be unwilling to make such a complaint because each of them has this type of arrangement with some of their high-volume customers. There might be some smaller resellers out there, though, who don't have such conflicting interests and would want to raise the issue in order to trim their access costs. (This could be an interesting case to handle on a _pro bono_ basis.) Of course, there are relatively few kinds of businesses that could get away with setting up an *exclusive* terminating access arrangement like this. Each of the examples that I know of involve an Internet access provider; in this case, the caller has already subscribed to the recipient's service and is paying to use it, and so is not likely to complain too loudly about having to use a particular LD carrier. However, most businesses wouldn't want to take the risk that the recording telling the caller to hang up and use a different LD carrier would annoy a potential customer/client, and so they would continue to accept incoming calls from the telco's lines in addition to the preferred carrier's dedicated facility. Russell M. Blau Swidler & Berlin, Chtd. rblau@cap.gwu.edu Washington, D.C. Tel: 202-424-7835 Fax: 202-424-7645 [Moderator's Note: Actually, Internet service providers are only a small part of the scene. Almost all the organizations doing it are providing sexual 'hot chat' phone services. It has been noted in this Digest in the past that all the long distance carriers love 'hot chat'; the idea of a guy and a woman, or two guys or whatever who are otherwise perfect strangers hanging on the long distance telephone for a half hour to an hour in the middle of the night getting each other off is what the carriers like :) The eager participants cruise on someone's 900 or 976 conference bridge at an early hour in the morning and an exhorbitant fee per minute -- like one of the bridges John Higdon operates out of his home and has installed in a few other places around the USA -- they like what they hear and one or the other gives out his phone number; names are not necessary nor desired. The one calls the other and they talk about whatever they want, but at direct dial overnight rates to avoid further (high) payment to the bridge tender and his 900/976 line. AT&T likes that as does Sprint/MCI. When 900 got very problematic for the bridge tenders what with all the deadbeats wanting to have their fun but not pay for it later on and convincing the telcos to charge it all back, etc, the carriers (and they are all nothing more than keepers of disorderly houses, as the old police complaints read years ago; electronic madams if you will) thought up the 'recipient chooses/denies carrier' scheme. It has obvious advantages over 900/976: as regular numbers, they cannot easily be blocked on PBXs; the revenue per minute is less but the guarentee of collection is almost assured a hundred percent, since telco CAN cut you off for non-payment of tolls even if they CANNOT cut you off for non-payment of 900 billings; and well, all around it just works out better. Since about all the services using this arrangement are sex-oriented I guess the proprietors figure the customers aren't in any position to make a stink about getting billed for a busy signal. Anyway, a message *is* delivered (rather than a busy signal) by most of the services: they say "We will not talk to you unless you hang up and redial using 10xxx plus the number you originally dialed." The law is on their side. No one has to come to the phone and speak with you merely because you are paying for a call to them. Yeah, I would say AT&T knows all about how these things work. An ad in one of the Chicago 'alternative lifestyle' newspapers awhile back showed these two guys with whips, chains, handcuffs, the whole routine. And the caption said 'Make new friends using the AT&T network. Just dial 10288-1xxx-xxx-xxxx. No extra fees; just toll charges.' You bet! PAT] ------------------------------ From: mlevin@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Marshall Levin) Subject: Re: AT&T _Required_? Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 21:14:01 GMT > building. The local telco never sees the calls. In the meantime, if > someone calls via some other carrier, that carrier continues to > do as always: hand the call to the local telco who in turn delivers > it to you normally via your main directory-listed telephone number. > So your 'regular' phone will continue to ring off the hook all day > and night just as it always has, but you answer those calls with > a recorded message *that you program and are responsible for handling* > saying something like "I won't talk to you since you did not call > via the carrier I chose. Hang up and dial 10-my-code to get through." Hmm. When I called Speedway via MCI to see what would happen, it was simply always busy. Thanks for your explanation. Marshall [Moderator's Note: It could be Speedway always leaves that line off the hook. Some use that method of dealing with callers via non-approved carriers. PAT] ------------------------------ From: smiley@hecate.umd.edu (John A. Romano) Subject: Re: Gouging University Students on Long-Distance Service Date: 8 Dec 1993 13:39:24 GMT Organization: University of Maryland, College Park P. Calvert (calvert@eos.ncsu.edu) wrote: > A friend of mine lives in a university-owned apartment. A few months > ago the university took over the phones and now he has to pay the > university for long-distance calls instead of being able to select a > long distance company. He is forced to use AT&T, and the school > charges a rather exorbitant mark-up over AT&T's rates. And to force > you to use their system, access to other networks (like MCI and > Sprint) is blocked. > Does anyone now of any legal alternatives to get around this? One > idea is to use a calling card and call a toll-free access number. > However, the usual calling cards would probably be too expensive -- > unless there exists some competitor's card that has reasonable rates. > Any suggestions? This issue goes back to the FCC ruling which took effect in March. Universities with student residents (dorms, etc) were considered "aggregators" just like hotels and are required to provide "equal access". It's a pretty legally complicated docket to read but I think 10xxx access isn't the only way to provide equal access, but maybe someone who knows the FCC rulings better than I do can fill that in. We decided to set up 10xxx access via a dial access code so anyone who doesn't feel like using ACUS can use there own calling cards. (NOTE: this applies ONLY to student resident phones; administrative phones do not have to have equal access). There is some outrageous fine like $10,000.00 a day if you are caught by the Feds, although there is some doubt about how strictly it will be enforced. I also heard that the FCC had stayed its ruling to give people more time to unblock access. I haven't heard whether its in effect, although we took the safe route and have complied. Maybe someone else can fill in the detail ... John Romano Telecommunications Engineer University of Maryland - College Park Eyes: jromano@umdacc.umd.edu Ears: (301) 405-4430 ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk Date: 9 Dec 1993 05:27:01 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article CDCS37@email.mot.com (Comroe-CDCS37 Rich) writes: > Fred R. Goldstein writes: >> Well here I am, posting my first note over my BRANDY-SPANKIN' NEW ISDN >> RESIDENCE LINE! I had an ISDN line before as part of a trial, but >> this is a genuine tariffed line provisioned by New England Telephone >> from my local central office, the same one that provides analog dial >> tone to the analog home >phone. > ... I'm curious if the two residential ISDN owners cited above > have 'residential service' or business service to the home ... or was > IBT all wet with the story that it wasn't available (the residential > service agent didn't know what ISDN was, and had to find a supervisor > to informed me that it wasn't available.) To restate: My ISDN line is under RESIDENTIAL tariff. I can make free calls any time of day within a 20-mile radius, under an obscure and limited-availability residential calling plan that New England Telephone never thought could carry 56 kbpd data (but it does; witness this connection). Business lines here in Metro Boston are always measured. This is not the case in all states. New England's ISDN tariff is quoted as a surcharge over any other service, residence or business. Some states treat it as a different service, which may be business only. Of course you can have a business line in the house (we do here, for a real business, but it's an analog line) if you're willing to pay the freight. Fred R. Goldstein k1io goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 12:21 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > I'm curious if the two residential ISDN owners cited above > have 'residential service' or business service to the home ... or was > IBT all wet with the story that it wasn't available Fred lives here in Massachusetts where the NET, under considerable regulatory prodding, offers residential ISDN for $8/mo above POTS. There are a few little warts. The worst is that the last I heard they still don't promise digital connections outside of the local CO, so it's only useful if you have ISDN friends in the same town. Also, the charging for calls is a bit strange. Voice calls are charged the same as voice POTS calls, which within the local calling area are free. Data calls are charged message rates, about 2 cents/minute. So anyone with the brains of a papaya adjusts his equipment to mark everything as voice and lives with 56K rather than the clear 64K promised on data calls. I considered ISDN for my Internet link (the POP is indeed here in Cambridge), but it ended up being cheaper and easier to set up a wireless link to a friend's house and share his existing DDS connection. The cable company says they'll have 500Kb IP for $100/month early next year, which if true (we're all very sceptical) would make ISDN moot. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 14:31:11 GMT In article oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) writes: > Anyway, here is what I heard back. It seems clear that NYTel is > cream-skimming -- serving only the highly profitable areas that want > ISDN, and leaving the unprofitable areas to others. That is exactly > the opposite of what common carriers are supposed to do. Somebody ought to explain to these guys that service needs to be available at both ends in order to be useful. If I put my business office in the "cream" CO, that doesn't help me to do, let's say, telecommuting over ISDN, if my employees don't live where it's offered. Ed Greenberg edg@netcom.com Ham Radio: KM6CG ------------------------------ From: padwad@psd.gs.com (Danny Padwa) Subject: Re: NY Telephone Big Talk - Their Response Organization: PARA Systems Development - Goldman, Sachs & Co. Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 16:32:07 GMT In article Barton.Bruce@camb.com writes: > The BIGGEST rub may be training their joke-grade sales force. The > answer to that is to ONLY sell it through their 'authorized' agents -- > even for home ISDN. NYNEX seems to have century old labor relations > policies and enjoys worker moral/quality to match. The agents are > outside companies and can do a much better job and train faster. > An example of their weak sales ability is their frame relay product > which is great, but only the larger accounts served by select quality > sales staff use it. They need to let the rest of the customer base in To give them credit, NYNEX does appear to have some (at least one) knowledgeable sales-droid. I called yesterday to ask about switching my service when I move (three blocks on Manhattan's West Side). I asked if I would be able to keep my phone number, and if (when) I would be able to get ISDN at my new location. While I was disappointed by the answers (no and no), I was surprised by the knowledgeable response given by the service rep. He was willing to explain the reason I couldn't keep my number (my three block move crosses CO boundaries), and the details of ISDN availability ("The new CO has two switches, a 1A that can't support it, and a 5ESS that maybe can, etc, etc"). All in all a shockingly knowledgeable sales/customer rep. Side question if the ISDN thing doesn't pan out (I've heard guesstimates of May '95 for ISDN in the new CO (Manhattan Ave), as opposed to "a few more months" for the old one (W 73 St). Since the distance involved is so small (I'm really only moving three blocks!!) how likely do y'all think it is that NYTel will be willing to run a slightly longer wire for me?? Especially if it is a "business circuit" (employer-billed line for dialup)?? Thanks, Danny Padwa padwad@psd.gs.com Note: These are not necessarily the opinions of my employer ------------------------------ From: snoonan@netcom.com (Sam Noonan) Subject: Re: PC to Alpha Pagers! Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 18:18:52 GMT Steve Lamont (smlamont@hebron.connected.com) wrote: > Several people have posted questions about sending messages to alpha > numeric pagers. I just saw an announcement for *free* software, > called MessageFlash, to send messages from any PC with Windows and a > modem. All they charge is $7.50 for S&H. The number to call is > 1-800-99FLASH or e-mail your address and credit card data to: > info@mccaw.com. There is also Software on AmiNet FTP sites called CyberPage for the Amiga computer. From what I have seen, I have a friend who I can use this software to page or I can call the system directly and do it by hand. All you need is the Phone # of the system. The one I call is at 300 baud 7E1. So check your service for a modem number to call. ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: PC Pursuit; Also Inexpensive 14.4k FAXmodem Date: 08 Dec 1993 21:51:23 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) Global Access which was or maybe still is on SprintNet offering a service about like PCP has started moving over to BT's Tymnet which has a lot more indials as well as outdials. It might be worth looking into because I believe BT has 9600 outdials. It does not support Data Commpression though, I found that out because I use it for my Homebanking. ------------------------------ From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu (Martin McCormick) Subject: Re: Finally Got REAL Phone Service Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 21:02:31 GMT In article ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) writes: > may recall that I posted a list of changes I had noted, including this > one: >> 1) My on-hook line voltage increased from ~15 volts to ~44 volts DC. >> Also, the tip/ring polarity reversed from what it had been when I was >> on the carrier. When the line is fixed, it might be interesting to see if the on-hook voltage is any higher than 44 volts. It could be that the pinched spot with the addition of a little moisture began to conduct slightly. Maybe, at first, it was a few thousand ohms. With a little more water, it may have dropped down to a low enough resistance to start causing real problems. The green color could have been either corrosion or electrolisis caused by the current flowing between the two conductors through the liquid. The increase in voltage would definitely speed up this process and cause metal to gradually break down from the cathode or negative wire and migrate to the positively-charged wire. It is just like what happens in the electroplating process. I remember as a young boy trying to plate copper from Pennies, (yes, I know, shame on me), onto my mother's table knives, a combination domestic/federal crime. I never succeeded in doing anything more than making a mess of things, but it was quite interesting. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ From: lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Call Waiting 14.4 Modem Date: 08 Dec 1993 21:01:00 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access In a message, chris@loncps.demon.co.uk said: >> If it is important to be able to reach you when data calls are in >> progress, I recommend a second telephone line. > Not exactly the tip of the century but I my have my phone set up to > divert on busy to my cellular phone. The drawback is that I pay for > the diverted call but as I have the cellular phone anyway it's > cheaper than a second line. A useful tip in some circumstances. The trouble is, in the U.S. you pay for incoming calls on your cellular line. These cost me $0.75/c minute any time of the day with my calling plan. So I would be paying for the call to the cell phone (though this might be a local call -- I haven't checked yet) and for receiving the call on the cell phone. This is something I would rather not do. They can always calls back or if they wait long enough, the ringing will usually drop the carrier. People do comment that it does take an inordinate amount of time for me to answer the phone though! Laurence Chiu Walnut Creek, California Phone(Work) : 510-215-3730 Internet: lchiu@crl.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #808 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04570; 9 Dec 93 19:19 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08223 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30188 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:05 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 04:11:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312091011.AA30188@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #806 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 01:02:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 806 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (David Leibold) CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes (Jeff Robertson) European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 (D.E. Price) Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company (Jack Decker) Four-Bit ADPCM (Stewart Fist) NAPLPS and RIP Inquiry (Jim Choate) Telecom Mouse Standard? (Jim Choate) Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Jason Demarte) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 00:45 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Bell Canada Business Local Call Charging Approved (djcl note: the Canadian telecom regulator, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, made the following decision last week. Needless to say, business groups in Canada are not particularly enthusiastic about the idea of local measured service after a given monthly calling allowance. In summary, the scheme will not be in effect until at least 1995, which is when Bell Canada expects to have its digital switching and billing systems in place. Business groups like the CBTA mentioned in the decision are warning that residence customers will be next to get hit with local measured service. Without further ado, the decision text (subject to the odd typo, official version available from CRTC) ....) [from text of CRTC decision] Ottawa, 2 December 1993 Telecom Letter Decision 93-18 To: Bell Canada Interested Parties Re: Bell Canada - Tariff Restructuring for Business Access Services On 22 April 1991, the Commission wrote to the telephone companies referring them to the February 1991 finding of the Terminal Attachment Program Advisory Committee (TAPAC) that, owing to technological development, mutually exclusive technical definitions of PBXs and key telephone systems (KTSs) were no longer practical. The Commission noted that rates for PBX trunks and KTS access lines were generally dependent on the classification of equipment on which they terminated, and that the TAPAC finding called into question the relevance of tariffs based on that distinction. As a result of the Commission's letter, the telephone companies filed tariff revisions or reports of plans to set rates independently of terminal equipment type (with the exception of AGT Limited and the New Brunswick Telephone Company Limited, whose rates did not depend on the type of terminal equipment). The Commission has since approved tariff revisions for BC TEL, and Newfoundland Telephone Company, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone Company Limited and Newfoundland Telephone Company Limited. By letter dated 25 November 1992, the Commission denied tariff revisions proposed by Northwestel Inc., and directed the company to file proposed tariff revisions that would be revenue neutral. Bell Canada (Bell) filed reports setting out three approaches to restructuring its tariffs for Business Access Service. These approaches are described below: Blended Rate: This approach provides for a common rate for individual lines and PBX trunks. Bell rejected this approach because of its effect on customers, specifically, individual-line rates would climb by 4% to 63%, while PBX trunk rates would drop by 10% to 43%. In addition, rates for services related to individual lines and PBX trunks would be affected and, in order to achieve revenue neutrality, further rate increases would be required. Sliding Scale: The sliding scale approach would entail replacing PBX and individual line rates with an ascending rate scale. The scale would vary with the size of the channel groups (1, 2-5, 6-10, 11-20 and over 20 channels). Each rate increase along the scale would be based on the value of incremental PBX trunk rates. Bell submitted that the sliding scale approach assumes that higher efficiency (i.e., increased usage volume and decreased blocking) is achieved with greater capacity. Illustrative rates developed to achieve revenue neutrality indicate that KTS customers would be subject to increases of 13% to 44%, while PBX trunk customers would see decreases of 11% to 27%. The ascending scale could be applied only to access line groups equipped with hunting. Lines from a customer's terminal not equipped with hunting would thus be rated at the lowest level, although, when terminated on sophisticated equipment, they can generate high outgoing usage to the public switched telephone network. Threshold Pricing: Under this approach, a business customer would pay a flat rate for the access channel and a specified amount of usage, i.e., the threshold. Outgoing calls exceeding the threshold would be charged for on a per-minute basis. The threshold would not apply to the user's incoming traffic. The threshold would vary by rate group bands to take into account usage differences. Bell based the thresholds for the illustrative rates on a six-month subscriber line-usage study, commenced in April 1992, of 24,000 business access lines of various types. Based on Bell's illustrative rates, 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line and 10% of PBX trunk customers would pay increased charges. As indicated above, Bell rejected the blended rate approach because of its impact on customers. Bell submitted that threshold pricing is more appropriate than the sliding scale approach because it takes into account large differences in usage. In particular, Bell submitted that it ensures billing certainty for the majority of customers, while reflecting a user-pay philosophy. Bell stated that implementation costs would be higher than for the sliding scale approach, but that threshold pricing would permit the introduction of usage sensitive local business services, which could provide additional revenues to help offset the local access shortfall. Bell proposed to file a final rate structure in the fourth quarter of 1994. The Commission received comments on Bell's reports from the Canadian Business Telecommunications Alliance (CBTA), the Government of Ontario, Smart Talk Network (STN) and Unitel Communications Inc. (Unitel). The Commission is of the view that threshold pricing is the most equitable of the three approaches. Blended rates would result in rate increases for small users in excess of 70%. The sliding scale approach would result in increases for KTS cutsomers of up to 45%, while PBX customers would see reductions of up to 27%. Threshold pricing, on the other hand, can be implemented with no increase in customer billing for the vast majority of customers. Indeed, based on Bell's illustrative rates, threshold pricing would lead to increases for 10% of single-line customers, 14% of multi-line customers, and 10% of PBX trunk customers. Unitel objected to the threshold pricing approach, relying on BC TEL's response to a Commission interrogatory related to that company's access filing. In that response, BC TEL concluded that a report by Economics and Technology, Inc. (ETI) on local/access pricing indicates that local usage- based costs are dropping to the extent that usage-based pricing is not justified. The Commission disagrees with this interpretation of the ETI report. The report provides views both for and against usage-based pricing. In fact, the report states that, because the evidence is ambiguous as to whether there are gains to be realized from using local measured pricing as a principal means of cost recovery, most U.S. regulators have chosen a combination of flat-rate and usage-based pricing. While the Commission agress that usage-based costs are in decline, it considers that they remain a factor in the local service market. In this context, the Commission notes that threshold pricing includes both flat-rate and usage-based components, with the latter applicable to heavier users. The Commission therefore considers threshold pricing to be consistent with cost recovery requirements in a market where usage-based costs are declining, but have not been eliminated. In addition, this approach may afford customers a certain flexibility in controlling their local access costs. STN and Unitel suggested that threshold pricing targets and penalizes high- volume users, particularly alternative long distance providers, whose access service costs would rise. Bell stated that trunk-side access/equal ease of access arrangements will be in places before any threshold pricing scheme. As to the targeting of market segments, the Commission notes Bell's statetement that differences between light and heavy users exist across the whole local market, i.e., no particular market is targeted. Based on Bell's six-month subscriber line usage study, and using its illustrative rate structure, 16% of users would exceed the threshold and pay usage-based charges. In the Commission's view, pricing approaches that recover greater revenues from the heaviest users should not necessarily be regarded as 'targeting' a market segment. CBTA and Unitel submitted that threshold pricing would eliminate predictability for users generating amounts of traffic large enough to trigger usage-based charges; as a result, their ability to forecast and control their telecommunications costs will be curtailed. The Commission notes that such users have considerable experience in controlling their costs for usage-priced services like Message Toll Service and Wide Area Telephone Service. STN and Unitel submitted that the costs of implementing threshold pricing are too high. Unitel argued that BC TEL's Small Business/ Standard structure should be imposed because it can be implemented more quickly and at a lower cost. The Commission agrees that the implementation time for threshold pricing is lengthy; however, it is tied to the implementation of Bell's new billing system. It is Bell's new billing system, which includes local usage-based billing capability, as well as the provision of digital switching to all its business customers by mid-1995, that enables Bell to apply its proposed rating structure. BC TEL will not be so equipped. The Commission also notes that BC TEL, in reply to interventions filed in support of the Small Business/Standard pricing approach, stated that its criticism of usage-based pricing is based on its own specific circumstances, and that the company may consider usage-based pricing in the future. In addition to the above, the Commission notes that Bell and BC TEL differ in terms of existing rate relationships. The Commission notes Bell's evidence that, based on the illustrative rates, imposing BC TEL's approach in Bell's territory would cause the rates of KTS users to rise by 30% to 80% or more. The Commission also notes that even the smallest users would benefit from no increases in rates, while the smaller users would see substantial increases. Under Bell's threshold approach, only the heaviest users would see the increases. In light of the above, the Commission directs Bell to file proposed tariffs, in the fourth quarter of 1994, to implement threshold pricing. The Commission further directs Bell to provide the following: (1) justification for any differences between the proposed rate structure and rate structures for its other exchange access tariffs; (2) a full subscriber impact analysis; and (3) the effect of the proposed rates on the difference in total compensation paid to the telephone company for line-side versus trunk-side access for competitive long distance providers. Allan J. Darling Secretary General ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 20:49:47 EDT From: DIMBIT@delphi.com Subject: CRTC Approves Bells Pay-per-Use Changes Bell Canada has won approval for a rate charge that would introduce a pay-per-use charge for outgoing local phone calls for its largest business customers. Companies would be billed on a pay-per-use basis once their monthly volume of local calls exceeded a yet to be determined threshold. The new system will go into effect in two years and mean higher phone bills for Bell's biggest business customers, and its long distance competitors. The new pricing scheme proposed by Bell Canada would eliminate the different trunk costs of $48/month and $80.50/month for loop and ground start business lines. It would be one charge for all business customers allowing unlimited incoming call, but a fixed amount of outgoing local calls. Any outgoing local calls beyond the threshold would be charged by the minute. However, none of the new charges, including the access rate, the threshold level and the usage charge have been determined yet. The CRTC told Bell to file the rates by the fourth quarter of 1994. The new rates will likely take effect in late 1995 or early 1996, the utility said in a news release issued yesterday (Tuesday Decemeber 8/93). Six other federally regulated phone companies have adopted alternative schemes that do not have usage-sensitvie charges. -------------------------- Is this the first step toward billing personal calls by the minute? If so, my grandmother (and her rotary phone) may kick the bucket! Jeff Robertson DIMBIT@DELPHI.COM Toronto, ON, Canada ------------------------------ From: dap@aber.ac.uk (D E Price) Subject: European ISDN Event - EURIE '93 Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 22:12:33 GMT Telecommunications 'World Firsts' at EURIE '93 ============================================== UK Universities have joined forces with British Telecom to bring the European ISDN Event to six locations within the regions and nations of the United Kingdom. Integrated Services Digital Network. ISDN, or Integrated Services Digital Network represents the state of the art in Pan European communications and supports many new applications like Videophones, high quality, high speed facsimile transfer and inter computer communications. The solution provided by ISDN is relevant to almost all sectors of the economy from the smallest companies to International organisations. Business Solutions for Europe '93. The European ISDN Event (EURIE '93) is being held simultaneously in over 70 sites in most European Countries and is being supported by 22 network operators. The event has the full backing and support of the Commission of the European Communities. EURIE is the biggest ISDN event the world has yet seen. The UK National Event, being titled `Business Solutions for Europe '93' occurs simultaneously at six locations. The locations are: BT Business Centre in London Docklands, England; BT Business Centre in Birmingham, England; BT Business Centre in Glasgow, Scotland; University of Salford, Manchester, England; University of Ulster, Londonderry, Northern Ireland; University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales. Worlds Largest ISDN Videoconference as Opening Ceremony. EURIE '93 will be opened by Mr Jean-Pierre Jouyet, deputy head of Cabinet of President Delors accompanied by Mr Michel Carpentier, Director General of DGXIII of the CEC. The opening ceremony will take place in Brussels and will be transmitted by ISDN to a total of 22 centres across Europe. This will be the world's largest ISDN videoconference. Santa Claus, Live from Lapland. As part of Telecom Finland's contributions to EURIE '93, they have arranged for Santa to be accessible live from Lapland via videophone. As we all know, Santa's grotto is based in the town of Rovaniemi on the Arctic Circle in Lapland. He will be talking to his friends from all over Europe. Conference Talks. Some sites will feature conferences in addition to an exhibition of products and services. Further Information. In the UK can be acquired from the British Telecom ISDN Helpdesk Freefone 0800 18 15 14 Elsewhere in Europe, contact your nearest Telecom Operator. ------------------------------ From: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) Subject: Ameritech Wants to be a Long Distance Company Date: 9 Dec 1993 04:48:21 GMT Organization: Youngstown State/Youngstown Free-Net Reply-To: ao944@yfn.ysu.edu (Jack Decker) According to {USA Today Update}, Ameritech has filed a request with the Justice Department asking that they be allowed to offer long distance service starting in 1995. A direct quote from the news item: "William Weiss, Ameritech chairman and chief executive officer, says the plan will mean customers can choose to get local and long-distance communications from a single provider." What this item does not say is whether Ameritech is willing to open up local phone service for competition. If so, and if it's done in such a way that even residential customers have the option of getting their dial tone from someone other than Ameritech, I would be all for it. Somehow, though, considering the way that Ameritech has behaved in the past (for example, totally eliminating unmeasured local service wherever a wimpy PUC would allow it), I doubt that they are really going to do anything that might give their captive customers other options. Please, someone, tell me I'm wrong, and that Ameritech really is going to allow true competition for the proverbial "last mile"! In any case, if anyone comes across more details on exactly what Ameritech has proposed, I for one would be interested in hearing about it. Also, I wonder if the Justice Department will be taking public comments on this? Jack ------------------------------ From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Four-Bit ADPCM Date: Thurs, 9 Dec 1993 00:02:00 I've just come across a reference on fax problems which says the problems in transmission are often caused by: > "4-bit encoding" 32 K bit/sec ADPCM systems which are unsuitable. > 16 K bit/sec or 8 K bit/sec ADPCM systems. I know that most voice trunk calls in Australia (supposedly 80%) are made over 32-bit/sec ADPCM trunks, and fax seems to travel over these quite successfully. But the quote marks around the "4-bit encoding" phrase above, seems to suggest that there are a number of different versions of 32 kbit/sec ADPCM. Is this correct? I had assumed that 32 Kbit/sec ADPCM always used 4-bit codes since it only transmitted the 'difference' between two adjacent samples, rather than the sample size itself. But perhaps I've got it wrong. Is there, perhaps, a variable length (Huffman-like) code being used here? I'd also appreciate a quick outline of 16 Kbit/sec and 8 Kbit/sec ADPCM. I understand that the 16 Kbit/sec version is now widely used in Transatlantic cables, so it must be a reasonably 'lossless' compression system. Does anyone happen to know if it is also used in association with DCMS/DCME or bit-stealing techniques? ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim Choate) Subject: NAPLPS and RIP Graphics Inquiry Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:54:33 GMT Hi everyone, I am interested in contacting anyone about using NAPLPS or RIP graphics for increasing the resolution of online communications. At present I run a small non-inet bbs which supports both of these. Please respond via e-mail. Solar Soyuz Zaibatsu ASCII-ANSI-NAPLPS-RIP 512.458.6084 ------------------------------ From: ravage@wixer.bga.com (Jim choate) Subject: Telecom Mouse Standard? Organization: Real/Time Communications Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 19:55:40 GMT Are there any standards relating to passing pointing information over a modem? In particular I am looking for any discussions on standards if they exist. Please respond via e-mail. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST From: Jason Demarte Subject: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted Organization: Penn State University I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD. If anyone has some any information on this please post me a response, thanks. ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 05:42:29 PST In article gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not. The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the results. Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that can be set separately), or it might not be working. You might also be having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING. So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ... 2->3 (transmit to receive), 4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send), 20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect). Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be echoed back -- if not, the port has a problem. These are the pins for a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 and 1. If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults. It just might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port. For Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches, the command is 'AT&f&w'. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #806 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04890; 9 Dec 93 20:08 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15760 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for jgfrancis@genvax.glamorgan.ac.uk); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:23:01 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24764 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:22:41 -0600 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:22:41 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312091822.AA24764@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #809 TELECOM Digest Thu, 9 Dec 93 11:08:09 CST Volume 13 : Issue 809 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Commercial OSI Products for SPARCstation (Phil Price) ISDN - Another Voice (William Hugh Murray) POCSAG/GOLAY Message Formats? (Mike Detlef) Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting (Koos de Heer) For Your Amusement, if Possible (Patrick Tufts via Mark Brader) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pprice@qualcomm.com (Phil Price) Subject: Re: Commercial OSI Products for SPARCstation Date: 9 Dec 1993 11:01:09 GMT Organization: Qualcomm Inc. In article , tru@kddnews.kddlabs.co.jp (Tohru Asami) wrote: > Does anyboy know a commercial version of OSI tool kit which supports > up to OSI Presentation Layer? The following is a collection of articles recently posted to comp.protocols.iso - the scope is slightly larger than Sun, but I thought that other people may also be interested (and I didn't want to edit it ;-) ... Phil From: marben@nic.cerf.net (James Schontzler) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso Subject: Re: OSI Stack Availablity Date: 1 Dec 1993 21:38:34 GMT Organization: Marben Products Inc. In article <1993Nov30.214629.23924@bnr.ca> Donald Coombs writes: > I am looking for an OSI stack for a Unix environment. > Has anybody compiled a list of OSI stacks, their capabilities (CMIP, > FTAM etc), and what platforms they run on (OS2, Unix )? > I am familiar with several: > Touch/Marben > Retix > HP OTS9000 > Both the Touch/Marben and the Retix run on Unix, OTS9000 runs on HP's > HPUX 8.0 or higher. Just to update the story on Marben in the US ... Touch Communications, which used to resell the Marben OSI products, is no longer in business. Marben's OSI products are now distributed and supported throughout the USA by Marben Products Inc., a California corporation owned by MARBEN in France. Also, Marben's OSI software is typically distributed in source code form to computer manufacturers. The source code comes with its own kernel and a generalized porting kit that allow it to be ported to a variety of platforms from single board embedded computers to workstation to mainframes. Thus, although Unix is the most common target it is not the only OS that works with the portable Marben code. In fact the stack can run stand-alone without any OS. Runtime OSI products are available from Marben for certain configurations. In addition Marben's OSI technology is OEM'ed by MOST of the major Unix workstation manufacturers in the US (I'm not sure I am allowed to publicly disclose their names). Hope this information is helpful. James Schontzler Marben Products, Inc. 3 1/2 N. Santa Cruz Ave., Los Gatos, CA 95030 Internet: james@marben.com voice: 408-399-8888 fax: 408-399-8890 From: john@citr.uq.oz.au (John Gottschalk) Date: 3 Dec 1993 16:18:34 +1000 Organization: CiTR, University of Queensland The following should be added to the list of other replies: Novell's Unix System Laboratories OSI products run on Unix and some non-Unix environments. The following are available: OSI WAN products, offering the transport layer interface OSI LAN products, offering the transport layer interface OSI upper layers, offering the X/Open ACSE/Presentation layer interface (XAP) FTAM, including an FTAM to ftp gateway CMIP ASN.1 compiler X.400 OSI Transaction Processing (which is available with Tuxedo) These products are now being sold by Firefox, who also have an X.400 (1988) product suite. I have the contact addresses for the company, in case anybody is interested. John Gottschalk, john@citr.uq.oz.au Project Manager, CiTR, +61 7 365 4321 (phone) Gehrmann Building, +61 7 365 4399 (fax) The University of Queensland, 4072, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, From: thomas@lkg.dec.com (Matt Thomas) Date: 2 Dec 1993 23:20:25 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation In article <2dhsph$64q@disuns2.epfl.ch>, ppvx@litsun36.epfl.ch (Patrick Pleinevaux) writes: > A few OSI stacks available on UNIX: > AEG Computrol PC/AT SCO UNIX MMS > Bull DPX 2000 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (DP=MAP) > Bull DPX 2 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (IS) > HP HP 9000/800 series MMS, FTAM > IBM RS 6000/AIX MMS (already available ?) > Motorola Delta Series MMS, FTAM > Olivetti LSX 5000 FTAM, X.500, X.400 > Siemens Nixdorf PC SCO UNIX MMS > Siemens Nixdorf MX 300 FTAM, X.400, RDA, MMS Digital ULTRIX V4.2 or later MMS, VT, FTAM, X.25, (VAX or MIPS) X.400, X.500 Digital DEC OSF/1 (Alpha AXP) VT, FTAM, X.25 (X.400, X.500, MMS soon) Matt Thomas Internet: thomas@lkg.dec.com U*X Networking UUCP: ...!decwrl!thomas Digital Equipment Corporation Disclaimer: This message reflects my own Littleton, MA warped views, etc. From: martineau@MacMartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca (Alain Martineau) Organization: Hydro Quebec Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 12:26:29 GMT You have any idea of the price tag of DECnet for OSF/1 ? We are in the process of procuring an energy management system with about 140 OSF/1 workstations. The specification said it should be UCA ( now IGOSS ? ) compliant. At $3500 CAN each, that makes $490 000, when TCP/IP comes for free, and does more ( multicast is required, for instance ). That was a shock, as I am used to get DECnet for free with VMS, and adding TCP/IP is far from being that expensive. These days, that kind of expense is not justifiable, especially when OSI nodes are nowhere to be seen, and with that kind of pricing, it's likely to stay that way. Alain Martineau Hydro Quebec martineau@macmartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca From: robert@gar.no (Robert Andersson) Date: 6 Dec 1993 17:22:05 +0100 Organization: Gallagher & Robertson A/S In martineau@MacMartineau.ccr.hydro.qc.ca (Alain Martineau) writes: > At $3500 CAN each, that makes $490 000, when TCP/IP comes > for free, and does more ( multicast is required, for instance ). That > was a shock, as I am used to get DECnet for free with VMS, and adding > TCP/IP is far from being that expensive. > These days, that kind of expense is not justifiable, especially when > OSI nodes are nowhere to be seen, and with that kind of pricing, it's > likely to stay that way. DEC is far from alone in doing this. Sun, HP and IBM all do the same thing. I'm sure a lot of the other major players in the Unix market also do. One vendor I believe bundles OSI transport with the base OS is NCR. Almost all vendors bundle TCP/IP with the base OS these days. The only exception seems to be vendors of Unix for the Intel x86 platform like SCO and Novell, but I expect them to bundle TCP/IP pretty soon. And while this happens we continue to pay through the nose for OSI. I believe that this is one of the major reasons for OSI's fall in the marketplace. If this fall is a good or bad thing is a religious discussion, please don't start that one again :-) Regards, Robert Andersson Voice +47 22418551 Gallagher & Robertson A/S robert@gar.no Fax +47 22428922 Kongensgt. 23, 0153 Oslo, Norway From: tozz@cup.hp.com (Bob Tausworthe) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1993 01:00:42 GMT Organization: Hewlett-Packard Patrick Pleinevaux (ppvx@litsun36.epfl.ch) wrote: > A few OSI stacks available on UNIX: > AEG Computrol PC/AT SCO UNIX MMS > Bull DPX 2000 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (DP=MAP) > Bull DPX 2 MMS, FTAM, X.400, CMIP (IS) > HP HP 9000/800 series MMS, FTAM Good list! To update this, it should read: HP HP 9000/800+700 series MMS, FTAM, X.400, X.500, CMIP Just trying to stay accurate. I won't turn this into an ad. If you want more information (API support, profiles, conformance, etc) drop me a line and I'll forward it to the proper people. Bob Tausworthe Hewlett Packard 19420 Homestead Rd Cupertino, Ca 95014 (408) 447-2873 tozz@cup.hp.com From: jbrady@deepriver.East.Sun.COM (John Brady - SunNetworks Consultant) Date: 3 Dec 1993 13:32:55 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Another "commercial" OSI stack for UNIX... SunLink Product Line... SunLink OSI Solaris 1.x & 2.x FTAM, VT SunLink X.25 Solaris 1.x & 2.x X.25 SunLink MHS Solaris 1.x & 2.x X.400 John Brady Network Management Consultant SunNetworks, A Sun Microsystems, Inc. Business (703) 204-4859 john.brady@East.Sun.Com From: dfauvarq@vulcain.France.Sun.COM (Daniel Fauvarque - SunConnect ICNC) Date: 3 Dec 1993 15:11:39 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. To be added: SUN Connect SunOS 4.X X.400, FTAM Solaris 5.X X.400, Mime Gateway, FTAM, CMIP, VT From: dsgrieve@jhawk.b30.ingr.com (david s. grieve) Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville AL Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 16:00:24 GMT Also... Intergraph CLIX FTAM, MHS, VT, TP0,2,4, ES-IS David S. Grieve dsgrieve@jhawk.b30.ingr.com Integraph Corp. Phone: 205-730-3142 MS GD3005 Fax : 205-730-3038 Huntsville, AL 35894-0001 Bldg 30, Room 128U From: ag129@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) Organization: University of Cambridge Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 17:49:48 GMT Just out of curiosity, does anyone, anywhere, have JTM? From: thomas@lkg.dec.com (Matt Thomas) Date: 5 Dec 1993 21:59:37 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Lower layers (bottom up): HDLC, LAPB, DDCMP (VAX ULTRIX only), FDDI, Ethernet, TokenRing (OSF/1 only) LLC2 CLNS, X.25 (over either LLC2 or LAPB) & CONS, DECnet Phase IV OSI Transport (classes 0, 2, and 4), RFC1006 (TP0 over TCP) ULTRIX implementation is US and UK GOSIP'ed. OSF/1 implementation is in the process of being GOSIP'ed. Matt Thomas Internet: thomas@lkg.dec.com U*X Networking UUCP: ...!decwrl!thomas Digital Equipment Corporation Disclaimer: This message reflects my own warped views, etc. Littleton, MA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 10:49 EST From: WHMurray@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL Subject: ISDN - Another Voice I have listened with interest the discussions on ISDN. While I have learned a lot, I feel that one important point has been missed. I suggest to you that there is nothing in the world quite so useless as one telephone. Even two telephones have limited value. The value of a telephone rises along an s-shaped curve with the number of potential connections. Incidentally, as its value rises along this curve, its price tends to fall. The problem with ISDN is not simply that it costs too much, but that there is no one to talk to. The price of a 9600 modem has recently fallen to under a $100- and that of a 14.4 to under $200-. The effective speed of the 14.4 approaches that of ISDN. The difference is that with the modem there are lots of people to talk to. Why would I want to pay five times the cost of the modem for an ISDN card when no one that I want to talk to has one. For ISDN value to be comparable to that of a 14.4 modem, the number of people using them would have to be comparable. Note that I made the same argument when comparing ISDN to 2400 modems, which were no where near the speed of ISDN. The number and price of 14.4s is getting better much faster than ISDN. Much of the discussion here has been about the use of ISDN for the last mile connection to the internet. Here, even the one advantage that ISDN really has, fast call setup, is lost. I will leave it to the reader to figure out at what point one might be willing to give up the scarce slot that his 14.4 is using to put an ISDN card in it. I am sure that I want high speed digital connections to the home more than most people. My personal comm bill runs about a thousand dollars a month, so I am about as likely to pay for it as most. But it still seems to me that ISDN is a day late and a dollar short. I find it much easier to forsee the cross over between modems and packet switched on CTV broadband than that between modems and ISDN. It may well be that George Gilder is right and low-power, spread-spectrum, digital RF will beat modems, ISDN, and CTV. William Hugh Murray, Executive Consultant, Information System Security 49 Locust Avenue, Suite 104; New Canaan, Connecticut 06840 1-0-ATT-0-700-WMURRAY; WHMurray at DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL [Moderator's Note: Thanks for pointing out what is so often overlooked when comparing technological advances and pricing in telecom services when compared with other 'utilities' as one example or devices and gimmicks: unlike virtually everything else, the telephone and its peripherals take two to tango. I don't care where you get your cable television; I don't care whose computer and software you purchase. None of it affects me. Wire it however you like; use expensive or cheap and worthless components ... but if your telecom equipment is of poor quality then it affects my use of my telecom equipment. Only the telephone matters in this respect: we all have to do it the right way, else everyone else's service is degraded as a result. Because of this, you can't quite apply the pricing and scale of economics to telecom that you can to other 'electronics' or 'computer equipment'. PAT] ------------------------------ From: detlef@se01.elk.miles.com (Mike Detlef) Subject: POCSAG/GOLAY Message Formats? Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:35:23 GMT I'm getting ready to start a home project that will involve sending coded numeric pages to a smart box that decodes them and prints a "grocery list" for a remote user. The two formats that seem to be most prevalent are POCSAG and GOLAY. Can anybody provide me with 1) details or 2) pointer to a source for details on either of these? Thanks, Mike ------------------------------ From: cvitoa!koos@uunet.UU.NET (Koos de Heer) Subject: Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 11:45:17 GMT Organization: Centrum Voor Informatieverwerking, Utrecht, The Netherlands In FOO@BUVAX.BARRY.EDU (G. Trevor Foo) writes: > Help! I am doing some research on telecommuting and its effects. My > research requires that I determine the percentage of the U.S. > workforce that is potentially suitable for telecommuting. > I am trying to find "a list" of all job classifications that will > fulfill the requirements for a potential telecommuting job. Due to newsreader problems I didn't see your question earlier. I am involved in a telecommuting project in The Netherlands. One of the problems is finding out when it will and when it will not 'work'. A few pilots are running. In general, full-time tele- commuting is seldom a succes. Usually the telecommuting portion of a job varies between 20 and 60% (one to three days per week). This requires also a different way of dealing with office space -- but that is too far away from telecommunications to discuss here. Another question is how to define telecommuting. How about the salesperson who writes reports from the car or from home at the end of the day and sends them to the office by modem or network? How about the worker who takes some extra work home and does that on the privately owned PC in the evening? There are other border-line cases and they are hard to ignore for the number of people involved. I don't have the list you are looking for -- unsure if one exists but also unsure if it is wise to create one. Aren't jobs changing continuously? In my opinion it is better to look at criteria that make it possible or impossible to telecommute. Then you can try to estimate a percentage. But certainly that percentage will not be fixed - my view is that it will grow substantially over time as our work changes and technology develops. Criteria that we have come up with so far (some quite obvious): - work has to be mainly desk work (research, writing, telephoning or faxing, data entry, and the like), or in other words: aimed at the creation, processing or retrieval of information; - job should not require frequent contact with co-workers; - organization has to be able to deal with remote workers, which means that management has to control output of workers rather than presence in the office (for many managers, this is a problem!); - worker has to _want_ to telecommute; - worker has to be able to work independently (this is very important when one works at home; working in a telecommuting center near home requires less discipline); - when working at home: home situation has to be fit for working (small space with two young kids around could be problematic); - the information and communication aspects of the work have to be highly automated (workstation network, phone/fax, videoconferencing etc. rather than books, binders and live meetings); Recently, I read about research in the US (no source was given) that estimated the number of telecommuters in the US at 8 million and growing by 25% per year. Dutch research in 1992 showed that in the near future 25 to 33% of the total working population will be telecommutable, i.e. meeting the above criteria. Hope this is of some help, I am interested in further comments of course. > Thank you. Pleasure. koos de heer koos@cvi.ns.nl ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:24:31 -0500 From: msb@sq.com Subject: For Your Amusement, if Possible [Moderator's Note: Found in alt.config by our correspondent and passed along. PAT] Newsgroups: alt.config From: zippy@cs.brandeis.edu (Patrick Tufts) Subject: Newsgroup proposal: alt.sect.telecom Organization: Brandeis University Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 19:48:08 GMT twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes: > Please consider alt.religion.islam rather than alt.sect.islam. There > is already an alt.religion hierarchy in place, and it follows the > model set by alt.dcom.telecom, alt.sources, etc. for having an > unmoderated alt group with a parallel name to a moderated Usenet group. alt.sect.telecom - its time has come. Tim Pierce twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) [Moderator's Note: So true, so true. The scandalous thing about the Dungheap Net is that its not just the formation of the unmoderated newsgroup they are now using for telecom; its *any* group they start there. The battles go on and on and on. Well, their time is drawing nigh ... watch what happens when the new Plantation Masters MCI and Sprint -- operators of backbone sites everywhere -- crack their whip and raise the rates for transmission to the point that the anarchists flee in terror. Sites will start getting severely truncated news feeds (all they'll be able to afford); absolutely no one will bother getting a full news feed any longer; the Sunday afternoon in the park analogy by Gene Spafford will turn into a ride on the New York Subway late on a Saturday night during a hot summer, etc. I predict Usenet will go through something like the CB craze of the late 1970's: everyone will be connected, the noise will be so awful that everyone gives up on it and admins will be severely pressured by their superiors to either eliminate it due to the increasing costs or at least severely cut back on it. And God help the poor devils, if Usenetters were told "you have a final 24 hour period to say something significant and make a substan- tial difference in the world via this medium before the plug is pulled once and for all," most of them would spend the 24 hours flaming about the proper way to set up a newsgroup and whether or not someone was making a couple dollars on the side from it. Its interesting though that a certain highly-placed netter who has much to say about which groups are created and which are not is never called to account for the fact that his employer UUNET definitly stands to benefit from the increased traffic via charges to their clients. Ooops, I was not supposed to say that, was I ... :) See ya tomorrow! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #809 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07594; 10 Dec 93 5:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06995 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:27 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02895 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:04 -0600 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 02:12:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312100812.AA02895@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #810 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Dec 93 02:12:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 810 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cable TV Meets Telecom (Dave O'Shea) Cable Channels (was Quantum Economics) (David L. Kindred) ATM Conference Jan '94/Vancouver Update (Mark Fraser) Reflections of a Phone Company Boss (Vancouver Province via Sid Shniad) Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Neklan Brozensky) FTP'able EIA/TIA/IS-54B? (Wade Stone) Are ORA Hands Free Car Kits Any Good? (Pete Helme) Phone System/Voice Mail Recommendations Wanted (Bryan Gonderinger) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dave_oshea@wiltel.com (Dave O'Shea) Subject: Cable TV Meets Telecom Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 12:21:44 EST padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) writes: >>> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R for >>> Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to pay for >>> 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home shopping >>> opportunities the new technology promises.<< >> Does anyone recall that there were similar arguments against cable TV? >> Tell me about how that one panned out, once it was available in the >> free market. > Somehow, I doubt that adding another 460 channels would change my > habits much and, since the foregoing is *enough*, would not be willing > to pay any more. You're working under the assumption that Cable TV will continue to simply add more broadcast channels with all this extra capacity. First, the "500 channels" figure is possibly misleading. It was tossed out in reply to a reporter's question by the president of TCI (Tele communications, Inc., a good-sized cable operator) when he was asked what kind of capacity these systems might have. Reporters (and most consumers) can't relate things like mbit/s, DS3, Sonet, and ATM to useful measures. That bandwidth could be used to carry a number of different things. A couple that come to mind are interactive games, information services, and possibly tele/videoconferencing services. Who knows what other things will be dreamed up in the decade or so that it will take to implement all this. Now, remember, that is just the bandwidth carried into your home. Some sort of switching system, like distributed mini-CO's, may be able to take portions of an even bigger data pipe and selectively feed it to consumers on demand. It may come to pass that the distinction between your phone service and your cable service becomes a little hazy. Bill "Who could ever use 640k?" Gates didn't think anybody could use more capacity than he provided, either. :-) > The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think > "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad > enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now > requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for > the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel > listing? Suppose the listing were piped into a cable converter that had a few pages of video memory, and allowed you to scroll through the guide, perhaps filtering on new-release comedy movies starting at 9:00pm? Or offering a $3.00/hr multi-player game which would be your computer would be the client for? It wouldn't be at all difficult to put an ethernet connector on the back of a cable box, and the price of a router might drop the way pocket calculators did in the '70s with mass production and LSI technology. > I suspect that this is part of the problem that has kept satellite > receiver sales down, sensory overload. Why else whould the Internet > Gophers, Archies, and WWW retrieval mechanisms be so popular -- and > these people are probably the "brightest and the best". Well, there's also price (low end units are still expensive), you need to be fairly technically sophisticated to be able to understand where to located programming, and many people (apartment-dwellers, folks in towns with scrict zoning regulations) simply have no place to put a dish. The trick is to make retrieval of useful information practical for a non- technical person. Archie amd related services are great, but you still need a large base of knowlege and skills before you can use it or interpret the information it provides. > So for 500 channels to work, a listing would have to be downloaded > (daily ?, weekly ?) to a storage device that could be set up for > selective retrieval. Could it be done -- certainly. Will it ? No reason to expect it won't. Scientific Atlanta, General Instrument, and several other companies have surely seen the value of such a service. (As have most of the RBOC's, I'm sure.) Dave O'Shea dos@wdns.wiltel.com Sr. Network Support Engineer 201.236.3730 WilTel Data Network Services ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 93 09:20 EST From: kindred@telesciences.com (David L Kindred ) Subject: Cable Channels (was Quantum Economics) A Padgett Peterson writes: > Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com writes: >> As {Business Week} pointed out in an article entitled "Dial R >> for Risk," it is questionable whether consumers will want to >> pay for 500-plus channels of repetitive entertainment and home >> shopping opportunities the new technology promises. > this gives me about 40 tunable channels of which I usually > watch 9 (TNT, TLC, Nickelodean, USA, AMC, BRAVO, Family, > Sci-Fi, and Comedy). This is *enough* (C). Your point is well made, however there is one thing you have overlooked, and that is that although each us may only watch nine or so channels, it is quite possible that we each want nine DIFFERENT channels. My cable company has about 45 channels of capacity, which means that there are channels I want that I can't get, as they also have to accommodate everyone else. (BTW, I only get four of the channels you listed, and would like at least three of the others). The advantage of a "500" channel system would be that each of us can select what we want, without preventing our neighbor from doing the same. Hopefully the implementation of these new systems would allow us to pay for what we wanted, and let us leave the rest behind. Dave ------------------------------ From: mfraser@vanbc.wimsey.com (Mark Fraser) Subject: ATM Conference Jan '94/Vancouver Update Date: 9 Dec 1993 09:42:17 -0800 Organization: Wimsey Information Services January 27-28,1994 Vancouver, BC, Canada Rapid adcances in switching and transmission technologies are propelling fast-paced developments in high speed communication networks that are capable of achieving transfer speeds in excess of 150 Mbps. Canada is at the forefront of this exciting development with companies such as MPR Teltech, Newbridge, Northern Telecom, Bell- Northern Research (BNR), and others doing research and developing products in the Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) arcs. ATM is a major technology focus in high speed networking. The purpose of this conference is to bring together major ATM players from industry and academia to talk about the technology -- its past, present, and future. This conference is the first of its kind in Canada. The specific objectives of this conference are: To provide a gathering of technology developers, service providers, network operators, and researchers who are deeply involved in high speed communication networking to describe the state-of-the- art in ATM networks, covering topics in technology, hardware, software, standards, trials, and innovative applications. Emphasis will be focused on both current developments and near future trends. To provide a forum for developers and providers to meet with application user groups and government policy planners to exchange views and insight on ATM networking. To promote a meeting of the minds so that a better understanding of the needs and problem of the user communities can be accomplished, resulting in products and services more tailored to meeting those needs and solving those problems. To provide a starting point for building a community of interest in ATM high speed networking with representation from all interested parties. The target audiences include: Technology developers Product developers Service providers Researchers Network operators Application users Industry observers Company executives Government policy planners The conference is co-sponsored by six research institutes: Telecommunications Research Laboratories (TRLabs), the National Wireless Communications Research Foundation (NWCRF), , the Ottawa Carleton Research Institute (OCRI), the Telecommunications Research Institute of Ontario, the Telecommunications Consortium of Canada (TCC) and the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers and supported by: Canadian Institute for Telecommunications Research (CITR). There will be three keynote speakers, about 15 invited speakers, and a lively panel discussion. The conference will have academics talking about their research, as well as industrial representatives discussing equipment developments, standards, trials, etc. in a vendor neutral way. For registration and For Technical Program Conference Information Information: John Mele Dr. Carey L. Williamson ATM Conference Coordinator Co-Chair, ATM Technical Committee NWCRF TRLabs Suite 450, 1122 Mainland St. 108 - 15 Innovation Boulevard Vancouver, BC, CANADA Saskatoon, SK, CANADA V6B 5L1 S7N 2X8 Tel: (604) 687-7644 Tel: (306)668-8204 Fax: (604) 687-7563 Fax: (306)668-1944 e-mail: mfraser@wimsey.bc.ca e-mail: carey@cs.usask.ca Request for refunds must be received prior to January 20, 1994. Refunds are subject to a $50.00 administration fee. Participants with confirmed registrations who fail to attend or notify NWCRF of cancellation prior to the refund date, are subject to the full fee. Substitutions are allowed at any time. Registration Form Early Registration $495.00 +GST = 529.65 (must be received prior to January 3rd, 1994) After January 3rd, 1994 Members* $550.00 +GST = 588.50 Non-members $625.00 +GST = 668-75 Students $200.00 +GST = 214.00 *open to employees of member companies of sponsoring organizations Method of Payment _____ Cheque/money order _____ VISA Card # ______________________ Expiry date _________________ IEEE #___________________________ Name ___________________________________________ Title ___________________________________________ Organization ___________________________________________ Address ___________________________________________ City/Prov ___________________________________________ Postal Code ___________________________________________ Tel __________________ Fax ___________________ e-mail ___________________________________________ Please make cheques payable to: NWCRF ATM: Technology, Standards, Trials and Applications Agenda Thursday January 27, 1994 9:00 am Keynote Session I James Mackie, Vice President, Business Development, Newbridge 10:30 am Session I: Technology Overview Chair: Carey Williamson, TRLabs ATM Networking - Alberto Leon-Garcia, University of Toronto, CITR CITR Projects on Broadband Networks and Services - Johnny Wong, U. of Waterloo/CITR 12:00 Lunch 1:00 pm Keynote Session II ATM: Issues and Challenges Ahead - Raj Jain, DEC Parallel Session 2:00 Session II: Technology - Hardware Chair: Norm Dowds, MPR T.B.A. - Norm Dowds, MPR Teltech A Parallel Host Interface for ATM - Mark McCutcheon, UBC A Desktop T1 Interface to ATM - Dave Dodds, TRLabs 3:30 Session III: Technology - Software Chair: Gerald Neufeld, UBC The Xunet II Native Mode ATM Protocol Stack - Srinivasan Keshav, AT&T High Speed Protocols for ATM - Gerald Neufeld, UBC Dynamic Incremental Reconfiguration of Virtual Paths - Mike MacGregor, TRLabs Parallel Session 2:00 Canarie: Status and the Way Ahead TBA, Canarie 3:00 OCRInet: Research Networks in the Ottawa-Carleton Region - First Impressions TBA, OCRI 3:30 Panel Discussion: ATM Research Networks - Edgar Froese, RNet - Brian Unger, President, Western University Research Network - TBA, Quebec Network Friday, January 28, 1994 8:30 am Keynote III Does 'ATM' Equal 'Broadband' - John Bourne, BNR 9:30 am Session IV: Standards Update Chair: Karen Kobierski, BNR International Standards Update - Richard Vickers, BNR ATM Traffic Management - Dave McDysan, MCI The AAL-5 Adaption Layer Standard - Craig Partridge, BBN ATM Signalling Standards - Gregg Ratta, Bellcore 11:00 am Session V: Applications and Trials Chair: Peter Briscoe, Newbridge The Viewstation: An ATM-Based Environment for Media-Intensive Applications - David Tennenhouse, MIT SaskTel's Residential Multimedia Broadband Trial - Perry Gray, SaskTel Traffic Management and Congestion Control in ATM Networks - Chuck Kalmanek, AT&T 12:30 Lunch 1:15 pm Session VI: Panel Discussion Chair: Rick Bunt, TRLabs - Raj Jain, DEC - John Bourne, BNR - Johnny Wong, U. of Waterloo/CITR - T.B.A. 2:15 pm Closing Remarks Parallel Session 9:30 Strategic Alliances: An Instrument to Build a Canadian National Information Infrastructure - Allan Kennedy, President, Telecommunications Consoritum of Canada 10:00 Panel Discussion: Initiatives in ATM Networks in the US - Matt Kuhn, North Carolina ATM Network - TBA, NII PacBell Research - TBA, Network Nielson 11:30 Initiatives in Europe - SuperJanet TBA 12:00 Lunch 1:15 Panel Discussion: Canadian Federal/Provincial Government Initiatives - Jocelyn Ghent Mallett, Industry Canada - Gordon Gow, Ontario International Corporation - TBA, Quebec - TBA, BC 2:15 Closing Remarks ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: Reflections of a phone company boss Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 11:34:58 PST Values lost along that bottom line -- by Doug Hockley Have you ever had a little rational bubble float to the surface of your consciousness that leaves you with a twinge of conscience? I've experienced a few of them recently and they concern the importance of people versus corporate profits. There are intrinsic Canadian values as we passively tolerate a concerted corporate lobby for a globalized marketplace in what used to be our country. Ours as in yours and mine, not some foreign money and management force that has taken over. Every day I read about companies reaping a profit margin unheard of in former times -- and at the same time I see more job erosion. I watch the evening news and hear how governments wonder where to cut social programs. We should start questioning the presumptuous corporate realm and our own misguided assumption that making money is more important than rights of an individual or the family. And we should start questioning all political parties that would give away our national integrity for the sake of foreign interests. I've heard that we can't build a wall around our country and I look at Switzerland and say why not? Why not experiment with a Canadian job tariff? Every job exported in the name of NAFTA could have a tariff imposed that would be transferred to unemployment insurance and job retraining programs. Let's not lose sight of the fact that we have an extraordinary array of natural resources and an abundance of renewable resources. Our population is relatively small in comparison to other countries and our land reserve is virtually untapped. ... And here's a radical thought: Why is half my income taxed away while corporate taxes remain incomprehensibly low? Considering the profits being made and the willingness of companies to increase my tax burden by manufacturing offshore, their tax rate should be doubled. Ask yourself this: How many multinational stop to consider the impact of their strategic objectives on citizens? I think we're overdue for a re-evaluation of what is fundamentally important to us as Canadians, otherwise we're going to lose what in the world envy. Let us not allow "our home and native land" to be given away for the sake of some corporate bottom line. _____ --Doug Hockley is the Employee Assistance Manager at the British Columbia Telephone Company. He deals with employees' difficulties related to alcoholism, drug abuse, stress, and family problems. This article ran in the {Vancouver Province}. Sid Shniad ------------------------------ From: a03431@giant.rsoft.bc.ca (Neklan Brozensky) Subject: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line Date: 10 Dec 1993 00:07:36 GMT Organization: MIND LINK! Communications Corp Hi Netters, I have a Unix background. Recently I've taken a job which involves IBM AS/400 and dedicated long distance data comunications, niether of which I've had tons of previous experince with. I'd like to get an outside opinion on a company-internal comunications question. I'm a systems administrator in a branch office. We have currently 30 terminals/printer unit attached to our head office's AS/400 in Colorado Springs accross a leased analogue line. The remote controller unit is attached to an IBM 5866 9600 baud modem. We are planning to totally upgrade the connection because our office is growing rapidly and even more terminals will be required. However in the mean time I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a v.32bis type modem would be a fast inexpensive way to increase throughput untill the issues around a more permanent faster solution got sorted out. The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary solution. Their chief arguments are: 1. The are uncertain that the line will support a faster line speed. That there may be problems with the line that only manifest them selves at the faster rate. and if they occur, too much time will be spent fooling around tyring to solve that. 2. They don't think that the solution will result in the antiscipated payoff of increased response for keyers at dataentry terminals. The guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times for a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the DSU/CSU). At that time he only got a 10% increase in resposiveness. I think something is wrong here. Keeping in mind that this dedicated line is going from Vancouver, Canada to Colorado Springs, I still think that the line is not going to be taxed that much more if the modem is signalling at 14400 instead of 9600. In fact our local telco repesentative suggested even using a v.fast type modem accross the line. I have even less reason to buy their second argument. Making the assumption that SNA (or what ever the communications protocol is for the AS/400s to comunicate with our remote terminals) can be compress almost as well as you average ascii text, then there should be a significate speed up taking place. What are people's thoughts here about this ... what reply would you guys make to these claims. Are they resonable technical objections? Are they being intransigent? Thanks for any insights you can provide. Neklan Brozensky a3431@mindlink.bc.ca ------------------------------ From: wstone@netcom.com (Wade Stone) Subject: FTP'able EIA/TIA/IS-54B? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 01:57:38 GMT Is there some public domain version of this meaty spec? If you know of, have heard of, or think you might have heard of availability of this (other than Global Engineering [US$218] or the local public library [microfiche 310 pages at US$0.25/page]), then I thank you for any info. Please follow up on this thread or e-mail me. Thanks in advance, Wade Stone wstone@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: pvh@apple.com (Pete Helme) Subject: Are ORA Hands Free Car Kits Any Good? Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 20:21:46 GMT Organization: Apple Computer Inc. I was thinking of getting an ORA hands free kit for my NEC P600. Are they any good? Do they recharge the battery as well as just power it? Thanks, pvh@apple.com ------------------------------ From: bjg@shaman.nexagen.com (Bryan Gonderinger) Subject: Phone System/Voice Mail Recommendations Wanted Date: 9 Dec 1993 16:39:52 -0700 Organization: NeXagen.com We've outgrown our current phone system/voice mail combination (a StarPlus 96EX hybrid key system coupled with a Vodavi StarPlus AVP voicemail system). I'd like to hear any recommendations for alternate phone systems and associated voice mail systems. We've been recommended by our current vendor to go with the StarPlus SPX PBX system and upgrade our StarPlus AVP system, but we've had no end of problems with our current StarPlus system, so I'm a bit leery of this solution. Currently, we've looked into a ROLM system, but even though this product is very impressive looking, I think that we'd be paying for many features/capabilities that we would never use. I'd appreciate any comments on the ROLM system (we were considering the ROLM 9200 CBX system with the ROLM PhoneMail voice mail). So far, all I've heard is good stuff about this system (well, except for the price :). Our current setup has approximately 16 key phones and 60 single-line phones, and we're planning to expand next year to about 120 single line phones, and maybe add a few key phones as well. The StarPlus system was recommended because it would allow us to use all our existing phones. The ROLM system is compatible with our SLT phones, but we would need to replace our key phones. Obviously, reusability of our current equipment would be nice, but not necessary (assuming the overall price was right). We'd like a system that would allow us to expand beyond this point at some time in the future (perhaps to around 300 or so phones), as well as one that's relatively cheap to operate. One potential problem - we've got a number of extensions that are shared by multiple people, each of whom has their own separate voice mail box. The Vodavi system allows us to have the "message waiting" light lit on the extension if any of the users (about four per extension) of that extension have a message in their mailbox. Our current supplier tells us that that is a feature not commonly found on voice mail systems. Well, if you've waded through all that diatribe, and have any info., please email me back, or give me a call at (303) 444-0498 x155 (or give me your number and I'll be happy to pay the charges). Thanks, Bryan Gonderinger (bjg@nexagen.com) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #810 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25569; 13 Dec 93 15:40 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23262 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for eweinberger@gn.apc.org); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17097 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:13 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 09:47:13 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312111547.AA17097@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #811 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 93 09:47:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 811 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir (Charles Hoequist) International X25 Connections (Frederic Albrecht) Airphone Enhancements, Anyone? (Andrew C. Green) "POTS"/CBL Maintenance Specifications (Anthony D. Vullo) Free Phone Calls on Itineris Service in France (cccf@altern.com) Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK (A. Padgett Peterson) Local Telco Blocking Carriers (A. Padgett Peterson) Do You Know About the Corning Plant in Wilmington, NC? (Phil Crawley) What is MF4? (Stephen L. Moshier) Help - Do You Know Who Sells Prepaid International Calling Cards? (Sue Liu) High Speed Links (ajay@cs.buffalo.edu) Phone Card For a PC (Paul L. Egges) Telephone Company Rate Survey (Hansel E. Lee Jr.) Satellite Monitors Wanted (Darren Ingram) Caller ID Telephone (Russ Kepler) Caller ID in Software? (John Allen) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 16:15:00 +0000 From: Charles Hoequist Subject: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir Last night, a message was waiting on my answering machine when I arrived home, from a Southern Bell representative requesting me to call their customer service number concerning my billing address. Aha, I thought. They are tired of the billing address not being the same as the service address and wish to make them the same. Wrong, wrong. I call the number, wade through the voicemail system, state the issue to the rep, and she asks me for my residential address. After taking it, she says, "Then you don't live at 820 Old Apex Rd?" No, I don't. I've never been to that address, which is in another town, and presumably not even served by the same CO as mine. The rep could not tell me how it happened, nor could she tell me how the discrepancy was discovered. The risky part, however, is embodied in her comment, "well, it's a good thing you didn't call 911!" True enough. Imagine the fire/police/ambulance speeding to some location a dozen miles from me, while whatever disaster is underway plays itself out. Worse: how many more such obvious database glitches are hanging around undetected? I say 'obvious', in light of the likelihood that the incorrect address in not in the correct CO service area, and should therefore be easy to spot. And if I called 911 and gave an address which didn't match the database, what would the 911 operator do? Charles Hoequist, Jr. | Internet: hoequist@bnr.ca BNR, Inc. | voice: 919-991-8642 PO Box 13478 | fax: 919-991-8008 Research Triangle Park NC 27709-3478 USA [Moderator's Note: The printout 911 receives is more of an advisory in the event the caller is unable to speak with them for whatever reason than an absolute guide to location. Had you told them a different address police/fire would have come to the address you stated. Regretfully, had you been incapacitated and been only able to dial the number then unable to speak (unconcious, dead, etc) their initial trip would have been to the wrong address. :(. Errors will occur in data entry when thousands of entries are entered manually. The listings have a high degree of accuracy, but that of course is of little comfort to the person whose entry is incorect. PAT] ------------------------------ From: FA38@calvacom.fr (Frederic ALBRECHT) Subject: International X25 Connections Organization: R.C.I. CalvaCom Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 13:55:29 GMT Hello, I've been asked to write a booklet on ways to connect to a French online service from various countries: Europe, North America, Japan and the Commonwealth. This online service is accessible from the French X25 packet switching network Transpac. It should therefor be accessible through any national X25 network with an international call. Trouble is I don't know how other network operators handle international calls. Which is why I now turn to the Digest. Any help from people from any of the above countries would be very much appreciated regarding ways to place an international call on their local X25 network (is some form of subscription needed?) or the phone number or e-mail address of the local network operator. In return, I'd be glad to answer any questions about France. Please reply by email. Fred fred@calvacom.fr 100136,711 (CIS) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 10:01:29 CST From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Airphone Enhancements, Anyone? I've recently received an invitation to participate in a survey by a market research outfit. No, no, this is a _real_ one, a firm that pays me in cash to show up, frown thoughtfully at the sponsor's product and make inspired suggestions about how they could improve it, as if the future of the free world depended on, say, hair mousse, to cite one recent session. Anyway, next Monday evening, December 13th, I am scheduled to be in a small group discussing possible new services and capabilities that we feel would be useful additions to airplane telephones. The focus of the evening seems to be adding laptop PC or fax machine connectivity, to judge from an unusual advance letter I just received from them. They say, "One of the major stresses on our discussion will be on developing A LIST OF ALL THE POSSIBLE CIRCUMSTANCES AND SITUATIONS IN WHICH YOU AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PANEL CAN VISUALIZE OR IMAGINE THAT YOU MIGHT USE SUCH A SERVICE." (Emphasis theirs) They ask, "[T]hink about this topic, to visualize yourself and perhaps other people as using this feature, and the situations of its use." Since you are all Other People, as far as I can tell, I thought I'd collect suggestions from you to raise in discussion next Monday. Please send whatever ideas you have to me via E-mail (in brief, please; I will be only one of at least six people, so I can't read speeches to them), and assuming I don't get bumped from an overbooked panel, I'll submit a summary of the evening afterwards. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 93 16:51 EST From: Anthony D. Vullo <0003250251@mcimail.com> Subject: "POTS"/CBL Maintenance Specifications I am looking for reference documentation, tariffs, ect. that govern the local exchange companies (LEC) in the US for providing and maintaining "POTS" or Common Business Line (CBL) service. My prime focus is to gain the resource to enable me to quote "chapter and verse" of the appropriate techno-legal references to drive trouble resolutions with local providers on POTS/CBL services, especially with dial-up data problems. I would like to assign one of our lines as a test reference, calibrate it, and use it to test the other lines when trouble is encountered. Then, with test data in hand, call the LEC repair office to report the *EXACT* problem. Specifically: - What are the design specifications for the LECs to provide this service? (C.O. to demarc) o Loss at 1004 hz o 3 tone slope (404 hz, 1004 hz, 2804 hz) o S/N o Noise with a quiet termination o Any other measureable parameters to define this service - What are the maintenance specifications for the LECs to provide service? (C.O. to demarc) o Design loss at 1004 hz +- X dB o Design 3 tone slope (404 hz, 1004 hz, 2804 hz) +- X dB o Design s/n +- XdB o Design noise with a quiet termination +- X dB o Any other measureable parameters to maintain this service Thanks. Tony Vullo ------------------------------ From: cccf@altern.com (cccf) Subject: Free Phone Calls on Itineris Service in France Date: Fri, 10 Dec 93 12:28:52 EST I discovered some time ago the new and very efficient Itineris service. Philips gave me as journalist the marvellous PA 810 portable (made in Finland) with a 11 hours battery. France Telecom offer me the line in some seconds and attribute me the 07038236 phone number without any question. Two days after, I receive an invoice of 1,075.05 FF: 350.00 FF for the initial fees and 556.45 for a "little amount of your future communication costs." The service works in the street, in the tube, in the TGV train, in the taxis, in the restaurant, in the church, in my bed, in my WC, etc. My company found this wunderful phone more practical and pleasant in comparison with the poor pager named Alphapage that can only capture 80 alphanumerical characters. The security of my Itineris is poor: only the PIN code work and I already have a little external kit (320.00 FF) that crash this protection. All my friends put the default value "0000" as the only door to access to the French phone network. The invoice is noted with "C.G.R.T." (33047 Bordeaux Cedex, toll-free phone number: 05 14 20 14) label. This phone help-desk will be of no interest for all my questions. Yves-Marie, my 17-year old brother, use my Itineris in school for no cost :-) He phone me for maximum 15 seconds and ask for a return call: between October 1st and the end of 1993, all these "short calls" are free. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 08:28:38 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Internet/SLIP Connections in the UK dave@llondel.demon.co.uk (David Hough) writes: > You will find that most UK households manage perfectly well with only > one phone line -- if it is in use then tough, ring back later. A > residential line costs 80-100 pounds a year so a second one would need > a fair bit of justification in most household budgets. This is true of *most* households in the US also, but TELECOM readers are not in the majority. I have had two phone lines ever since I moved from Texas to Florida (and the cost here for two is about the same -- $30/month -- as one line was in Texas). It does not sound like this is much different from the 80-100 pounds per year per line in the UK particularly when McDonald's prices in London seem to have the sane numeric value as in the US, just in pounds not dollars. I should mention that my two lines are both "basic" service with no add-ons other than the Caller-ID on my "hobby" line (now U$6.00/month) since the cost of all the "Touchstar" services would be more than the other line cost. Also it is nice to be able to bring up someone's computer on line two while talking to them on line one. "Blind Bravo Indias" in the military taught me the value of keeping in touch. Then again the fierce competition for long distance in the US helps also (I figure on U$0.15 or less per minute anywhere in the States). Unmetered local and 800 service is another plus. Not to say that this is necessarily typical -- Orlando is one of the least expensive places in the US to live -- just that there are a lot of variables and a second telephone line just does not seem much more expensive than one. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 08:51:46 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Local Telco Blocking Carriers The following announcemet appeared in my November Southern Bell bill: "Effective December 1, 1993, Southern Bell will begin blocking access by long distance companies to local calls. Under Florida law, local telephone calls must be handled by the local exchange telephone company only." My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call when at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the U$1.00-U$1.25 charged to make a collect local call). I called Southern Bell and was told that the ruling only affects residences but have not verified this as yet. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ From: philc@lexington.ee.mcgill.ca (Phil Crawley) Subject: Do You Know About the Corning Plant in Wilmington, NC? Date: 9 Dec 1993 10:03:04 -0500 Organization: McGill University - MACS Laboratory, Montreal, CANADA. I've heard that Corning has its telecommuniations research plant in Wilmington, NC. Unforunately, I have not been able to find out if they do any circuit design at this location. I figured that if Corning does do IC design it would probably be on a GaAs process, but I would like to be sure before sending in a job application. Also I would like to know if they do any analog design at this plant. I anyone has any information I would greatly appreciate hearing what you have. My email address is philc@finnegan.ee.mcgill.ca. Sincerely, Philip Crawley ------------------------------ From: moshier@world.std.com (Stephen L Moshier) Subject: What is MF4? Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 06:57:40 GMT Can someone supply a reference or info on MF4 signalling? It is supposed to be a variant of MF multifrequency tone signals, perhaps a protocol using those tones. ------------------------------ From: sue@gate-testlady.engr.sgi.com (Sue Liu) Subject: Help - Do You Know Who Sells Prepaid International Calling Cards? Date: 11 Dec 1993 11:09:45 GMT Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA Any info is greatly appreciated. ------------------------------ From: ajay@albali.cs.buffalo.edu Subject: High Speed Links? Reply-To: ajay@cedar.Buffalo.EDU Organization: Center of Excellence for Document Analysis and Recognition Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 22:10:39 GMT We are in the need for a temporary, high-speed ( ~ 50-100KBytes/sec ) link from our offices in Buffalo, to Washington D.C. I'd like to get some information regarding how much such a link would cost, what is involved in setting up the link at both ends, how much would it cost to lease the equipment for the period of time, what are our options, etc. etc. As you can see, Telecomm is definitely not one of my strongpoints, so I'm just fishing for ideas right now! Any help will be appreciated! Ajay ajay@cs.Buffalo.EDU ------------------------------ From: pegges@teal.csn.org (Paul L. Egges) Subject: Phone Card For a PC Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc. Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 23:44:16 GMT My company is looking for software/hardware for a pc-clone that will: 1. Recognize caller id; 2. Understand dtmf tones; 3. Prompt a caller with a voice or tone; 4. Execute a hook flash (for doing a call transfer); 5. Dial out a number (one that the person who has called into the system has entered); 6. Interface with database to verify that the caller is allowed to call out. This board should work in an IBM-PC 386/486. Prefer that the board can handle more than one phone line. Additional question: Where is the faq for this group? Thanks for your help in advance. Paul Egges [Moderator's Note: The TELECOM Digest FAQ is located in the Telecom Archives, accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. You can also get it by using the email information server. If you need a help file on that, let me know. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ar826@yfn.ysu.edu (Hansel E. Lee Jr.) Subject: Telephone Company Rate Survey Date: 11 Dec 1993 06:25:05 GMT Organization: US Air Force - SMC/INKA Reply-To: hansel@freenet.scri.fsu.edu (Hansel E. Lee Jr.) I am conducting a rate survey of long distance companies. Currently I have contacted: MCI Sprint AT&T US Long Distance Metromedia/ITT All Net Cable & Wireless Opticom If you know the name and customer service number to any other long distance companies please e-mail them to me at hansel@freenet.fsu.edu so I can include them in my comparison. I will post the results of my comparison when it is complete. Thank you for any assistance. Hansel E. Lee Jr., GS-07, USAF hansel@freenet.fsu.edu System Threat Analyst leehe@post2.laafb.af.mil Space & Missile Systems Center DSN Prefix (DSN) 833- Directorate of Intelligence Office/STU-III (310) 363-1988 SMC/INKA Unclass Fax (310) 363-0034 180 Skynet Street, Ste 2271 STU-III Fax (310) 363-0792 Los Angeles AFB, CA 90245-4690 Home Phone (310) 643-5067 PGP Public Key available upon request or at keyservers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 07:43 GMT From: Darren Ingram Subject: Satellite Monitors Wanted Reply-To: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk SATELLITE WATCHER, CABLE HOG OR TELLY ADDICT? Are you an enthusiastic viewer of all things televisual? Do you keep an active eye on what is happening on the small screen? Do you care about what is coming up for your viewing pleasure in the future? YOU COULD HELP: Satnews is looking for active enthusiasts and even professionals around the world to provide timely information on developments in cable, satellite, broadcasting and mainstream telecomms, who will act as a tipster or correspondent. Whether you can tell us about a story concerning a Brazilian cable television network in Rio; Icelandic MMDS, Russian satellite dishes or Australian aboriginal television, you can help. Every fortnight M2 Communications Limited releases a full-text version of Satnews free-of-charge to the global on-line community, shadowing developments in the worldwide market place. This resource can cost many hundreds of dollars/British pounds if you had to pay for it. We cannot give you piles of money; but then again we are not asking you to spend a lot either. Just keep an eye on your local cable/satellite TV, daily newspapers, radio and even bits of paper that you come into contact with in your day-to-day employment. At times, however, there may be a requirement for some assistance (if you can provide it) and we may be able to pay you a modest stipend for your efforts and expenses. Such assignments would be proposed and agreed before you would be expected to expend any time or effort. To tell Satnews your news please send us a message as soon as possible after discovery providing as much information as possible -- if you wish to scan/type the story in and e-mail it that is even better. For those rich enough to do so, you may also fax any articles. It is important that you cite the source and date of any clippings you send us. We will not be copying these cuttings, instead using the data as a reference source and a grass roots intelligence resource for our newsgathering. You will be credited for the discovery in any published story (i.e. additional information by John Doe) unless you desire otherwise. Regular contributors will also be given access to the subscription newsletter we also produce on satellite technology, delivered by electronic mail, as a token of our appreciation and gratitude. If you are looking at breaking into journalism or an allied trade, you could even attempt at writing copy directly, submitting it with any associated material. Phone numbers, fax numbers and contact names are always very useful. If you do require any feedback or printed examples of any published work, we may be able to send you copies in the mail. Due to budget constraints we cannot send out regular printed copies of published articles. So what do you have to lose. Please forward any material AS SOON AS POSSIBLE after discovery to: DARREN INGRAM (satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk). Do not be worried if your message does not get acknowledged, but wherever possible you will get a response ... even if it just says "Thanks!" You can receive Satnews free-of-charge for non-commercial usage direct to your Internet/Compuserve mailbox. Signing on is easy. Send a message to our INTERNET mailbox: listserv@orbital.demon.co.uk and in the first line of your message (ignore the subject line), enter: subscribe satnews first_lastname At anytime you can unsubscribe from this automatic mailing list by sending a message to the same address with the words "unsubscribe satnews" on the first line of text. This mailing list is not a interactive discussion forum, and hence traffic is usually limited to around seven to ten messages a month; comprising of two Satnews issues (100k) and the occasional administrative message. If you do have any queries please contact me. If you are considering providing assistance in the future also mail me with your street address/tel/fax and other e-mail details. A few words about your own personal situation/employment would also be appreciated. It is amazing who you get hiding behind a e-mail account these days. Let us work together and keep the Internet spirit going. With best regards and thanks. Darren Ingram EDITOR Satnews M2 Communications Limited Reptile House, 2nd Floor 20 Heathfield Road Coventry CV5 8BT United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 203 717 417 Fax: +44 (0) 203 717 418 Eml: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ From: russ@bbx.basis.com (Russ Kepler) Subject: Caller ID Telephone Organization: BASIS Int'l, Albuquerque NM USA Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 11:14:05 GMT I recently bought an AT&T model 764 telephone to replace a malfunctioning phone at my house. I selected the 764 because it has an integral Caller ID display with handy redial, etc. All in all it had the features that I wanted in a combined Caller ID box and phone. It didn't work. After much gnashing of teeth and moving around of telephones and answering machines it finally turned out that the built in caller id decoder isn't capable of handling (or ignoring) the name portion of the caller id data, and would always fail. Does anyone know of a telephone with the same feature set of the 764 (caller id display, scroll, call back, distinctive ring, etc.) that also handles or ignores the name portion of the datastream? Russ Kepler, Basis International Ltd. russ@bbx.basis.com phone: 505-345-5232 ------------------------------ From: jallen@standard.com (John Allen) Subject: Caller ID in Software? Organization: Standard Insurance Company - Portland Oregon Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:31:35 GMT Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here ready to do some work for me. John Allen - Network Executive E-mail: jallen@standard.com Network Services Telephone: (503) 243-6189 Standard Insurance, Portland Oregon FAX: (503) 321-3313 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #811 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25941; 13 Dec 93 16:23 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29109 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31093 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:10 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 21:48:10 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312120348.AA31093@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #812 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 93 21:48:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 812 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Delaware Phone Bill Announces Pa. Split (Carl Moore) Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call (Carl Moore) Vacancies in the Band for Cellulars (Mikhail Boukhny) Cellular Caller ID (Leroy Donnelly) How to Find Number in 313 Area Code? (Victor R. Volkman) Telephone Number Readback Number (Jim Sturtevant) PC Board Wanted (Paul L. Egges) What is "Blueboxing?" (Steve Cogorno) Cellular Systems in Argentina and Peru (Alex Cena) Digital Phone Service in Canada (Alex Cena) More Wireless Questions (Roy Thompson) Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages (Bob Krause) SL-1 to Voice Mail Integration (R. Schwartz) Special Fax Long Distance Service? (Robert J. Keller) A Modem With a Seat Belt 12/02/93 (H. Shrikumar) Re: On Line GSM Recommendations? (Alan Levy) Re: For Your Amusement, if Possible (Thomas Lapp) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 13:48:31 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Delaware Phone Bill Announces Pa. Split I have just picked up my December phone bill from Delaware, and it has notice of the 215/610 split (PRINTED ON THE BACK OF THE ENVELOPE with a list of the prefixes, right there, which will be in 610). Notice also appears in the enclosures. It says that if you dial Area Code 215 to reach any of the exchanges on the list, you should dial Area Code 610 to reach them starting Jan. 8. BUT: "If you dial seven digits to make local calls into Pennsylvania today, you can continue to dial seven digits after January 8, 1994." I do not think any of the Pa. prefixes which are local to Delaware are duplicated in Delaware. There has been some publicity in Delaware in recent years about expanded local areas (with the leading 1 going away for newly-local calls), and (just my own idea) there could be confusion about "7D means local" if Delaware ends up removing the leading 1 for all calls within it. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 14:07:43 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call Arriving with my Delaware phone bill, and I have put some comments in in brackets; *69 for return call and *66 for repeat call, with 11 replacing the * if used from rotary phone: Some phones may not respond properly to the Repeat Call and Return Call special rings. A local or toll charge may apply for calls made with Repeat Call and Return Call. [What is the special ring like, and what does such improper response consist of? I guess the internal signal is different in some way.] Repeat Call and Return Call do not work with calls made to most 700, 800, and 900 numbers. [What are the exceptions, and what happens if you attempt this and it indeed does not work?] You can request your local business office to restrict Repeat Call and Return Call from your telephone line at no extra charge. [What happens if such a restriction exists at the receiving end of your intended call? Or does this mean that if I have such a restriction, I cannot use these features?] ------------------------------ From: Mikhail Boukhny Subject: Vacancies in the Band For Cellulars Organization: University of Virginia Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:23:54 GMT Someone has asked me recently what if he wants to build a competing network for cellular phone. Are there any gaps left in the bandwidth? Whom should he ask to for a license? Federal Communication Commission? Any information is appreciated. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 12:39:38 CST From: Leroy.Donnelly@drbbs.omahug.org (Leroy Donnelly) Subject: Cellular Caller ID Reply-To: leroy.donnelly@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha > From the November 22, 1993 issue of Radio Communications Report Cellular gets Caller ID Cellular carrier Bell Atlantic Mobile announced it will use intelligent switching equipment to test services in Washington, D.C./Baltimore next year designed to give cellular customers more control over the calls they receive. BAM plans to implement GTE Telecommunications Services IntelliBase Enhanced services technology so its customers can take advantage of new Spoken Caller Identification, Selective Call Delivery and Who's Calling Me? services. Spoken Caller Identification enables cellular telephones to announce the name or number of a caller using digital voice technology before the call is answered. Calls can be screened, and the voice application lets customers keep their eyes on the road while driving, BAM noted. Selective Call Delivery lets customers program a list of call numbers into the phone that can be automatically rejected. Who's Calling Me? gives customers a spoken list of unanswered names or numbers, which can be returned by touching one button. BAM employees will be the initial trial participants, starting in January. The test is expected to last about five months. Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 DRBBS -- Planet {Connect} Schmanet Janet (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ From: vvolk@hcia.com (Victor R. Volkman) Subject: How to Find Number in 313 Area Code? Date: 11 Dec 1993 18:38:31 GMT Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, Michigan Is there a number in the 313 area code that I can dial that will tell me what number I'm calling from? I saw of list of these here once before. Can anybody mail or repost it? I planning on rewiring several phone outlets (customer wiring) and it would be most helpful. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: jimst@netcom.com (Jim Sturtevant) Subject: Telephone Number Readback Number Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 16:44:59 GMT I've seen several postings of various phone numbers to call to have your telephone number read back. I'm in PacBell area (San Mateo, CA). There have also been postings of 800 numbers to call and have the ANI readback. Any help would be appreciated if you have these numbers. ------------------------------ From: pegges@teal.csn.org (Paul L. Egges) Subject: PC Board Wanted Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc. Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 04:39:50 GMT My company is looking for special board and software that will allow us to do the following: 1. Read the caller id of the caller; 2. If the caller id is in the database allow the user to enter a phone number to dial out (using call transfer from the telephone company); 3. If the caller id is not in the database prompt the user for a password; 4. If the password is in the system allow the user (caller) to enter a phone number to dial out (using call transfer from the telephone company). Basically, then the hardware needs to get the caller id, and understand DTMF codes. We don't want to buy a voice mail system!! Thanks, Paul ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: What is "Blueboxing?" Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:41:05 PST Someone was telling me that the pre-breakup AT&T telephone network operated on a set of 12 tones to control trunks and switches. He said something about blue boxes, blueboxing, or something like that, that would generate tones to signal switches. I assumed that he was talking about a technician's butt-set or test unit, but that doesn't make sense because they are usually bright orange (at least the PacBell ones are). What are these things used for? Also, has the network been changed so that it no longer responds to audio tones? I would think that would be a major cause of telephone fraud if a phreak made a device to generate the control tones. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 [Moderator's Note: 'Blueboxing' referred to placing tones not normally available to telephone subscribers (but otherwise used by telco) on the line with the intent of defrauding telco of toll charges. One such tone was often known simply as '2600' because of its frequency. These tones are/were used internally by telco as a way of telling the switching equipment to begin or end 'supervision'; that is, the timing of calls for billing purposes. Today's network also responds to audio tones, and yes, in the past phreaks have constructed devices to generate these control tones. But the network operates differently today, and theft of service, while not impossible, is much more difficult than in the past. This Digest has never been a phriend of phreaks, and consequently discussions of how to cheat telco are generally kept purposefully vague. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 11:50:45 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Cellular Systems in Argentina and Peru Argentina and Peru recently have purchased cellular infrastructure equipment from AT&T. Does anyone know if its analog or digital technology. If its digital, what technology are they using TDMA, CDMA, GSM, etc? Thanks, Alex M. Cena Lehman Brothers acena@lehman.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 09:05:05 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Digital Phone Service in Canada > DIGITAL PHONE SERVICE. New Brunswick Telephone became Canada's first > phone company able to provide computerized digital service to every > subscriber -- the first step in transforming the company's network > into a high-speed, electronic information highway. (Toronto Globe & > Mail 11/30/93 B7). Does anyone have the details on the infrastructure/technology equipment deployed by NBT for this broadband service? i.e. ADSL, PONs or NGDLC? Does digital service actually reach your home or is this a FITL deployment? Thanks in advance, Alex M. Cena, acena@lehman.com ------------------------------ From: roy_thompson@vos.stratus.com (Roy Thompson) Subject: More Wireless Questions Date: 11 Dec 1993 19:32:46 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA It seems the hot topic of the month is PCS and GSM. I have heard of at least three major groups jumping out in favor of GSM as the new infrastructure for PCS. To my knowledge, NexTel, MCI (and the 100+ members of their consortium), and PTAG (a consortium of all the RBOCS (except Bell South), Sprint, and a few others), have all selected GSM. After the spectrum allocation in May, what are the likely timeframes we will see for new infrastructure being deployed? I'm assuming, because of the nature of the FCC handling of spectrum allocation, many new PCS systems will be deployed with older systems and exisitng wireline networks being used for backhauling. Is there anything, other than frequency issues, that make the PCS infrastructure much different from standard cellular networks? I suppose the micro and pico cell management will create some uniqueness in the network. In that case (with a pico cell for example), will more switches be required? Or will it be more of a service platform issue? I'm not a radio/frequency expert, so I ask the question: What are the unique requirements for implementing at 1.8 GHz? I thought the higher the frequency the more power was required. But the PCS phones (GSM) have lower power requirements than some cellular phones. Is it because of the microcell implementation that allows higher frequency, lower power? Do the basic switching requirements change in the new PCS infrastructure? Do the requirements for HLR change? I understand, maybe incorrectly, that GSM uses TDMA as the AIR standard. Is that TDMA different from that specified for the US? I remember something about a channel number difference. Also, as GSM becomes the defacto standard for PCS in the US, what happens to CDMA? Isn't their an FCC regulation on wireless phones to support a dual-mode? I assume that means a dual AIR standard. Could that mean that GSM TDMA and CDMA will probably be supported out of the same phone, or other similar configurations? Roy Thompson - roy_thompson@vos.stratus.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 11:16:11 EST Subject: Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY From: rjkrause@mothra.syr.edu (Krause) Hello all, I was wondering what large scale e-mail packages people might be running off of their Unix boxes out there. I am interested in receiving information (product and vendor) on e-mail packages that can be used in a corporate environment where one RS/6000 will act as a central point and other RS/6000's will dial into for mail. Mail could consist of regular mail as well as binary files (ie. spreadsheets, designs, etc.). Any information specific or general would be greatly appreciated. If you want, please send e-mail directly to me to avoid making the lists receive the traffic. Thanks, Bob Krause e-mail: rjkrause@rodan.acs.syr.edu phone: 315-451-8000 ext.-4472 ------------------------------ From: r.schwartz18@genie.geis.com Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 23:50:00 BST Subject: SL-1 to Voice Mail Integration I'm looking for information to help me integrate an Northern Telecom SL-1 phone system to a PC based Voice Mail Card. What I need to know is: Is the SL-1 capable of ringing a voice mail port and touch-tone the calling extension number to the vm port prior to conecting the caller? Can the SL-1 give in band supervision via Touch-Tone back to a VM port that is acting as an Automated Attendant? ie: Line busy, line answered, etc. I know that the Panasonic KSU has these capabilities and works wonderfully, but I have yet to be able to track down any info on the SL-1 and these features. If you can help, please respond first to my Internet address or as a reply to the Digest as a second choice. Thanks, Robert Schwartz Internet: r.schwartz18@genie.geis.com ActionTel ------------------------------ Reply-To: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 10:29:57 Subject: Special Fax Long Distance Service? From: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) I heard once about some sort of resale long distance service in which the provider multiplexes a small number of regular voice grade long distance circuits into a larger number of narrower bandwidth circuits and then resells them for dedicated fax use. The theory is that the narrower bandwidth is more than adequate for fax (although horrible for voice) thereby allowing a discount from the usual LD rates. I have four questions regarding this: 1. Does any one know the names and/or contact info for any such long distance providers? 2. Does the fax quality suffer as a result? And what about fax speed in this day of 9600 and 14.4 faxing? 3. Would the same type of lines be adequate for high speed (9600 bps and up) data in addition to fax? (I think I already know the answer to this one, but thought I'd ask anyway!) 4. What sort of discounts are we talking about? Thanks, Bob Keller (KY3R) Tel +1 202.939.7918 rjk@telcomlaw.win.net Fax +1 202.745.0916 rjk@access.digex.net CIS 76100,3333 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:44:44 -0500 From: shri@sureal.cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar) Subject: A Modem With a Seat Belt Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Systems Bombay India Hi, I just read about the Konnexx line of adapters that lets you use a modem with "any" sort of a telephone/PBX system. The idea is simple: it takes the handset jack, and use the handset wires to give out a POTS style RJ11. [ Any user reports ?? ] The simulated POTS line lacks battery feed, and my guess is it lacks ringing and pulse and digital/PBX style signalling (tho' tone is possible) as well. [ In fact, from the BORSCHT functions ... I guess it only provides the H=Hybrid function :-) ] Back a while ago I was wondering if such a device was possible, and had shot a query to the all-knowing Digest ... if the handset jack was more or less standard, and I was asking if one could use the hack to obtain easy connections in all hotel rooms and friends apartments and also avoid need for certified and surge protected DAAs. [ It got acked but I did not see it appear on the Digest tho' ... wonder if PAT lost it in a deluge ! :-) ] I was surprised to see that the said device lists at a handsome $150 ... maybe I am a bit simplistic, but can you not take the mic and speaker pairs, combine with some imedance matching, maybe an dual opamp, and maybe a hybrid (transformer or transformerless) to obtain an device that can connect a RJ11 to a handset jack? Can you not put one together for much less? Can not the PCMCIA modem guys build it in for cheaper and smaller than their current RJ11 DAAs? shrikumar ( shri@cs.umass.edu, shri@shakti.ncst.ernet.in, G=Shrikumar; S=Hariharasubrahmanian; P=itu; A=arcom; C=CH ) [Moderator's Note: I'm sorry to say I don't remember seeing your other article, so if you want, please send it in again. It sounds like an interesting topic of conversation. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Levy_Alan.Cambridge_LSC@gled.logica.co.uk (Alan Levy) Subject: Re: On Line GSM Recommendations? Organization: Logica Space & Communications Ltd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:08:31 GMT In article , Bui Anh Jonathan Banh wrote: > Can someone tell me where (ftp sites) I might find some GSM > recommendations/standards (on line), particularly, signalling > protocols and interface. Similarly, recommendations/standards on > DCS1800. The GSM and DCS 1800 specifications are commercial publications and are not available in the public domain (OK _should not be_, I can't definitively say that they _are not_). You can buy the specifications from ETSI. They are priced in ECU (European Currency Units -- not _real_ money :-). They are fairly expensive -- a year ago they cost around 2000 UK Pounds (US$3000) for the full set of Phase 1 Specifications. The contact address is: ETSI publications office 06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex France Fax: +33 93 65 47 16 Phone: +33 92 94 42 58 They have no Internet address that I am aware of, but you could try hunting around the net. All opinions expressed are the author's own (whose else would they be?) Alan Levy (+44)223 251000 x4729 Levy_Alan.Cambridge_LSC@gled.logica.co.uk ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 17:15:21 EST From: Thomas Lapp Subject: Re: For Your Amusement, if Possible Our Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: So true, so true. The scandalous thing about the > Dungheap Net is that its not just the formation of the unmoderated > newsgroup they are now using for telecom; its *any* group they start > there. The battles go on and on and on. I see your point. Perhaps it is time to filter the TELECOM solicitations even more than you do already. A filter to eliminate any articles not sent explicitly to the group comp.dcom.telecom or telecom@eecs might be the next step. It would probably cut down on duplicity of noise on this group. After reading and participating in Usenet for over four years now, I can see three things happening. First, the noise/signal ratio is going up, and the difference between Usenet newsgroups and the noise on "public access" systems like Fidonet conferences is getting less and less. Perhaps this just means that "the masses" are now getting onto Usenet as much as they used to get into Fido. Another thing I see happening is a division between alt.*, soc.* and like groups and comp.* and sci.* groups. Although you have to look long and hard sometimes, there are still some good groups out there that don't have too much traffic each day and have some good experts reading the group and willing to participate (although it is increasing in volume, sci.med is one example I can think of). If or when it becomes necessary to pick and choose newsfeeds, I think that the "entertainment" hierarchy will be dropped by many of the sites and just the "real" newsgroups that have value will stay around on most machines. Finally, I see the formation of e-mail distribution lists or controlled listservers taking over the roles of the "serious" newsgroups. It is already happening, and I find myself spending more time reading mail that comes in via distribution lists than I do reading the same requests over and over again on Usenet. (I think that the cycle time must be one month sometimes!) It seems sometimes that the very technology that we wish to push into the hands of the masses, ends up getting away from the technologists and is trampled to an early death by the media, the users, and the abusers. As the Moderator pointed out, Citizens Band radio was one of the technologies. Amateur radio is quickly going down the same path and Usenet will probably be another one to be trampled. Of course, we can always hope that the technology is a phoenix and will rise again in a mutated, but useful form some time in the future. (Philosophical Irony: This reply itself, while complaining of the tendency toward more noise and less light, ends up contributing to the noise (griping and moaning) rather than light (useful telecom-related items and discussion). Perhaps the TELECOM Digest needs an op-ed page :-) internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu (home) Location : Newark, DE, USA [Moderator's Note: Some people contend this entire Digest is one big op-ed page. :) I think with Usenet now having their own telecom forum to trash out, it should make a substantial difference in the noise level here. The real mistake may have been made years ago in agreeing to interconnect with Usenet, but there was a time I thought that Usenet showed a lot of potential as a medium for change and good, valid information. Some people still feel it does have these qualities, but I am not so sure. Truth be told, I see 'CB Radio' written all over Usenet as the general public starts discovering it. I've always been extraordinarily pleased by *how little* moderation/editing on my part is required on submissions from list members as opposed to what comes in from 'the net'. A lot of them have an utter disdain for grammar and spelling and completely resent someone (like a moderator) correcting if for them. For those of you unfamiliar with/too young to remember the 'CB Craze' of the middle to late 1970's and early 1980's, I want you to know that circa pre-1975, CB was a wonderful communications method. The users were courteous, well-versed in radio etiquette and FCC rules, and helpful, friendly people. They were like ham radio operators but without the license and knowledge required of hams. And ham radio operators will tell you that until around the middle 1980's things were a lot different in that part of the radio spectrum as well. Then as CB increased in popularity and useage, a lot of the CBer's could no longer deal with their own messes and quite a few migrated legally or illegally to amateur radio, joining the true hams in large numbers. Now a few years later ham radio is still a great thing with lots of wonderful people, but we see it starting to get tacky and frayed at its edges. A common complaint is that 'they' (many of the newcomers to ham radio in the past few years) go up to forty meters and sit there to horse around, tune up their rigs, key up and play music, etc. Ditto the written word: the earliest BBS's (Ward and Randy here in Chicago, others) were super-great things; wonderful community treasures where the guys were all helpful and pleasant. Fido started the same way. Soon the 'general public' discovered them, and folks started migrating to Usenet to avoid the messes of the masses on the local boards, etc. Now its Usenet's turn to be discovered and polluted. The anarchists of Usenet did okay when at least everyone there considered themselves an anarchist and essentially went by the same rules. Now they've got people there who have no idea what an anarchist is and have no intention of following someone else's guidelines in any event. :( PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #812 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26198; 13 Dec 93 16:47 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29627 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:14:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09980 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:13:59 -0600 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 13:13:59 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312131913.AA09980@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #816 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:14:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 816 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson CFP - Home Informatics International Conference (Kresten Bjerg) History of Blue Boxes (Dave Emery) Nokia M10 Programming Manual Wanted (William Quinn) Prodigy-Nynex Online Yellow Pages (Les Reeves) Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols (Marc Riese) Comments Wanted From DECvoice Users (Rick Schofield) Call Return on Pay-per-Use Basis (David Leibold) Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D (Al Varney) Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Weiyun Yu) Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kresten@vax.psl.ku.dk (Kresten Bjerg) Subject: CFP - Home Informatics International Conference Organization: IFIP WG 9.3 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 14:25:57 GMT A cross-disciplinary international conference HOME-ORIENTED INFORMATICS, TELEMATICS & AUTOMATION From 'State of the Art' through 'Prospects' and 'Blueprints' to 'Implementation' organized by IFIP Working Group 9.3 in cooperation with the University of Copenhagen University of Copenhagen, Denmark June 27 - July 1, 1994 BACKGROUND The home offers a great potential for new automation, information and communication technologies and related services. A wide array of innovations are already under way, with many more to come. They will transform the home and everyday life in the emerging information society. They will condition how private households will be enabled to function in changing social, economic and political structures. AIMS AND SCOPE The conference will assess and conceptualize perspectives and options, which attach to developments of domestic informatics, telematics and automation across the levels of - consumer hard- and software, - network infrastructures - storage & distribution media, - teleservices and - socio-cultural & economic structures. How can these new technologies - seen together - be used to empower consumers and private households? How can both users and suppliers get the optimal benefits from the possible new technologies? - and with which global impact? Can these technologies contribute to the emergence of a new home concept, an "Oikos", where the private household can reestablish itself in an experienced way as a living and production centre, embedded in and interacting with a larger community? Addressing such questions requires a multi-disciplinary approach. Therefore the conference aims to bring together experts from many fields and disciplines. Researchers and practitioners, designers and users, policy makers and industrialists, each with new knowledge and new questions from their experience of recent and expected development. The conference will not only serve as a forum to present and exchange experience, results of research and ideas, but also to explore and discuss strategic approaches and alliances for product research and development, and for prototyping and field experiments. MAJOR THEMES * The social construction of new domestic technologies. * Bridging between the various disciplinary approaches. * The changing position and importance of households in the new social and economic structure of the information and communication society. * Strategies for creating professional and public awareness of the converging potentials and implications of constructive innovations for everyday life and for social, cultural, educational, health, energy, and economic policies. * Ways of organizing relations between research and product development which can further the long-term interest of consumers, and save producers from waste of investments in development of products and services which are doomed to failure. * Relevance for developing countries, cultural diversities and the general goals of the UN year of the family 1994. MAIN AREAS Advanced Home Technologies (e.g. Intelligent home - Linking of TV, telephone, computer and VCR - Interactive multimedia and domestic virtual reality - Security-systems - Household appliances - Environmental control and ecology - Bio-electronics and health-monitoring.) Communication and telematics (e.g. Convergence of broadcast and telecom networks - Interactive teleservices and teletransactions - Tele-education - Telework - Evolving informal networks - Home-to-Home interfacing.) Economics and politics of HOIT (e.g. Interests of industry and service providers - Links between R&D and marketing - Prices and tarifs - Legal and regulatory policies on national and international level - The future of home economics.) Cultural and social impact on everyday life (e.g. Personal development and knowledge distribution - Intra- and interfamily relations - Functions for children, elderly, disabled and home-bound people - Community structure - Cultural continuity.) CONTRIBUTIONS We solicit: Research papers; Papers on experiments and case studies; Policy and strategy papers; Opinion and position papers; which will address State of the Art, Prospects, Blueprints or Implementation within these general areas. Besides full papers, short contributions like posters and statements papers may be submitted. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Notification of the intention to submit a full paper (including title and subject area) should preferably be sent as early as possible. Two page abstracts of full papers are due at latest January 15, 1993. Notification of acceptance March 1, 1994. Deadline for submission of final full papers and short contributions May 1, 1994. All accepted contributions will be published in the preceedings available at the conference. Selected papers will be published in the conference proceedings. PROGRAM COMMITTEE Felix van Rijn (Chair), Univ. of Amsterdam, Dept. of Communications (NL) Kresten Bjerg, University of Copenhagen, Psychological Laboratory (DK) Gunilla Bradley, Stockholm University, Inst. of Internatl. Education (S) Valerie Frissen, Univ. of Amsterdam, Dept. of Communications (NL) Karamjit Gill, Seake Centre, University of Brighton (GB) Leslie Haddon, University of Sussex (GB) Gisela Lehmer, Ministry of Telecommunications, Kln (D) Mara Gabrila Macra, IDAT, Montpellier (Fr) Kurt Monse, IWT, Universitaet Wuppertal (D) Bjoern Nake, University of Copenhagen (DK) Toomas Niit, Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law, Tallin (Estonia) Gerrit Noltes, Ministerie van WVC (NL) Yves Punie, Free University of Brussels (B) Andy Sloane, School of Comp. & Inf. Techn. Univ. of Wolwerhampton (GB) Alladi Venkatesh, Grad. Sch. of Management, Univ. of Calif., Irvine (USA) L.E. Zegers, European Home Systems Association, Eindhoven (NL) ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Kresten Bjerg (DK), Bjoern Nake (DK), Dan Melkane (DK), Poul Groenhoej(DK) REPLY FORMAT Please e-mail, fax or photocopy and mail to: HOIT-94, Kresten Bjerg, Psychological Laboratory, University of Copenhagen, 88, Njalsgade, DK 2300 Copenhagen S. Tel.:+45 31541856 Fax: +45 32963138 E-mail: kresten@vax.psl.ku.dk ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [ ] I/we consider participating. [ ] I/we intend to submit a full paper. Area: Preliminary title: [ ] I/we intend to submit a short contribution, poster or audio-visual demonstration. Topic: [ ] I/we want to exhibit/demonstrate electronic or mechanic equipment, taking max. m2 floorspace. Subject: Name: Institution: Street address: City / postal code: Country: Voice telephone: Fax: E-mail: ------------------------------ From: jjmhome!pig!die@transfer.stratus.com (Dave Emery) Subject: History of Blue Boxes Date: 12 Dec 93 22:12:33 GMT Reply-To: jjmhome!pig!die@transfer.stratus.com Organization: Opinion Mongers Incorperated... Someone posted an (unattributed) note to the effect that blue boxes had been around "10 or 15 years". This is wrong - try 40 years or so. For what it is worth, blue boxes have been around almost as long as the underlying MF in-band address signaling that they exploit (since 1948). And will probably exist until there is none of this left (we're getting there). The first one I am certainly aware of was built by an IBM engineer working on some sort of government telephone switching project in or around 1957. I have heard rumors of the devices being built by other engineers in the telephone R&D community significantly before that time but have never heard any definate proof one way or the other as to the actual existance of such or to their use for hacking. These early devices of course mostly used vacuum tube oscillators and relays rather than the software and sound board approach that is common now. The famous "Blue Box" which gave the device its common name was the fruit of a hacking project at MIT and Harvard in 1960 or 1961 and was in fact really a blue metal box. I suspect but do not know for certain that that this project which ended in criminal legal negotiations between the students involved and telephone security personel was the first time telephone company operating management became widely aware of the potential of such sophisticated (at least for its time) toll fraud. I was told at the time that the president of the New England Telephone Company was absolutely flabbergasted when he was told of the technology and given a demonstration -- before that time operating telco management has no idea whatsoever that such things were even remotely possible. One suspects that the spooks knew of the technology earlier than this and no doubt kept the secret classified just as they did many other holes in the security of society so they could exploit them for "purposes of national security". The first public discussion of blue boxes that I am aware of was an article in the {Boston Herald} in 1964 or 1965 that resulted from a political fight between the {Boston Herald} and the New England Telephone Company. Apparently the Herald felt that the Telco had screwed them in a legal battle over a story they had published earlier and got revenge by printing the blue box story which they had known about for some years (since 1961 or so) in order to damage the telco since it was known that it would take years to plug the holes that blue boxes exploited. By the time this article was published, the technology of telephone signalling and automatic billing and its weaknesses was fairly well know amoung the nascent MIT centered hacker community and blue box projects were common amoung students there. Blue boxes surfaced nationally in the media in 1971 when {Esquire} published an article about them. But by that time the telephone industry had mounted an aggressive campaign to prosecute and monitor blue box use and the whole matter had become one aspect of the ever present toll fraud problem rather than a marvel that stunned senior managment. David I. Emery - N1PRE - Lexington Mass. Former senior technical consultant (and currently unemployed drunken bum) Internet: jjmhome!pig!die@transfer.stratus.com (preferred) or die@world.std.com UUCP: ...uunet!stratus.com!jjmhome!pig!die Phone + fax: 1+(617)-863-9986 ------------------------------ From: quinn@austin.ibm.com Subject: Nokia M10 Programming Manual Wanted Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 05:26:21 GMT Reply-To: quinn@austin.ibm.com Organization: IBM Austin Does anyone know where I can get a programming manual for my NOKIA M10 cellular telephone? I would like to change the "default" lock code ... or am I stuck paying my cellular provider to reprogram it. Thanks. William Quinn ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 10:45:51 PST From: Les Reeves Subject: Prodigy-Nynex Online Yellow Pages Nynex announced plans to team with Prodigy in the first ad-supported on-line interactive Yellow Pages system. The database, consisting of some 300 on-line telephone books, is expected to be available by the end of next year. The service will be delivered over Prodigy's network and will be owned exclusively by Nynex. The listings can include photos, maps, menus and up-to-the minute information, such as interest rates at banks. Nynex plans for the system to eventually be interactive, whereby customers could make reservations on-line. Subscribers will not be charged for the service since it is supported by advertisers, and businesses would only pay for advertising beyond their name and phone number listing. The team plans to push other regional telcos to join them in listing and selling Yellow Page advertising on-line. The value of the agreement was not disclosed. (Wall Street Journal, "Nynex and Prodigy team up on Yellow Pages that will provide on-line listings and ads," 12/10/93, p. B1; New York Times, "So, let your cursor do the walking," 12/10/93, p. C4; USA Today, "Yellow Pages move on-line," 12/10/93, p. 6B ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 14:36:53 +0100 From: riese@litsun.epfl.ch (Marc Riese) Subject: Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols A recent doctoral dissertation entitled: "Model-Based Diagnosis of Communication Protocols" is now available by anonymous ftp at site: litsun.epfl.ch Once the ftp connection is established, change to directory: pub/Protocol_Testing_and_Diagnosis. Please feel free to contact me at: riese@acm.org if you have any problems. Marc Riese Swiss Federal Institute of Technology riese@acm.org EPFL-LIT IN-Ecublens CH-1015 tel +41.21.693.4672 Lausanne, Switzerland fax +41.21.693.4701 [Moderator's Note: Would you be so kind as to submit a copy of the paper for the Telecom Archives as well? Thanks very much. PAT] ------------------------------ From: schofield@trlian.enet.dec.com Subject: Comments Wanted From DECvoice Users Date: 13 Dec 1993 14:26:22 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. Reply-To: schofield@trlian.mko.dec.com In all the time I've been following this group, I've seen no mention of Digital's DECvoice product. Has anyone had any experiences with this product set? What were your impressions? Are you using it now? Rick Schofield DECvoice Product Support Digital Equipment Corp. Merrimcak NH ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 16:49 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Call Return on Pay-per-Use Basis [from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 Dec 93] We get thumbs up for two pay-per-use services: Last Call Return and Busy Call Return Last Call Return and Busy Call Return -- two calling features normally available on a subscription basis -- are now available on a pay-per-use basis to individual-line residence and business customers. The features were offered on a three-week, free-trial basis starting November 8, in Belleville and Trenton, Ontario and Sherbrooke and Magog, Quebec. They became available in Ottawa-Hull and Quebec City as a full service on November 29. A charge of 50 cents applies for each use of last call return or busy call return, up to a maximum limit, or cap, of $6.00 per month (plus tax). Both capabilities have been available to Bell customers on a subscription basis. Customers can use Last Call Return and Busy Call Return for local or long distance calls within or between areas where the features are available. The features will be introduced in other Ontario and Quebec communities where calling features are now offered, on a phased basis during the first six months of 1994. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 08:14:11 CST From: varney@ihlpe.att.com Subject: Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D Organization: AT&T In article j-grout@uiuc.edu writes: > fybush@world.std.com (Scott D Fybush) writes: >> According to radio ads being heard by a friend in Rochester NY, >> Rochester Tel will change over this week from 1 + 7D for long distance >> in 716 to just 7D. >> This poses a few problems. First, almost any LD call from the >> Rochester exchanges is inter-LATA. 716 is divided into two LATAs. >> The Buffalo LATA encompasses all of 716 except the Roch Tel areas and >> a few other areas inside the Roch Tel zone which are still served by >> indies (including Ogden Telephone and a few Contel exchanges.) I >> suspect LD carriers will be upset about this one ... especially if Roch >> Tel tries to default customers to its own RCI long-distance service. Since the LATA boundaries aren't changing (only the dialing), why would the LD carriers be upset (assuming no IXC defaults are changed). Won't the same calls to the same inter-LATA numbers still use the same IXCs? The IXC sure can't tell that you dialed a '1+' at the beginning. > After divestiture, NJ Bell chose to continue to support the abbrevia- > tion of 7D (instead of the full 1 +609 + 7D) to place a DD inter-LATA > call, now with one's default LD carrier ... of course, to support > equal access, they also had to implement 10xxx + 1 + 609 + 7D (I am > guessing that Bellcore decided from the beginning to never permit > seven or eight-digit abbreviations after 10xxx). Bad guess -- first of all, Bellcore didn't exist when the 10XXX dialing plan was devised, but many folks from AT&T that worked on the plan became Bellcore employees in 1984. Secondly, 10xxx can validly appear in front of any standard numbers of 7, 1+7, 10 or 1+10 digits, assuming you could dial them without the 10xxx prefix. I just tried calling myself using: NXX-XXXX (IBT oops, I mean Ameritech) 1+708+NXX-XXXX (ditto) 10288+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX (AT&T) 10222+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX (you know who) 10333+ 1+708+NXX-XXXX (ditto) 10288+ NXX-XXXX (AT&T) 10222+ NXX-XXXX 10333+ NXX-XXXX These all rang the "second line" on my ISDN set. No form of 1+NXX-XXXX worked -- IBT intercepted. But if IBT permitted it, 10XXX could precede it. All the forms with 1+708 could also be 0+708. IBT doesn't support 0+NXX. The only form of 10XXX access that doesn't work are those where your presubscribed carrier would not be selected, such as 1+800 or 1+900 calls. Note these shorthands: 00 = 10XXX+0# IXC operator 0# = LEC operator Also, 10XXX+# is cut-thru to IXC dial-tone (sorta like 950-0XXX). There is no shorthand for this access, since '#' by itself is an error. Al Varney ------------------------------ From: weiyun@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (Weiyun Yu) Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite Organization: Information Services, Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 12:50:00 GMT Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> writes: > In Australia we use the access code 0011 for voice calls, and 0015 for > fax calls. The difference is primarily in the fact that the fax call > will always be placed via cable if cable is available. Correct me if I am wrong. Exactly the opposite happens. The 0015 lines primarily use the satellite route while the 0011 numbers has the cable route when ever possible to provide better voice quality (no echoes). Apparently the fax machines are immune to echoes. I got these from a telecom rep. > There are also some differences in the fact that bit-stealing is > turned off, and some modification to the time-out of the echo > cancellation. Can't comment :) Dr Weiyun Yu "Why Me?" | Internet: weiyun@ucc.su.oz.au Dept of Surgery, Uni of Sydney, Australia | Voice: 61+2-692-3851 Let there be light! And there was light! | Fax: 61+2-692-4887 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:06:21 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere in a Moment, Sir I don't know what would be displayed if I had to call 911 from my present phone on 410-287; my mail (including my phone bills) goes to a PO box in another town. Utility companies need to know where you live, because that is where the physical connections for service (electricity, phone, etc.) go, even if the bills don't. (Perhaps you'd want to find out what exchange serves 820 Old Apex Road. I did find Apex Road and Street listed for zipcode 27707, and Apex Hwy. listed for zip code 27713, both in Durham.) Question: What about foreign exchange service? An old example in Maryland was someone in an area served by 287 prefix who brought in 642 Perryville (the next exchange to the west) as a foreign exchange because it is local to Aberdeen (272,273,278) and Havre de Grace (939). Another case (glaring because a state line is involved, and I recall seeing this at least once in the Wilmington, Del. directory), would be someone in the Wilmington or Holly Oak exchange area bringing in Chester Heights (Pa.) as a foreign exchange; that choice: -Keeps Wilmington, Newport, Holly Oak as local calls -loses local service to other parts of New Castle County, Del. and part of southern Chester County, Pa. -GETS LOCAL SERVICE TO ALL OF PHILADELPHIA METRO AREA Remote-forward, which I set up in Delaware, would not be involved in 911. No calls can originate on my Delaware number; it can only be activated by an incoming call, and can only automatically call the number I am forwarding to. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #816 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26658; 13 Dec 93 17:47 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26549 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tmkl@gaffer.hr.att.com); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04703 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:03 -0600 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 22:57:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312120457.AA04703@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #813 TELECOM Digest Sat, 11 Dec 93 22:57:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 813 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations (David Breneman) Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations (Hoyt A. Stearns, Jr.) Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Alan Levy) Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment (Erik Ramberg) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Steve Taylor) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Mike Yang) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Robert Berger) Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? (Steve Jones) Re: Sprint Modem Offer :-( (Alan L. Nelson) Re: The Coming of the Information Age (Dennis G. Rears) Re: The Coming of the Information Age (Peter Gregory) Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Carl Moore) Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Steve Cogorno) Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (David A. Kaye) Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Wil Dixon) Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly (Glen Ecklund) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: daveb%jaws@dsinet.dgtl.com (David Breneman) Subject: Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations Date: 11 Dec 93 20:40:54 GMT Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA niall gallagher (niall@bnr.ca) wrote: > In Telecom Digest #724 (Wed, Nov 24) gardnern@spot.Colorado.EDU wrote: >> I am stumped with how I can demodulate modem communications >> in-progress. My project includes displaying the originating AND >> answering data, though not both at the same time. I envisioned >> recording it, and piping it into my modem. Not so. How would I go >> about convincing a modem to listen to a tape recorded conversation or >> "tapped" in realtime. (Problems there include messing up the current >> conversation). > Unfortunately (or should that be fortunately) it is very difficult to > "tap" modem calls. The basic problem is that high speed modems (V.32 > and above) use the full bandwidth of the telephone channel in both > directions for simultaneous transmission and reception of data. > The modems at either end can extract the Rx data because they *know* > what they have transmitted and using echo-cancellation techniques can > determine what the Rx data is. At any point in between the modem and > the CO, there is a two-wire circuit and anybody listening in would > pick up the combined Tx and Rx data -- ie. garbage. > If you have access to the circuit after it has been through the hybrid > at the CO which separates the combined channels into distinct transmit > and receive, the problem becomes more manageable and I'm sure that > some enterprising government agency somewhere has built the required > decoding equipment. One of the problems is that most modern modems exchange information during the handshake. Older modems, however, did not. The calling modem waited for the answer tone of the called modem, then sent out its tone and the communications began. These modems can be tricked with a tape recorder. I used to test ASR33 Teletypes by recording their output (through the phone line) and playing it back in answer mode. The trick is, in send mode the TTY needs to hear an answer tone before it sends out its town. Easy. Just record a couple seconds of answer tone at the head of the tape. Put the TTY in send mode, play the tape, switch the tape machine to record and start recording. David Breneman Email: daveb@jaws.engineering.dgtl.com System Administrator, Voice: 206 881-7544 Fax: 206 556-8033 Software Engineering Services Digital Systems International, Inc. Redmond, Washington, U. S. o' A. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Demodulating Modem Conversations From: isus!hoyt@uunet.UU.NET (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.) Organization: International Society of Unified Science Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:32:19 GMT In article niall gallagher writes: > In Telecom Digest #724 (Wed, Nov 24) gardnern@spot.Colorado.EDU wrote: >> I am stumped with how I can demodulate modem communications >> in-progress. My project includes displaying the originating AND >> answering data, though not both at the same time. I envisioned > Unfortunately (or should that be fortunately) it is very difficult to > "tap" modem calls. The basic problem is that high speed modems (V.32 > and above) use the full bandwidth of the telephone channel in both > directions for simultaneous transmission and reception of data. I think it could be done by means of two taps a distance apart. I thought about this when the necessity arose to decode ISDN 2B1Q U channel signals, but the same principle would apply. Ideally you'd have a delay line with multiple taps feeding a forward and reverse correlator (shift registers + adder). One way of looking at this is that the cable is sampled along its distance, and each sample is delayed by the amount of time it takes for the signal to propagate along the cable, and summed. Signals going the other way will not sum up. Hoyt A. Stearns jr.|hoyt@isus.stat.com 4131 E. Cannon Dr. | .com OR Phoenix, AZ. 85028 |enuucp.asu.edu! voice 602 996-1717 |stat.com!wierius!isus!hoyt OR hoyt@isus.tnet.com ------------------------------ From: levya@logica.co.uk (Alan Levy) Subject: Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment Organization: Logica Space & Communications Ltd Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:47:58 GMT In article , Alex Cena wrote: > There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the > cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well > as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS. But who will be > providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for > availability. I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes > Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T. I'm specifically > interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the > world. Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest > or to me directly? TDMA networks -- in the form of GSM and to a lesser extent DCS-1800 (aka PCN) are already widespread throughout Europe and are arriving in parts of Asia Pacific. GSM infrastructure equipment is already being manufactured by both Motorola and Ericsson amongst others (I don't know about Hughes or AT&T). As far as the provision of GSM services is concerned, the situation is changing rapidly as new licenses are issued, new services come on-stream and existing ones expand. Takeup varies enormously between countries. For instance, in the UK, where existing analogue cellular services are still very influential (with millions of users), GSM user numbers are in the low thousands. In Germany, where the existing analogue service was limited and very expensive, there are around 1 million GSM users. The above opinions are all my own work. Alan Levy, Logica Space and Communications Ltd E-mail: levya@logica.co.uk Tel: (+44)223 251000 ------------------------------ From: erik_ramberg@SMTP.esl.com (Erik Ramberg) Subject: Re: Availability of TDMA and CDMA Infrastructure Equipment Date: 12 Dec 1993 02:13:03 GMT Organization: ESL Inc. In article , Alex Cena wrote: > There has been quite a bit of CDMA vs TDMA debate with respect to the > cellular carriers migration from analog to digital technology as well > as equipment to be used in emerging market for PCS. But who will be > providing the infrastructure equipment and what is the time frame for > availability. I've heard some announcements from Ericsson, Hughes > Network Systems and Motorola but not from AT&T. I'm specifically > interested first in the United States followed by other parts of the > world. Can any one help me by either posting an answer on the digest > or to me directly? From what I know about the current players in the North American market regarding digital standards: TDMA - Ericsson E-TDMA - Hughes CDMA - Motorola and AT&T No commitment or I just plain don't know: Northern Telecom, Seimens Erik Nothing that I say can be construed as the opinion of my employer. ------------------------------ From: taylor@perlis.csis.gvsu.edu (Steve Taylor) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Organization: Grand Valley State University Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 14:21:22 GMT In article , Bill Berbenich wrote: > Both are advertised as 900mhz, spread-spectrum models. Does anyone else have experience with spread-spectrum models? I just purchased (and then returned) Vtech's Tropez 900DX. The reception was extrememly poor and it would not hold a charge in stand-by mode for more than 12 hours. I then purchased Southwestern Bell's cordless phone with built in digital answering machine. The reception was horrible and the answering machine didn't work. I am now looking at the new AT&T 9100 900 MHZ cordless phone. I know none of these are spread spectrum, but I would be interested in any opinions on 900 MHZ phones in general. Thanks for the advice! Steve [Moderator's Note: The Radio Shack 900 mhz phone seems to be a very good quality instrument. If anyone has tried it out or purchased one, I would appreciate a review of it here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mikey@sgi.com (Mike Yang) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc. Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 10:18:46 GMT In article bill@wabworld.atl.ga.us (Bill Berbenich) writes: > I have the Cobra CP-910 cordless and it looks like a repackaged > version of the Escort/CM 900mhz cordless. > Bottom line: I have found that sound quality on my Cobra is very > consistent and good, but not of a "corded" quality. The versatility > of getting consistent cordless signal quality within about a one block > radius of my home is worth the minor degradation and loss in audio > quality in that model. I got a Cobra CP-910 a couple days ago but I'm planning on returning it because it's not "corded" quality. There is a noticable background crackling that sounds sort of like that of a long-distance call. Both you and the person you're talking to can hear it. Since my Sony 46/49 mhz phone has virtually the same quality as a corded phone, I find the Cobra quality unacceptable. I guess I'll wait and see if the AT&T spread-spectrum model is any better. On the plus side, I like the Cobra looks and echoing of DTMF tones to the handset earpiece. However, I found the varying tone volumes of the keypad strange (the tone is the same, so why bother making the 1, 4, and 7 tones softer than the 3, 6, and 9 ones). The range-until-failure of the Cobra was about twice that of my Sony, though the Sony degrades well before the limit while the Cobra shows no degradation until the limit. The new Sony 900mhz phone I tried out a month ago had a shorter range than the Cobra, though still longer than my Sony 46/49mhz. I returned that one, too, because it's range was only about 1.5 times and since it was analog, degraded well before the limit too. I don't remember hearing the background noise that the Cobra has. I was disappointed that there was no "standby" mode on the handset to further conserve battery power by not ringing. My Sony handset gets charged every couple weeks in this mode; I can hear the ring from one of the other phones just fine. Besides, the Cobra ring is really shrill and somewhat obnoxious. Mike Yang Silicon Graphics, Inc. mikey@sgi.com 415/390-1786 ------------------------------ From: rwb@alexander.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Berger) Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:09:31 GMT In article bill@wabworld.atl.ga.us (Bill Berbenich) writes: > I have the Cobra CP-910 cordless and it looks like a repackaged > version of the Escort/CM 900mhz cordless. Or maybe the Escort is a repackaging of the Cobra; Cobra has been making cordless phones for a while, and it seems more likely that they are the original manufacturers. In any case, the Radio Shack one also appears to be the same unit. My officemate bought an Escort, and I bought the AT&T unit ($249 at Service Merchandise). Both give good sound quality; the AT&T phone had a bit more range in side by side comparisons. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Best 900mhz Cordless? From: steve.jones@canrem.com (Steve Jones) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 18:56:00 -0500 Organization: CRS Online (Toronto, Ontario) Rich Skrenta writes: > Features I'm interested in: > o Security. If it's all-digital, doing some simple scrambling > should be easy. Going digitial is enough to weed out the > neighbors with scanners, but I don't want someone to be able > to plug in another 900mhz phone and hear my calls. If you've been watching the rec.radio.scanner group, several people have found the audio in the clear somewhere in the UHF region. I believe the Tropez was the model in question. I'd guess the handset radiates more than just the 900Mhz signal. Not sure how far away the signal was accessible but I doubt it would travel too far. Cheers, Steve Jones !Amprnet : VE3SDJ@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CAN.NA General Delivery !Internet: ve3sdj@amiga.ve3sdj.ampr.org Stayner, Ontario ! : steve.jones@canrem.com Canada ! : L0M 1S0 !Phone : (705) 428-5358 ! Fax : (705) 428-5359 ------------------------------ From: nelsoal@irie.network.com (Alan L. Nelson) Subject: Re: Sprint Modem Offer :-( Date: 12 Dec 93 00:24:31 GMT Organization: Network Systems Corporation In article cambler@cymbal.aix. calpoly.edu (Chris Ambler - Fubar) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: By the way, did you *sign* for the packages they >> sent you? Have you opened the packages and installed/used the modems? >> Sorry to make it rough for you guys, but under the Uniform Commercial >> Code -- which will be the prevailing law -- you may have waived any >> further claims. Hmmm, I thought the UCC only applied *between* merchants??? Not between a vendor and a retail customer/consumer. Al [Moderator's Note: No, not necessarily. Just some parts of it. Speaking of which, I haven't received any mail from Fubar and his housemates recently. I wonder how their suit against Sprint is coming along? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 20:46:54 EST From: Dennis G. Rears Subject: Re: The Coming of the Information Age Paul Barnett wrote: > As I said before, welcome to the real world. It's a jungle out here, > and if you don't have what it takes to survive, then I suggest that > you take the civil service exam and get a job with the federal govern- > ment. Paul: With this comment you malign every Federal Civil Servant. You also show an ignorance of the Civil Service. Few positions require the civil service test. Those positions that require the test are generally clerical or low graded. Contary to public belief, federal employees are just as competent if not more so than the private sector. The problem with federal workers is we work under arcane and inefficient laws and regulations. The workers at my site (US Army Armament Research and Development Center) are just as productive and competent as anywhere else. dennis ------------------------------ From: peter.gregory@mccaw.com (Peter Gregory) Subject: Re: The Coming of the Information Age Date: 11 Dec 1993 17:21:10 GMT Organization: Asix, Inc. Reply-To: peter.gregory@mccaw.com In article 1@eecs.nwu.edu, shniad@sfu.ca () writes: > The Telecommunications Revolution > How Union Jobs Are Being Lost In an Expanding Industry > -- by Kim Moody > PHONE COMPANY ACQUISITIONS 1993 > > AT&T-McCaw (cable) $12.6 billion Uh, 'scuze me, but McCaw is not cable, but cellular, the parent company of Cellular One and the North American Cellular Network. Pete Gregory peter.gregory@mccaw.com Senior Consultant. ASIX, Inc., Seattle, WA on-site at Wireless Data Division, McCaw Cellular Communications, Kirkland, WA ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 13:14:53 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers What kind of access? 10xxx? If the calls are short, I'd have the Orange Card available for consideration if I were making them. I call an 800 number when originating an Orange Card call. [Moderator's Note: Ah yes, the Orange Card. I think I've heard of that one somewhere before ... :) Its still available; applications are taken through my office as before. Its not a bad deal, with rates of 25 cents per minute (with a thirty second minimum) and *NO* surcharge for its use. It works like any other calling card (except for the absence of a high surcharge I guess); you dial an 800 number, get the tone, then enter your card number, the number you are calling and your PIN. And now I am a dealer for one even better (depending on who you ask and the precise application) called the 'Gold Card'. It incorpor- ates voicemail and a fax mailbox as part of the deal. I'll have a more detailed message about it here in a day or two. PAT] ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 12:33:01 PST Said by: A. Padgett Peterson > My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call when > at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the U$1.00-U$1.25 > charged to make a collect local call). I called Southern Bell and was > told that the ruling only affects residences but have not verified > this as yet. How do you circumvent the local company? In PacBell territory, they will not allow you to select a long distance company on a local call. I can, however, use my long-distance calling card (AT&T, haven't tried with another company) for local calls. These calls are billed by AT&T at PacBells rates and the bill reads "Local Calls Charged to Your AT&T Card." If there is a way (besides the 1-800-CALLl-ATT method) to get AT&T for local calls, I would rather do this, as their rates are lower than those of Pacific Bell. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Date: 11 Dec 1993 17:15:43 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Marc Sira (aa382@freenet.carleton.ca) wrote: > couple of months that this phone makes a little beeping-ticking sound > every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Though I have not heard these myself, the local power company in the SF Bay Area, PG&E, sends several tones down the electric line. One is a command to turn street lamps on at dusk and another to turn them off at dawn for those areas which still use synchronous relays instead of photocells. Also, PG&E sends a tone at 10:00pm to set the 60 cycles back on track in case of extreme power loads which may have caused their system to slow down. This allows synchronous clocks to stay on time. Anyhow, power transformers with loose laminations or power supplies with 60-cycle hum problems could likely pick up these kinds of things. If your phone plugs to AC wiring it could possibly be picking up this kind of thing from your own power company. ------------------------------ From: wildixon@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Wil Dixon) Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Date: 11 Dec 1993 14:44:44 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana aa382@freenet.carleton.ca (Marc Sira) writes: > every night at exactly 4:46 AM (Eastern time). Yeah, I should be > sleeping at this hour instead of waiting around for my phone to tick. > No, it's not particularly loud enough to keep me awake, but I am > curious about it. > The ringer on the phone does seem to be sensitive to the line > condition; taking my modem off-hook or putting it on-hook while it's > on the same line produces a similar, louder noise from the phone. I > imagine a second extension would have the same effect. So presumably > there's a small glitch in the line voltage or something at 4:46 AM > nightly. > Any ideas what the phone company is doing to the line every night that > would cause this behaviour? > [Moderator's Note: Telco is doing line testing of the phones on your > exchange. Your phone is sensitive enough that it notices this when > it occurs. Roll over and go back to sleep. :) PAT] The Telco is doing Automatic Line Insulation Test (ALIT). If the phone has an adjustable spring on the ringer (bias spring) you can increase the tension on the 'clapper' and cure your problem. Wil Dixon wildixon@uiuc.edu 217-244-1321 University of Illinois CCSO Telecom Engineering ------------------------------ From: glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund) Subject: Re: My Phone Tinkles Nightly Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 19:19:03 GMT Wrap it in a clean diaper (nappy) every night at bedtime. Glen Ecklund glen@cs.wisc.edu (608) 262-1318 Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y Department of Computer Sciences 1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355 University of Wisconsin, Madison Madison, Wis. 53706 U.S.A. [Moderator's Note: Hey, I wake up and go tinkle every night also but that is not the kind of tinkle he was referring to. I think this issue of the Digest had better come to a close now. :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #813 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26922; 13 Dec 93 18:07 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10029 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for dave@geis.geis.com); Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:23 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16220 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:01 -0600 Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 00:10:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312120610.AA16220@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #814 TELECOM Digest Sun, 12 Dec 93 00:10:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 814 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Tony Harminc) Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line (Bruce Sullivan) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Gary Breuckman) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Brett Frankenberger) Re: What Is Switched 56? (Neil R. Henry) Re: What is Switched 56? (Bill Mayhew) Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (Charles Mattair) Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (E. Castedo Ellerman) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Paul Robinson) Re: Info Wanted on ISDN Centrex (Ed Goldgehn) Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs (John R. Levine) Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs (Will Martin) Re: New Archives Files (Per Helmersen) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 12:38:35 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line a03431@giant.rsoft.bc.ca (Neklan Brozensky) wrote: > I'm a systems administrator in a branch office. We have currently 30 > terminals/printer unit attached to our head office's AS/400 in > Colorado Springs across a leased analogue line. The remote controller > unit is attached to an IBM 5866 9600 baud modem. > We are planning to totally upgrade the connection because our office > is growing rapidly and even more terminals will be required. However > in the mean time I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a > v.32bis type modem would be a fast inexpensive way to increase > throughput untill the issues around a more permanent faster solution > got sorted out. > The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary solution. > Their chief arguments are: > 1. The are uncertain that the line will support a faster line speed. > That there may be problems with the line that only manifest them > selves at the faster rate. and if they occur, too much time will be > spent fooling around tyring to solve that. It's not likely to be a problem. Neither Vancouver nor Colorado Springs is out in the middle of nowhere. The line is likely to be digital all the way. In any case, any reasonable communication protocol (like SNA) will do error checking/retry/recovery. Do keep in mind that you need a modem with a synchronous interface on the RS232 side, that is the modem needs to be able to supply clocking to the terminal equipment, and not require any Hayes-style async ASCII commands to put it into the right mode. You might also look into using an end-to-end digital link. You can get a Dataroute<->DDS (the US equivalent to Dataroute) connection at 19.2 or 56 kBPS at a price that is probably competitive with an analogue line and with a lower error rate. > 2. They don't think that the solution will result in the antiscipated > payoff of increased response for keyers at dataentry terminals. The > guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times for > a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the DSU/CSU). > At that time he only got a 10% increase in resposiveness. Responsiveness is not the same as throughput or bandwidth. SNA has all sorts of buffering and pacing options that need to be set appropriately for the line speed in use. Certainly the time to fill a screen with data should decrease significantly when you go from 9.6 to 56kBPS. If it doesn't, something is very wrong with your configuration. How fast the system responds when you hit enter is another and much more complex issue. You should be sure that the host system is not so constrained that it can't handle the higher transaction rate that might result from higher bandwidth. > What are people's thoughts here about this ... what reply would you > guys make to these claims. > Are they resonable technical objections? Are they being intransigent? You need to look at what you are trying to accomplish, and the cost. Is response time already so bad that "something must be done"? Or are you just anticipating how things will be when you add more terminals? Does "head office" have some longer term solution that they think will work in a way that your faster modem idea won't? Perhaps you should ask *them* some hard technical questions. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 17:27 EST From: Bruce Sullivan Subject: Re: Increasing Throughput of a Leased Analogue Line In TELECOM DIGEST V13 810, a03431@giant.rsoft.bc.ca (Neklan Brozensky) writes: > I was thinking that changeing the modem to say a v.32bis type modem > would be a fast inexpensive way to increase throughput untill the > issues around a more permanent faster solution got sorted out. > The people in the head office aren't enamoured by the temporary > solution. And for pretty good reason: It won't work. You may not have meant this, but you cannot simply swap a leased-line modem for a dial-up modem. While they both do the same basic function -- modulate and demodulate -- they are otherwise very different animals. The dial-up modem has no means for 'grasping' the leased circuit. It expects to dial first. Secondly, a v.32bis modem is *asynchronous*, while the SNA/SDLC protocol is *synchronous*. While many dialup modems *can* be strapped for synchronous communications, it's often at a lower speed. Even so, you're now faced with long-distance charges to Colorado Springs. And, you'd be subject to the idiosynchrasies of the Public Switched Telephone Network. > The guy cites a test that he did a while back measuring response times > for a 9600 baud modem link and the a 56K link.(The kind with the > DSU/CSU). At that time he only got a 10% increase in responsiveness. Depending upon the nature of the traffic, this could indeed be true. Generally speaking, I would probably have expected a somewhat greater improvement in response time, but I'd need to know a lot more about the application and data. In any case, just because you're increasing the line speed roughly 5.8 times, response time does not decrease at the same rate. All of that said, the cheaper solution, which *should* work, is to replace the 9.6K leased line modem with a 19.2K leased line modem. "Most" analog circuits will run up to 19.2. I have done this with many circuits which were originally provisioned at 9.6 with no special conditioning. Because the circuit was not engineered with that conditioning, however, the telco will likely be of no help if you do have problems. Frankly, it's something of a crapshoot. Sometimes I can bump them to 14.4, sometimes 19.2. One final thing to think about: It's the users you're supporting: If your 'solution' is fraught with problems, you're not doing them any favors. Bruce ------------------------------ From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:39:38 GMT In article gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. This is an external modem, the first think you want to do is test the serial port on the computer and determine if that can receive or not. The modem might be working fine, but the port not showing any of the results. Receiving is often interrupt driven, and the interrupt for the port might not be set correctly (if it is in fact something that can be set separately), or it might not be working. You might also be having a problem with the control lines, but with a port that usually affects SENDING rather than RECEIVING. So, what you need is a breakout box or a loopback plug, you can make a loopback plug, jumper the following pins together ... 2->3 (transmit to receive), 4->5 (request-to-send to clear-to-send), 20->6 and 8 (terminal-ready to modem-ready and carrier-detect). Now, anything you send out the port with your comm program should be echoed back - if not, the port has a problem. These are the pins for a 25-pin serial port, for the 9-pin it would be 3->2, 7->8, 4->6 & 1. If that works, and you know the modem works elsewhere, you might try setting the modem settings back to the factory defaults. It just might be some problem with flow control, but I suspect the port. For Hayes compatible modems that store the settings (ie, no dip switches, the command is AT&f&w. puma@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 17:08:32 GMT gast@CS.UCLA.EDU writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. Typically this indicates a problem with interrupt settings. While interrupts can be used for all aspects of serial communications, typically they are used mainly for receiving data. If the card you have has lost the ability to generate interrupts when data is received, or if it is configured for a different interrupt than your comm program expects, you will be able to send fine (assuming your comm program doesn't require interrupts to send), but it will not be able to receive any data, since almost all comm programs require interrupts to receive data. The standard interrupt (IRQ) numbers are 4 for COM1: and 3 for COM2: (and 4 for COM3: and 3 for COM4:). Figure out which COM port you are using (i.e. which comm port is selected in the COMM program) and then make sure than both the card and/or the comm program are set for the correct interrupt. (If the card has no switches, you will have to hope it's the default and just set the comm program to the correct interrupt. If that doesn't work, try all sorts of different interrupts from the COM program). Good luck ... Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ------------------------------ From: nhenry@netcom.com (Neil R. Henry) Subject: Re: What Is Switched 56? Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 13:54:20 GMT How are switched digital lines "dialed"? Is it a seven or ten digit address like switched analog calls? While I am asking, what is the proceedure (dialing requirement) for ISDN calls? Thanks for the emlightening summaries. ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: What is Switched 56? Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 03:20:19 GMT In article goldstein@carafe.tay2. dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > Service Unit (CSU) compatible with your serving CO. It "dials" the > call digitally, but it tends to take a while. I was looking at the practice sheet for a switched 56K card a couple of weeks ago. They actually used the A/B signalling leads to outpulse the the dialed number. Seemed rather quaint in this day and age. That would explain why, "it tends to take a while!" Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu amateur radio 146.58: N8WED ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 10:48:03 CST From: mattair@synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair) Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc. In article trenton@netcom.com (The CyberMonk) writes: > Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time), > but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access? and PAT responds: > [Moderator's Note: Cable companies don't want competition any more > than the local telco wants competition. Like telco, the cable companies > have friends in high places. So Clueless, given that clue, now do you > have an idea what is going on? PAT] You can also add in the vertical integration of a number of the cable operations. A situation arose in California several years ago regarding a wannabe cable competitor. I can't remember the specific companies so the example is illustrative and does not constitute a condemnation of the companies named. . Time-Warner owns HBO and Warner Cable. . I want to wire west Houston (which is Warner) and contact HBO. . HBO either refuses to sell feed, having signed an exclusive contract with Warner, or agrees but at rates which are significantly higher than those charged to Warner. . In any case, I am effectively blocked from competing. I _think_ the Cable act addressed some of these problems. Charles Mattair (temporarily - work) mattair@synercom.hounix.org In a mature society, "civil servant" is semantically equivalent to "civil master." - Robert Heinlein, _The Notebooks of Lazarus Long_ ------------------------------ From: castedo@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (E. Castedo Ellerman) Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies Date: 11 Dec 1993 20:07:12 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana trenton@netcom.com (The CyberMonk) writes: > Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time), > but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access? > I also don't understand why the courts (I think it's them) don't seem > to be moving faster in allowing competition for the local dial tone. I think in both the local cable and local telco markets, even without regulation you would have a natural monopoly. The initial capital is very costly and there is a fixed number of consumers. Because of this government jumps in a regulates the situation since a natural monopoly is sure to form. That's my guess. Castedo ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 00:20:36 EST Reply-To: 0005066432@MCIMAIL.COM Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Will Estes , writes: > James R Ebright (jebright@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote: > JRE> In article > john.eichler@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (John Eichler) writes: > JRE>JE> oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) wrote: > JRE>JE>CO> I should think that New York Telephone, which fills the > front pages of every telephone directory with glowing > talk of up-to-date digital technology, would be > embarassed at its apparent failure to deploy ISDN > beyond a handful of Manhattan exchanges. > JRE>JE> It's almost a 'catch-22' proposition. The phone companies > are slow to implement ISDN because there is little demand > for it and the demand is waiting for the service to become > available. > JRE> Huh? ISDN was originally a way to get 56KB service ... but > modems on regular analog lines can almost do this today. > ISDN vs market forces. ISDN 0, Market 1. > I think you are missing the big picture here. Within one > year, people are going to be able to buy unlimited 10 Megabit > per second connections to the net via existing cable TV cable, > with a V.FAST or similar channel going upstream. This is > going to cost $99/month or less for unlimited network use. > If the phone companies had even the slightest bit of > technology vision, they would understand what a serious threat > to their future market growth this really is, and they would > be offer ISDN at or below cost until they can get the fiber > optic cables in. And one more thing. How long until someone figures a way to do real-time compression of voice onto a modem data stream and do "telephony over internet"? If I want to talk to someone in Dallas or Los Angeles, so I would put a microphone on my computer, have it digitize my voice and send it as a TCP/IP packet stream to someone else's computer where his application is listening on a port, and his computer receives it as a TCP/IP connection who then decodes it and sends it to a sound card and receives my message. I think that the least expensive dial voice service is running at least 6c per minute if you buy huge quantities of time, e.g. thousands of hours of time per month. The cost to send information over the Internet is effectively zero. It's only a matter of time until someone figures out that all it takes for an Internet connection to pay for itself is to be able to use it to reduce long distance traffic by 1 1/2 hour a day even at these low rates. If the other places you call are on the Internet and their computers have the means to do voice reception and transmission, how long before people discover that if they are paying 15c a minute per trunk for conference calls, that they can set up a multicast group and everyone involved can hear and speak and the net cost per minute is zero? If it ever becomes easy to do real time digitizing and compression of speech with decompression and playback, it's going to cause people to reconsider the high cost of long distance service. Paul Robinson - TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: sysexpa@netcom.com (Sys. Express Corp) Subject: Re: Info Wanted on ISDN Centrex Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 02:58:54 GMT System Operator (ftgcorp!system@uunet.UU.NET) wrote: > I'm looking for information and experiences with ISDN Centrex > operations, especially from Chesapeake and Potomac (C&P) Telephone > Company (now Bell Atlantic). I work with a company that is an authorized Bell Atlantic Reseller. I'll be happy to have them get in touch with you to assist in determining your needs. I've found them to be good at what they do. Ed Goldgehn Internet: sysexpa@netcom.com Technical Sales Engineer Voice: (404) 919-9442 Systems Express Corporation Fax: (404) 919-9527 Distributors for Data/Voice/Video Communication Equipment Manufacturers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 14:15 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Anyone have information where I can get thinks like the old Telecom > Talk Tickets? Most of the convenience stores around here sell Sprint's prepaid FON cards. They're not cheap, 33 to 50 cents a minute, but they're convenient. At a truck stop I also saw another brand of card, Liberty something, a little cheaper, and with the possibility of refilling the card over the phone and charged to a MC/V credit card. If you have a few weeks to plan, AT&T still issues calling cards not tied to a particular phone. You need to make a full credit application, like the one for a bank credit card, so it takes a while. (For that matter, there's also the AT&T Universal card which is both a bank card and a calling card.) If you already have a bank card or Amex, MCI and Sprint probably still have the deals that let you use your credit card as a calling card without extra credit or billing complexity. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Dec 93 8:17:40 CST From: Will Martin Subject: Re: TalkTicket Like Thangs > [Moderator's Note: I think Western Union sells them via currency ex- > changes and other outlets. I didn't mention this before because I felt it was a competitor to our esteemed Moderator's income, but, since he himself now referred to a different source, and no longer is a dealer in these, here is the info: Another source for these was recently (Nov. 1 93) advertised by the populist newspaper, {The Spotlight}. They are selling these type of prepaid telephone cards in $30, $50, and $100 denominations. They say they're good in the US and Canada, but not Alaska. Calls are charged against the card balance at 25 cents per minute at all times. The ad does not state the 800 number you call to use the card. They imply the card can be "recharged" by calling and giving a credit-card number to restore or increase the credit balance against which calls are charged, but they do not state this number or go into any detail on that process in the ad I have. Also, the only way to buy these, according to this same ad, is to write them and order cards with a check (payable to "The Spotlight"), or a Visa or MC number, with expiration date and signature. The address is: The Spotlight 300 Independence Ave., SE Washington, DC 20003 (I find it rather strange that they don't give an 800 number to call to buy cards via credit card, but that's the way it appears. Maybe later ads have added this feature -- this ad is the only thing I have with me about this product.) Regards, Will ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 01:39:09 GMT From: Per.Helmersen@tf.tele.no (Per Helmersen) Subject: Re: New Archives Files Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research In article , TELECOM Moderator wrote: > Several new files have been added to the Telecom Archives today. Are the archives accessible by means of WWW? Per Helmersen E-mail: Per.Helmersen@tf.tele.no Norwegian Telecom Research Phone: +47 63 80 91 58 P.O Box 83 / N-2007 KJELLER FAX: +47 63 81 00 76 NORWAY [Moderator's Note: I believe someone told me they were, but I have no first hand knowledge of it, or really, how WWW works. Maybe someone with knowledge of WWW will write to explain it more, and let me know if Telecom Archives is obtainable that way. Generally when asked, I refer people to the anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu facility or I send them a help file for use with the Email Information Service. If anyone wants to use the Telecom Archives but does not have the help file to properly phrase their commands, etc, let me know and a copy will be sent out to you right away. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #814 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27364; 13 Dec 93 19:23 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28225 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for jgfrancis@genvax.glamorgan.ac.uk); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17882 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:04 -0600 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:13:04 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312130813.AA17882@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #815 TELECOM Digest Mon, 13 Dec 93 02:13:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 815 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson ISDN in Huntsville, AL (Hunstville Times via Dwayne Blumenberg) Newspapers Want ?11 Numbers; So Do Hearing-Impaired People (Nigel Allen) PC Pursuit vs America Online (Earl R. Hall) Book Review: "Managing UUCP and Usenet" by O'Reilly/Todino (Rob Slade) Bell Canada Invests in Jones Intercable (David Leibold) Phone Line Teaming (krc@igc.apc.org) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dablumen@infonode.ingr.com (Dwayne Blumenberg) Subject: ISDN in Huntsville, AL Reply-To: dablumen@ingr.com Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL. Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 20:10:47 GMT The following article appeared in the Dec. 12, 1993 edition of _The Huntsville Times_ newspaper Business Section (Huntsville, AL). I thought it might be of interest to Digest readers. NETWORK CAN CONNECT AREA TO ECONOMIC FUTURE WORLD By Connie H. Dykstra For The Times Amidst the current climate of economic uncertainty among Huntsville's traditional space and defense operations, an unseen but extremely powerful force has been building a new foundation for future economic growth. Huntsville stands at the forefont of the challenge to greet the dawning information age not only with open arms but with ready technologies to satisfy emerging customer demands. Through vision and partnership with area businesses and the U.S. Army at Redstone Arsenal, South Central Bell has built in Huntsville and Madison one of the world's most advanced telecommunications networks. Just the bare statistics of what's been happening here on the high-tech telecommunications front are staggering. This is the nation's first large metropolitan area to have 100 percent digital network switching and transmission facilities, according to telephone company executives. Huntsville is the first, and only, major city served by Bell in the U.S. to have a metro area-wide Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) service -- the most advanced telecommunications network technology available anywhere, according to Gary Pledger, South Central Bell's district manager. The operation has more than 1,100 ISDN lines now in service. Huntsville was SCB's first AccuPulse customer, the Central Office Local Area Network (C.O. LAN) customer, the first city in Alabama to have both major universities connected to C.O. LAN, first to use wideband switches, and the location where many first-time services were made available to Army and NASA customers. SCB has in services more than 4,000 miles of fiber optic cable throughout Madison County. The list of telecommunications triumphs goes on, but the bottom line is the South Central Bell has invested more the $60 million here during the past five years to offer the most advanced intelligent network capabilities of any U.S. city. What this means for Huntsville's future includes diverse advantages that range from businesses expansion to remotely transmitted medical services to improved pizza delivery, Pledger says. "Basically what we have come to realize is that the public network is really to commerce and industry today what rivers and railroads were in the last century,", says Pledger, "Commerce is carried over our network and we have a profound role to play in facilitating that." The movie, "Field of Dreams," features actor Kevin Costner who carves a baseball field out of a corn field guided by the notion of "build it and they will come." Similarly, with the high-tech in formation services already in place here, the right players will follow. "We're sending more than voice and data signals, we're sending a signal to the world that we're ready to meet any telecommunications needs of existing businesses or anybody looking for a great place to locate," Pledger says. With the U.S. Army as the first customer for ISDN here, the leading-edge technology was able to be rapidly developed and tested. BellSouth operates an ISDN laboratory at Redstone Arsenal, serving as a testbed to keep the company -- and Huntsville -- at the forefront of ISDN research. "The Army was looking for ways to find efficiencies in their business and one way was through a single line concept. If you have a telephone line for a fax machine, another line for voice communications, a line for a modem and a line for whatever else, you wind up with three and four separate telephone lines to serve someone who performs those functions," explains Pledger. "The Army realized it was costing a lot of money to maintain all those lines, and they said there's got to be a better way. And the better way, naturally, was ISDN which allowed the Army to fold all those services into one telephone line." Based on digital technology, ISDN represents a major breakthrough in telecommunications by providing a "digital pipeline" for moving voice, data, telemetry, video and facsimile separately or simultaneously all over one telephone line. Data can be transmitted up to 60 times faster than a normal modem. More than 1,000 pages of information can be faxed in 30 minutes. "With digital you get speed, reliability and tremendous efficiencies," say Pledger. In addition, SCB has installed more than 4,000 miles of fiber optic cable in Madison County. Fiber provides tremendous band width, or capacity, to quickly and accurately deliver enormous volumes of data. Pledger proudly points out that fiber is not only deployed to specific customer's offices, but is 100 percent in place for routing between all SCB central offices. While fiber optics continues to capture attention, Pledger hastens to add that copper is being used to display some phenomenal capabilities, as well. "People never dreamed 100 years ago that copper was able to carry what it is. Now we're even experimenting with delivering 35-millimeter- quality over copper. So, we're continuing to push the copper technol- ogy at the same time we're deploying fiber." SCB's investment appears to be paying off. Pledger says people from other cities and states are now coming here just to talk with him about what's been done and learn from Huntsville's experience and how these elements work together in economic development. "When Nichols Research outgrew their buildings on South Parkway and needed to add a facility in research park, they came to us and said we want to link that new site with out current site so employees have a virtual co-location," recalls Pledger. "We were able to facilitate that and in so doing, helped them expand in such a way as to contribute to the continuing success of their enterprise." Nichols Research Corp.'s Vice President of Computer Systems, Mike Solley, says his company is perhaps unique in wanting to get as close as possible to their customers. The telecommunications equipment required to achieve that is available in Huntsville. It's really a combination of all the manufacturers in town," Solley says, pointing to the fact the Nichols is a beta test side for Adtran which manufactures electronic transmission equipment for telecommunications. UDS Motorola of Huntsville designs and manufactures data communications equipment such as high-speed digital modems facilitating remote applications for advanced telecommunications services. FITS GROWTH STRATEGY Brian Hilson, senior vice president for economic development at the Huntsville-Madison County Chamber of Commerce, knows well the advantages of having advanced telecommunications services in place throughout this area. "It fits well with our economic growth strategy. We've targeted several industry sectors to bring to this area based on the labor attributes and industry support services we offer, and telecommunications is one of those," Hilson says. According to an economic development specialist with GTESouth, 80 percent of corporations say telecommunications is important, or very important, in facility planning. Ten years ago, that number was only 30 percent. Hilson says Huntsville is well-positioned in the current nation-wide trend for companies to decentralize from larger cities to smaller cities, taking advantage of lower operating costs but still looking for advanced technologies. "There is not a significant office operation or business that is dependent on quality telecommunications which our community can't compete for," Hilson asserts. While the feral government plans to consolidate Defense Department finance and accounting operations at a central location has been more or less shelved for the time being, Pledger discovered that Huntsville stacked up well in the recent competition to win the proposed facility. Again, the telecommunication network was one of the area's strengths. Pledger says sometimes there are direct hits where people who have heard of this area's network come here because they have a telecommun- ications-sensitive operation and believe Huntsville to be a prime site for them. "Unfortunately, I can't tell you about one of these yet," he hints, "but in the near future was expect to make a major announcement than an organization that is telecommunications-intensive is coming to Huntsville. They will locate here and provide a worldwide service." This area's telecommunications capabilities are making possible numerous other significant advances for future development opportunities. HELPING EDUCATION Pledger believes their network will play a role in resolving the equity in education problem currently plaguing Alabama. "If we can link schools, as we are, for distant learning -- for remote access to CD ROM and other applications -- then students in a remote location can have access to lectures and learning opportunities that students in urban areas already have," he explains. Mike Solley at Nichols Research is working closely with the Alabama Supercomputer Authority, South Central Bell and local telecommunications equipment providers to hook up Johnson High School, and other local schools, to the supercomputer facilities in Cummings Research Park. Dozens of high schools statewide have now been similarly connected via high-speed, dedicated data circuits for classroom instruction and other applications. MEDICAL APPLICATIONS At Crestwood Hospital, neurosurgeon and chief of staff Dr. Ira Denton has been breaking new ground with ISDN. He uses the high-speed, high-volume data transfer capabilities to send, receive and annotate x-rays and video images while talking with other medical professionals on the same line. He has also partici- pated in physical examinations and has observed microneurosurgical procedures taking place at a remote location. "ISDN has tremendous potential for cost-savings by providing access to specialists for practitioners and hospitals remotely located," Dr. Denton says. Dr. Denton has been using ISDN with the latest video compression technology for videoteleconferencing applications using two-way audio and video. He is conducting a study to determine which bandwidths are most effective for this type of effort. When completed, the study will serve as a guide to further the development of similar systems for use by medical professionals worldwide. Videoteleconferencing via ISDN technology was employed last year when back surgery prevented superintendent Dr. Ron Saunders from attending a Huntsville Board of Education meeting. Using three ISDN lines, video equipment and a personal computer, both video and voice were transmitted between Dr. Saunders' home and the board's administrative officers, enabling everyone to meet as if they were all in the same room. The efficiencies of advanced telecommunications services can even be felt these days when calling many local pizza carry-out establishments. Once a caller's name and phone number are given, the employee automatically knows their location, thanks to specialized caller ID services. Pledger says he's talking with the Board of Realtors to explore real estate applications allowing on-screen walk-throughs of homes or buildings that can be constantly updated as data changes. "Certainly real estate is an integral part of economic development. If we can facilitate information flow about sites, than can help fuel economic growth," add Pledger. Like any state-of-the-art technology, telecommunications advances have a life cycle often eclipsed by emerging capabilities. Pledger says this is good news for them because it means companies like South Central Bell have to be constantly looking as far down the road as possible. "We have five-year plans, ten-year plans, and even fifteen-year plans for how we're going to continue tow build and enhance the network. We're constantly doing analysis of what our customers will need." Dwayne A. Blumenberg | Internet: dablumen@dwayneb.b30.ingr.com IBM Systems Programmer | UUCP: ...uunet!ingr!b30!dwayneb!dablumen Intergraph Corp., M.S. GD3002 | Voice: (205) 730-3795 Huntsville, AL 35894-0001 | FAX: (205) 730-3300 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 08:24 WET From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Subject: Newspapers Want ?11 Numbers; So Do Hearing-Impaired People Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-3783 Voice: 416-363-8676 Here is a press release from the National Newspaper Association. I downloaded the press release from the PR On-Line BBS in Maryland at 410-363-0834. I do not work for the Association, and I do not think that newspapers should be allocated three-digit numbers for their information services. Instead, I feel that three-digit numbers should be reserved for relay services for the hearing-impaired. National Newspaper Association Announces Program to Help Newspapers Apply for Three-Digit Calling Numbers Contact: Mark Sheehan of the National Newspaper Association, 703-907-7900 WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 -- National Newspaper Association Chairman Sam Griffin today announced a four-point program to help newspapers successfully apply for three-digit calling number -- called N-one-one or N11 numbers -- in their local areas. "There's no time to waste," he said, the smartest publishers are already moving aggressively to protect this vital tool of delivering news and information." He said the NNA Board of Directors had recently reviewed the developments of N11 numbers in several states. It concluded that prompt action by community newspapers may be needed to guarantee that the maximum number of Nll numbers are assigned for local information tools. Nll numbers are being used in some markets in the U.S. as an expedited dialing number for electronic information systems. Consumers dial 311, for example, to access newspaper audiotex systems. The telephone company collects a fee for the service as a part of regular phone billing and passes on a share of the revenue to the newspaper. "In the past we tended to think of N11 numbers and audiotex as concerns for metropolitan newspapers, but we've come to recognize that they are a key part of community newspaper strategic marketing," he said. "Perhaps the most important point was the board's decision to support local rather than statewide allocation of such numbers," he said. "You can ask the phone company for statewide designation, so that, for example, 311 is the number all across your state for information services, but each local exchange should assign the number on a local basis so that local publishers have access to them. A statewide allocation system would simply give one provider a statewide monopoly." The four-point NNA program involves: 1. An initiative to help publishers make immediate application to their local telephone companies for such numbers, including a model letter. Most of these requests are being refused at the present time, except in states served by the BellSouth Regional Bell Operating Company. 2. Assistance to publishers in preparing for the application to the state public utilities commission (if the telephone company refuses the request), including a model application to be tailored to the publisher's individual situation. 3. A referral system for more detailed legal expertise. 4. Continuing policy support to publishers in the N11 effort, backed up by a resolution passed by the NNA Board of Directors urging local assignment of the maximum possible number of N11 numbers by telephone companies to community newspapers and other local information providers. "Make no mistake," said Griffin, who publishes the Post-Searchlight in Bainbridge, Ga., "NNA believes this should be an all-out effort by publishers. At the same time, we realize this is a new area for community newspapers and we want to provide our members the support they need to take these steps." "Some of us have already begun," said R. Jack Fishman, publisher of the Morristown (Tenn.) Citizen Tribune and chairman of the NNA Government Relations Committee. "I have already filed an N11 number for both the Morristown Citizen Tribune and our weekly Tullahoma News, and I've purchased an audiotex system. My readers will receive electronic information the same way they receive printed information: from the Citizen Tribune and the News. "NNA is providing support to our members for two reasons. One, we know that unless local information providers begin to move quickly, the perception that the electronic highway is only for the big guys will continue to mushroom. Two, many state governments are now poised to figure out bow to handle the N11 requests they are already receiving. If we are going to maintain the nature of localism in this country, states must build localism into their telecommunications policy. This is a piece of the puzzle." Griffin said the NNA board cautioned newspapers that while prompt action is essential, newspapers must think strategically about their electronic future. "Newspapers are offering everything from school lunch menus to horoscopes and soap opera updates in their audiotex systems," Griffin said. "We believe there are new revenue sources through the N11 mechanism. Obviously, before you apply for N11, you have to know what you plan to sell. Several vendors are now vying in the marketplace for your business and that is a welcome new development. "And, not so obviously, you may have to persuade your public utility commission that you are the best candidate for the number. Newspapers are experienced information providers. They should be in a very strong position to make that case. But it won't be made for them. Each publisher has to develop a plan and take these first important steps into the electronic future." Fishman emphasized two things: "First, this isn't for everybody. You've got to determine that you're going to get into the audiotex business. Newspapers are offering everything from business news and sports to horoscopes and summaries of soap operas over the phone and hoping to make money at it, but don't expect to get rich overnight. "Second, when you make that application to the PUC, you'd better be prepared to explain, in detail, why your newspaper is the best available source to have that N11 number, and how you plan to benefit the public by the use you make of it." Note: Copies of the following N11 code application materials are available through the National Newspaper Association office: -- N11 code application instruction sheet -- NNA Model N11 Request Letter -- NNA Model N11 Petition. Please call 703-907-7900 for more information. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 06:53:51 -0800 From: Earl R. Hall Subject: PC Pursuit vs America Online Recent changes at America Online may be behind SprintNet's reported 'reexamination' of PC Pursuit. America Online is one of the "Big Three" of Online Information Providers (is that the right term?), the other two being Compuserve and Prodigy. America Online recently announced that it had exceeded 450,000 subscribers. Unlike Compuserve and Prodigy, America Online does not run its own private data network. It instead relies on SprintNet and BT Tymnet to provide dial-in connections for subscribers. Connections were originally limited to 2400bps, but they have now announced the availability of 9600bps dial-in connections (so far, via SprintNet only) at no additional charge. Coincidently, SprintNet is expanding its dialin network: a few months ago it added 9600 service to 53 new locations. I wonder if the America Online traffic negates the justification behind the forming of the PC Pursuit program. With this non-Primetime traffic their network no longer sits idle at night, waiting for the start of the next business day. In fact, SprintNet may now consider PC Pursuit traffic a hindrance in meeting any contractual Level-of- Service agreement they may have with America Online. Earl Hall | +1 708 437 9300 (work) | via Peacenet: erhall@igc.apc.org Skokie IL | +1 708 933 9352 (home) | CIS: 72746,3244 | AoL: Erhall ------------------------------ Date: 12 Dec 93 18:41 -0600 From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Managing UUCP and Usenet" by O'Reilly/Todino BKMANUCP.RVW 931104 O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. 103 Morris Street, Suite A Sebastopol, CA 95472 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: 707-829-0104 info@ora.com "Managing uucp and Usenet", O'Reilly/Todino, 1992 Once again an excellent job by the nutshell folks. Intended for system administrators who need to set up and maintain UUCP connections or access Usenet, the book realizes that in the UNIX world many sysadmins are just plain folks. The necessary technical details are here, but presented in a logical and non-threatening manner. Not limiting themselves to the UNIX software, the authors provide hardware guidance as well, particularly to those with Intel boxes. Chapters two and three deal not only with the basic operations and configuration of UUCP, but also with cabling, ports and modems. The material gives enough detail but does not go on to flaunt knowledge of unnecessary trivia. Further chapters give information on testing and troubleshooting, security and management. The material provides a functional overview, but assumes a reasonably computer-literate reader with a small system. Those completely unfamiliar with data communica- tions may want to get some assistance from experienced friends; those with large systems and very active connections may wish for more suggestions on security, for example, such as may be provided by "Practical UNIX Security" (BKPRUNSC.RVW). Chapters seven to ten deal specifically with Usenet and news, assuming that you have UUCP running properly. Again, it is a practical and realistic guide, starting with the selection of a Usenet feed site. Seven appendices are included covering the working files, modems and modem setup strings, more details on cabling and RS-232, useful programs and scripts, UUCP implementation for MS-DOS, Macintosh (and even VMS), frequently asked questions about Internet mail and Usenet news, and the inner workings of the UUCP G protocol. If you are planning to install or use UUCP and Usenet, this book is undoubtedly well worth the cost: probably many times over. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993 BKMANUCP.RVW 931104 Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM Digest and associated newsgroups/mailing lists. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 93 16:47 WET From: djcl@io.org (David J. Leibold) Subject: Bell Canada Invests in Jones Intercable [from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 December 93; content is Bell Canada's] Big Step Into U.S. Cable TV BCE Telecom International (BCETI), a subsidiary of our parent corporation BCE Inc., has signed a letter of intent with Jones Intercable, Inc. of Englewood, Colorado. Following the completion of a proposed acquisition by Jones Intercable, Inc. of the assets of Jones Spacelink, Ltd., BCETI will invest US $275 million for the purchase of approximately ten million shares of class A common stock representing a 30 per cent equity interest. BCETI will also acquire for approximately US $55 million the option to purchase eventual control of Jones Intercable. In addition, it has committed to participate in future equity financings up to US $125 million which will increase the original investment to US $400 million as Jones Intercable continues to grow through acquisitions. "This investment provides BCETI with a solid entry into the world's most dynamic telecommunications market and is a major step in BCE's global strategy," said Derek Burney, BCETI's chairman, president and chief executive officer. "The complementary strengths of BCE and Jones Intercable will enable us and our shareholders to take advantage of the rapidly converging cable, communications and entertainment markets in the United States." Jones Intercable ranks among the top ten cable television operators in the United States, serving 1.3 million basic subscribers in 55 cable systems. Its major markets include Illinois, Florida, California and the Washington D.C. area. In addition to its businesses in the United States, the company has interests in cable and telecommunications operations in the United Kingdom and potential cable operations in Spain. BCETI will also invest in other assets of Jones International, including Jones Lightwave, a competitive access telecommunications service provider and Jones Education Networks, which operates the only distance education network on basic cable television that offers academic degree programs. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 04:19:09 GMT From: Kentucky Resources Council Subject: Phone Line Teaming Hi, I want to use a standard telco line to connect to my local schools -- they will soon have local internet connections (a big deal in the boonies!). What I really want is a means to team a second phone numner onto the standard number. The second number needs a different ring cadence so I can discriminate between the two numbers -- now comes the fun part: I want to enable the second number from 4:30 pm to 7:30; that way we can publish the second number and not endure data calls during the school day. Anyone who can help me enable such a system would be a minor hero in my book -- thanks for reading this. wsherr01@ukcc.uky.edu wh [Moderator's Note: Okay, here is what you do. Get one of the devices similar to those sold at Radio Shack which uses the ringing cadence to decide whether to send an incoming call to a regular telephone or to a modem. Your incoming phone line plugs into this, and from the two outgoing connections on the back you plug your regular telephone in one and the modem in the other. The phone itself will only ring when the appropriate ringing cadence triggers the device to send the call in that direction. You'll miss part of the first ring because the device will absorb it in the process of deciding what to do with the newly arrived call. But once it has decided, and flipped its little gate inside one direction or the other, then your associated phone will ring. You answer it as always. If the cadence indicates the call is on the 'modem line' then the device will flip its gate in the other direction and send the ringing current to the modem instead. But of course you will have the modem turned off so the calls to that side of the device will just ring open -- never get an answer. When school is out for the day (is that the selection of your time of 4:30 ?) then someone has the duty of turning the modem on before they leave. Perhaps you will instead prefer to use a timer for the electric supply which feeds the modem and at 4:30 the electric current feeding the modem will kick in allowing the modem to answer calls. At 7:30 the timer will shut the current off and the modem will no longer answer the line. You might want to actually set the timer for 8:00 PM but *publish* 7:30 as the cutoff time; that way the modem won't power down right in the middle of someone's call which started at 7:25 and (would have) ended at 7:31. If the caller is on the line as much as 30 minutes after the published cutoff time then it is really their problem. But since reasonable people's watches may disagree by a couple minutes, you'll want to allow some latitude at 7:30 for the person on line who is trying to wind down his session in good faith, etc. One problem with this solution is that although you won't be plagued by hearing the distinctive ringing line ringing all day long, you may have times when someone is unbeknownst to you ringing that line (you won't hear it of course) and you decide to make an outgoing call. As soon as you pick up your phone, naturally you will trigger an offhook condition for their modem. They'll be sitting there dead and you'll be on your end waiting for a dialtone which never comes. That only really matters if you expect the voice traffic to be heavy increasing the likelyhood that you'll want to make a lot of outgoing calls and be doing so just after a modem call arrived from the other direction. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #815 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29995; 14 Dec 93 3:51 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17068 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:29 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08152 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:05 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:43:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312140643.AA08152@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #817 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 93 00:43:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 817 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson NYNEX/BAMS Codes, More (Douglas Scott Reuben) Bravo, Bravo +, etc. Pager Options and Programming? (Mike Gordon) Radio Shack 900 Mhz Cordless Phone (Greg Abbott) Big Switch Interfaces? (Christopher Nielsen) Acoustic Coupler For PCMCIA Modem Wanted (Phydeaux) Problems With 911 (Ed Mitchell) Some Surveyers Want Exemption From Autodialer Tariffs (David Leibold) Mind Games: A New Love Story (Dror Lubin via Mark Brader) Layoffs at NYNEX? (Reuters via Sid Shniad) Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs (David Appell) Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs (Eric Florack) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13-DEC-1993 14:50:37.92 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: NYNEX/BAMS Codes, More I recently gave in and got service with NYNEX/NY. I've been holding out because each time that I've had opportunity to call their customer service in the past, they have responded so incompetantly that I figured that their system/service could not be much better. However, since the summer, NYNNEX/NY finally added Follow Me Roaming (four years after every other major city got it), and more significantly, Mobilreach, NYNEX Mobile's automatic call delivery network which runs from Maine to Virginia. This includes SIDs: 00022 (NYC Metro), 00484 (Star Cell/southern Maine), 00028 (Boston Metro/RI), 00088 (CT), 00404 (Orange County, NY), 00486 (Poughkeepsie Area), 00078 (Albany), 00??? (forgot the SID for Pittsfield, MA), 00008 (Southern Jersey, Eastern PA, Delaware), 00018 (Baltimore and DC). I think there may be more past Albany, in other NYNEX properties, I'm not sure. (Note that SID 01516, near Kingston, NY, halfway between Poughkeepsie and Albany is NOT on the system, nor do they have FMR. It's some hick system which is only operated by NYNEX, and is an annoying hole in their NY <-> Albany coverage.) I think that NYNEX recently purchased the southern VT and NH properties from US Cellular, so maybe those will be added to the Mobilreach network as well. With such an extensive system, and with no daily surcharge for incoming calls, I decided it was time to try to them. (The "A" side still does not have a similar auto call delivery network which is as extensive, lacking any connectivity between New England or NY and DC/Baltimore, and nothing past Boston, so you lose Maine as well. There is a link between DC/Baltimore and Philly/DE on the A side, but it doesn't go as far northward or westward as does the B side. Vanguard and SWBell on the "A" side are supposed to get on the NACN "soon", but that still means that immediately north of NY (north of I-84) there is no means for auto-call delivery on the "A" side for the forseeable future.) Anyhow, the system works quite well -- I am autonomously registered as I enter a new system, and calls are routed there automatically. The "please hold on" message is annoying -- I'd prefer that the phone just rang. The system needs to place the call over an IXC, so the NYC system has to grab a line and dial out to the visited system, which takes time, and hence the "hold on" message. (Note that but for the DOJ's requirements, this would probably be unecessary :( ). In most of the systems, my call-forwarding features work. I can activate *71/2 and *73 to clear in all of BAMS, all of NYNEX (NY, MA, and RI), and Star Cell of Maine. They will not work in CT, simply because SNET refuses to allow them for some reason. I'll be calling them about that on Monday, and would encourage others who roam to CT to call SNET at 800-922-5469 and bypass the front-end customer service(?) automatons and directly ask to speak to the VP of Network Operations or something to find out why they don't allow call forwarding features to be activated/deactivated in CT, when all the other systems with the same AT&T switches allow it -- it's NOT a technical reason. (BTW, SNET auto-call delivery also goes to Maine, and your forwarding features from SNET will work all over New England, but not NY. SNET customers who roam in NYNEX/NY State properties may also want to inquire as to why SNET has chosen not to allow them to use their forwarding features from NY, whereas in Mass and Maine it is apparently OK.) One neat feature about forwarding on an AT&T Autoplex is that it is similar to forwarding on a landline -- if you receive a call while you have immediate forwarding (*72) set on, your cellular phone will ring once to let you know that a call was forwarded. This will work in NYNEX/NY (home system), and throughout BAMS as well. It won't work in NYNEX/Boston or Star Cell/Maine. Also, since calls are not being delivered to you in a visited market when you have forwarding on, it rings once IMMEDIATELY, which goes to show you how fast call delivery CAN be if it were not for these IXCs (MCI et. al.) screaming to the DOJ about "all that lost revenue from inter-lata, non-waiver cellular traffic". Call-Waiting also has a very nice implementation on the Autpoplex - if you are on a call, and a second comes in, you get the standard two call-waiting beeps, and then about 20 seconds later, a third one. The calling party hears a speacial ring (a ring with a beep attached to the end) to let him or her know that the cellular customer is on a call. If the calling party hangs up before the cellular customer answers, the cellular customer gets a stutter dial tone to indicate that the caller has terminated the call. Call-waiting for NYNEX/NYC customers works in all of BAMS, I think all of the NY properties, but not in SNET or the rest of New England. (Its seems as if NY and BAMS are in one "regime" and New England is in another -- is this in any way correct?) Voice-mail works nicely too -- if you are in your home system and have received a message while you were away from the phone, when you place or receive a call, you will hear an initial stutter dial tone to idicate that a message has been deposited in voicemail. This won't work when you roam in SNET or the rest of New England; it may work in BAMS and other NYNEX sites, but I haven't tried yet. Since the DOJ prohibits messages from going back to voicemail from a visited market unless it goes through an IXC (which most switches can't seem to handle, I dunno why), if you are roaming and get a call, and don't answer it, it will NOT go to voicemail. (The "A" side is similar). I'm not sure how advanced IS-41 Rev (whatever revision will handle this) is, but it's not here yet, and the US cellular industry is wasting a good deal of time and effort to deal with a problem which wouldn't even exist were it not for, in my mind, unecessarily onerous DOJ requirements for cellular voice (+ messaging?) inter-lata trafficking. (Hey, anyone have the address for Al Gore's Efficiency in Government or Competitiveness Committee or whatever it is called? ;) ) In any event, if you need to force your calls back to voicemail (or designated No Answer Transfer location) while you are roaming, hit *780. This turns call delivery of and forces calls to stay in your home system. Hitting *78 will turn call delivery on an have calls come to the visited market. (Similar to the *35/*350 codes on the "A" side NACN, or the *28/*29 codes for some Motorolas or ex-Motorola systems like GTE/SF.) I noticed that these codes were not working from any BAMS properties, although BAMS does indeed uses these for roamers from other PA B systems. (They use *18/*19 -- the FMR codes -- for auto call delivery for their customers -- foolishly I think. Its too confusing to know if you are using FMR or auto call delivery, although GTE FMR may be pushing for this. Don't be fooled, FMR is NO substitute to auto call delivery!). I called NYNEX/NY, and their inept customer service first had no idea what *78 was, and then told me it didn't work outside of NYC (????!!?!), and then one totally self-assured rep told me "It won't work south of NYC due to DOJ regulations" (really?! Which ones?!), and finally I called the corporate headquarters (914-365-7200) and got them to check it out for me. Seems it IS supposed to work, but BAMS never put *78/*780 in their translation table for NYNEX roamers! It is supposed to be set up in Philly (00008) this weekend, and DC/Baltimore (00018) early next week. What I want to know if why after six + months of auto call delivery and four + months of having the *78 feature that NO ONE at NYNEX even noticed this?! Don't they actually send people -- even just ONCE -- to the markets where these services are offered to try things out to see if they work? What sort of quality assurance do they have, anyhow? In general, a very nice network (once the *78/*780 codes are set up in BAMS),if you can stand the awful NYNEX customer service reps. Unfortun- ately, it is more the rule than the exception that although technically impressive, most inter-system call delivery regimes are not very well supported, by both lower-level technicians and customer service, which tends to discourage their use. Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: mwgordon@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Mike Gordon) Subject: Bravo, Bravo +, etc. Pager Options and Programming Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 01:19:11 GMT Four years ago, I was on a Bravo, now I see that the paging companies are pushing a variety of numeric pagers, including the Bravo + (or 2?), Bravo Express, the Freespirit (rounded looking moto pager) and those CHEAP NEC models. I'd like to stay with a Motorola, (I hear nothing but problems about the NEC) but which one? I like the time-stamp feature of the Bravo + and Express, and vibration mode is a must, as I'm often in noisy environments. What other features do these newer units have, and how useful are they? What options can the user set, and what ones can be set by the dealer? Since I'm sure most dealers don't want to go through the trouble of programming options, I'm sure they won't tell me about all of them. Also, has anyone figured out how to program a Bravo through the 3 contacts near the battery? (Without having to pay the paging company big $ to do it?) A buddy of mine wants to change the his beep sound (no, not his CAP code), and can't justify the $25 his paging company wants just to plug it in and hit a few keys on their computer. He has a PC, and can make a cable / interface if it isn't too overly complicated. Gee, could it just be a three wire serial connection? On a more serious note, last time I was on a pager, my call-in number used to be occupied by a "dealer". (And I don't mean a used car dealer.) As I worked third shift and often slept during the day, (and will be again, oh joy of joys) I didn't enjoy the calls at noon from his old customers. Does anyone have any little hints on how to avoid this? Please don't suggest having my boss call me at home during my sleeping hours, because that would mean I'd have to plug my phone in and get woke up by tele-marketers. (At least they don't call pagers!) By the way, the rep from the paging company could only suggest turning off the pager while I slept. Kind of defeats the purpose of having a pager when you're on call around the clock, and missing a call means losing a shift. Thanks in advance for any help, Mike Gordon N9LOI mwgordon@nyx.cs.du.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 20:22:58 CST From: Greg Abbott Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: Radio Shack 900 Mhz Cordless > [Moderator's Note: The Radio Shack 900 mhz phone seems to be a very > good quality instrument. If anyone has tried it out or purchased one, > I would appreciate a review of it here. PAT] Pat: I had the chance to play with one at a nearby Radio Shack about two weeks ago. After being asked if I would like to try out their new cordless I picked the unit up and placed a call. I then, much to the manager's dismay, walked out of the store with the handset and walked down the sidewalk. This Radio Shack is located in a strip mall constructed of steel and concrete. I had no problems with the unit all the way down to the grocery store (about 400' away through all the concrete and steel). I was amazed. I was also able to place calls all the way out into the parking lot (well over 2,000 feet). In short, I found the unit very well built and certainly capable of living up to all of the statements made about it in the catalog. I gave a good report to the manager who was very pleased. BTW, the manager is a friend of mine, so don't think I make it a practice to pick up property and walk out of the store with it! The comments expressed here are my opinion. They in no way reflect an opinion or endorsement by/of my employer. GREG ABBOTT INTERNET: GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107 VOICE: 217/333-4348 METCAD FAX: 217/384-7003 1905 E. MAIN ST. PAGER: 800/222-6651 URBANA, IL 61801 PIN # 9541 ------------------------------ From: zchris@eskimo.com (Christopher Nielsen) Subject: Big Switch Interfaces? Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 21:05:53 GMT We are looking for a way to interface a PC based voicemail type system to many types of switches out there. It seems difficult because each switch has different programming, different T1 specs, etc, etc I'm sure you've all heard it before ... It would be great if there some black box that could be used to interface to 'switch X', and on the other end have a standardized T1 interface that would allow transfers, accepting calls, and perhaps some other basic functionallity. Does anyone out there know of the likelyhood of such a black box? Failing that, does anyone know of (or is) a consultant that is very good at interfacing to many of the switches out there? Thanks for any help! Christopher Nielsen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 15:35:03 -0500 From: reb@ingres.com (Phydeaux) Subject: Acoustic Coupler For PCMCIA Modem Wanted I'm trying to find an acoustic coupler adapter for a PCMCIA modem (Intel PCMCIA Faxmodem). Any solution short of taking apart a telephone jack each place I go help would be appreciated. reb ------------------------------ From: Ed Mitchell Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 13:40:24 PST Subject: Problems With 911 In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 811, Charles Hoequist pointed out the dangers of errors in the telephone company address database when that database is used for 911 dispatch operations. 911 dispatchers have told me that they recommend persons who are concerned about this to telephone 911 during off hours and ask that the dispatcher verify the address shown on the screen. What constitutes "off hours" varies by location so you shouldt first look in the phone book and call the emergency agency's regular business number and ask. I was told that a more common problem than having a completely incorrect address is to have corner lots (at the corner of two streets) reported as facing the street other than that used for the postal address, eg. 4204 Arastradero when 4204 Suzanne was intended. By the way, the dispatchers I spoke with said they usually attempt to verbally confirm your address while on the phone. Ed Mitchell "These opinion are my own and do not reflect the views of Microsoft Corp." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 23:52:43 -0500 From: David Leibold Subject: Some Surveyers Want Exemption From Autodialer Tariffs [from Bell News, Bell Ontario, 13 Dec 93; content is Bell Canada's] Market/survey researchers to be exempt from ADADs tariff Bell has listened to the market/survey research industry and has informed the CRTC that certain market/survey researchers should be exempted from our original ADADs (Automatic Dialing and Announcing Devices) tariff filing. Of primary concern to markey/survey researchers was the proposed restrictions related to the hours of calling and random or sequential dialing. Representatives of Bell and the market/survey research industry agreed that placing strict limits on the hours during which they may call people could potentially affect the quality and accuracy of their research (e.g., certain types of people would not be available for interviews during the proposed hours of calling). The industry recognizes that calling people at unreasonable times could hinder researchers' abilities to gain the co-operation of the people they wish to interview. Although most interviews would be conducted within the hours proposed, in some cases calls could be placed outside of the proposed hours. Under Bell's original proposed tariffs, this could have resulted in the termination of the researcher's telephone service, should a customer complain to Bell (as per the complaint procedure proposed in the company's August 6, 1993 filing). The ability to randomly select telephone numbers is integral to the market/survey research industry. Industry representatives and Bell reps agreed that prohibiting the use of random dialing would hinder their ability to obtain research results that are representative of the general population. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 01:29:00 -0500 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Mind Games: A New Love Story Moderator's Note: Forwarded to the Digest by Mark Brader from the rec.puzzles group on Usenet where he found it. Look it over and think about it; I'll print the answer here in a day or two. PAT] From: lubin@fy.chalmers.se (Dror Lubin) Subject: A New Love Story Reply-To: lubin@fy.chalmers.se Organization: Chalmers University of Technology Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 08:33:39 GMT A New Love Story Once upon a time, in a far away land, there was a beautiful girl, who lived in a big big castle, just like in all the other stories that begin like this. Alas, the girl had a wicked mother who kept her locked. Where? In a red cell. The cell had a combination lock with three knobs. On one was written "red" on the other was written "cell", and on the third, the biggest, was written "nlrrecs". Our poor girl couldn't find out how on earth could she open this lock. As she couldn't get out, she decided to make her living in. She was a great cook, so she opened a road restaurant in her cell, or more properly: A cell-diner. She put outside a big sign saying: "NIIDSACAL CELL DINER" (niidsacal means "friendly" in her language). Of course, with such a name, not many people stopped there, and even if they did, they couldn't get in because of the lock, so business was rather slow. One day, a young prince heard about this girl. Nowadays, most princes are in the racing business, and so was he. Instead of a white horse, he had a big racing car. People often asked him if he had a white horse, and he would always say: "NO!, I have a racing car". Then they would ask him what does his car look like, and he would say: "Nice ... All RED!!". The registration plate was "ICDIINPNNS". He chose this plate because these were the initials of his name and title: "Isidor Charles Darwinski the 2nd, Noble Prince of Norway, Nashville and Seattle". Well, as ICDII heard the sad story of the girl in the red cell, he jumped into his car, and raced towards the evil castle. He was so furious, he did not see the huge oil truck coming towards him on the wrong side of the road. Boy, was that an ill-end-race!! ICDII became even more ill when he got the bill: $5,172,790.20, you see, it was he who drove on the wrong side, and without insurance too! After that, ICDII wouldn't hear anymore of no princesses, so our little girl is still locked away in her red cell, waiting for *YOU* to call her. Do you know her phone number?? ---------------------------- [Moderator's Note: Figure out the right phone number and send it to me **with an explanation for how you figured it out**. I'll print the answer in a day or two after a few replies have arrived. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shniad@sfu.ca Subject: Layoffs at NYNEX? Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 10:43:28 PST MASSIVE JOB CUTS COMING AT NYNEX? Boston -- NYNEX Corp. has declined comment on a report that it will cut 22,000 jobs over the next three years as part of a plan announced earlier to cut costs 30%. The {Boston Herald} said an internal NYNEX memo showed the telephone company plans to slash 28% of its 80,000-strong workforce by 1996 through layoffs, attrition and retirement. These would include some 7,100 jobs at it New England Telephone subsidiary, the report said. The memo called for 2,551 job cuts in 1994, it added. The company, which also owns New York Telephone, has already cut one sixth of its workforce in recent years to compete with rivals that are merging telephone, cable television and computers. "I can't confirm the numbers of workforce layoffs," said NYNEX spokesman Pete Goodale. He noted that the Herald report was "based on a single document and out of context." In September, NYNEX announced it would eliminate 1,200 jobs by June and several thousand more in the next few years. Goodale said NYNEX's plans to trim operations had already been made plain. "But there are a variety of ways of achieving this. How it plays in terms of workforce reductions is not yet determined." NYNEX shares closed up 1/8 on the New York Stock Exchange after the news was released. -- Reuter Sid Shniad ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 93 12:03 EST From: David Appell <0005946880@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs In Telecom Digest V13 #803 Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com wrote: > Regardsless of any other factor, companies whose primary goal is to > make money for it`s investors, will always and invariably move to > operate at a lower cost and a higher profit margin. Perhaps this is one of the things they're upset about: the unspoken assumption that *investor's* rights take precedence over *worker's* rights. Investment capital is only one of the requirements for a successful business -- labor capital is important, too. Yet, in the money-crazed, business-first environment of the 90s, those who have money to invest in a company are invariably treated better than those who merely give their blood, sweat and tears to it. There are real people underneath all those layoff numbers, whose belts are undoubtably tightened much farther than your average stock holder, institutional or individual. Both groups are necessary for a successful business, and a little perspective, even in this day and age, can't hurt. David Appell 594-6880@mcimail.com [Moderator's Note: That's why I like running Sid's commentaries and reports from time to time; they lend a little balance, a view of the other side of the coin. But Eric Florack has another rebuttal, so his article next will close this issue and this thread. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 09:55:09 PST From: Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com Subject: Re: Union Losing Telco Jobs Eric originally responded: >> What the article fails to point out is that the unions themselves are >> responsible for pricing themselves and the workers they claim to >> represent, out of the market. Sid replied: > Eric doesn't adduce any evidence to substantiate this claim. In fact, > real, inflation-adjusted wages -- in the unionized telephone industry > and other sectors -- have been declining for more than ten years. But > let's not let facts get in the way of a good diatribe. Let's just use > this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless > accusations. Declining in relationship to what, Sid, themselves? Non-union wages? Either one is a strong suggestion of just how out of line union wages have been ... and does /nothing/ to dispute my statment. In fact, it backs it. But let's not let facts get in the way of a good pro-union diatribe. Let's just use this baseless comment as the launch pad for further baseless pro-union spout. Asks Sid, > What evidence is there that regulation kills jobs? Carter. Johnson. Most recently, Clinton, and the reaction of industry to her agendae. The biggest example is the biggest regulator in the world; the former Soviet Empire. Just to name a few examples. Note that each of these was a friend of big labor. Then place in contrast, the deregulation attitude /after/ each of these administrations, and the well-documented spurt in job growth, after dereg, in each and every case. (See? I`ve even given you something to watch for, in the future. Remember, you heard it here first, gang! :->) Can you deny, for example, the number of newly created jobs that came along when the federal government allowed competition, by removing the regulation that established the monopoly of AT&T? > But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it > that companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas > expansion, takeovers, etc.? I don`t suppose it`s occurred to you that such investment goes to the places it`s most likely to earn a good ROI. Obviously, they don`t consider the best investment to be in the CWA controlled telecom market that we have here in the US. > But if these are confiscatory, as you imply, how is it that > companies like MCI are finding ways to invest in overseas expansion, > takeovers, etc.? You are attempting to have it both ways. You complain that they`re making too much money on vid services, and then you wonder where it comes from, as if they were making it all from their `cash cow`. Which is it? > However, when the normal workings of said Free Market generate > staggering loss of jobs -- for example, a recent {Wall Street Journal} > article reported that the Fortune 500 employed 16.2 million people in > 1990, versus 11.8 million in 1993 -- then this is treated as just a > natural unfolding of the workings of the world. What`s your solution, then? Back to the Xbar system, or before, so that all the operators will have their jobs back? Should we go even farther ... back to cord boards? What you`re dealing with is not free market forces alone, but the free market reacting to technology. You`d best understand, with the rest of us, that making money for the owners (nee:investors) is the number one goal of any company. Jobs are nothing more than a secondary function of business, albeit a happy one, and telcos are certainly no exception. And by the way, your F-500 comment is quite typical of someone attempting to prove a point with only half the statistics. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics, it is said. What your comment /does not/ indicate is how many jobs were created /outside/ of the F-500 ... which, in fact is where most jobs in this country are created, and a higher percentage of non-union jobs, at that. Being at work, I don`t have the figures to hand, but look it up. You will find that the number of jobs created by companies other than the 500 far outstripped the numbers of jobs lost by the 500 in the same period. A smaller number of people working under the F-500 umbrella, therefore, is an indication that free markets are working for the benefit of all, not that the system is failing. In short, tell the whole story. On the other hand, let's not let facts get in the way of a good pro-union diatribe. Let's just use this comment as the launch pad for further baseless pro-union spout. My regards to Pat, who says: > [Moderator's Note: Part of -- maybe the majority of -- the 'rabid > responses seen here come from the Dungheap Net (Usenet). I`m not on Usenet, so far as I know, FYI. > As you know Sid, I sent you a separate note a few minutes ago noting > that most of the readers here like to see two, or three or four sides > to every story. I certainly don`t object to such material being placed in here. Not only is that your call, Pat, but I happen to agree with you, in it. I simply reserve the right to respond to things when they come through ... one you apparently support, having echoed it out in the Digest. As to Sid`s comment about his post being taken as off subject; no, I don`t think it is.This is an issue that affects, on a first level, the future of the telecommunications industry ... the other implications for other industry and government policy towards labor not withstanding. In fact, I would suggest it`s those parallels to the rest of industry that make this an important topic. All this having been said, allow me to place a little perspective on all of this; my company (see my address) has just recently announced a ten thousand or so employee cutback, on a world-wide basis. /E Everyone`s entitled to my opinion, but Xerox doesn`t pay me for it.... [Moderator's Note: And I bet you hope you are not one of the 'ten thousand or so' they choose to eliminate. Hey Sid, better get some union membership sign-up cards over to Xerox right away! :) And Eric, I never claimed YOU were part of Usenet, although I guess my message came out sounding that way. Anyway, Usenet is now doing their own thing with telecom news in an unmoderated forum, as I'm sure will become obvious before long, even to the untrained eye! :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #817 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03722; 14 Dec 93 15:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27831 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:37 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17249 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:12 -0600 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:42:12 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312141742.AA17249@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #818 TELECOM Digest Tue, 14 Dec 93 11:42:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 818 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Gold Card: New Calling Card For Business Travelers (TELECOM Moderator) Businesses Should Beware of Phone Fraud During Holiday Season (Nigel Allen) International Internet Association (Alfredo E. Cotroneo) New: RADIO-L - Digital Audio Broadcasting - DAB (Ronald Lee Stone) X.32 Dial-up Access (Stewart Fist) Miscellaneous Questions Before Leaving For China (John T. Ellis) Area Codes *and* Prefixes (Doug Krause) Caller ID Project in Electronics Now (Feb. 94) (David Leibold) Caller ID Terms Can be Confusing (Stewart Fist) Cox Cable to Compete With US West (Advertising Age via vantek@aol.com) Scaling (Was Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS?) (Paul Robinson) Shared 800 Telephone Numbers (Dave Bonney) Wanted: RJ Testing Tools (David Elliott) Frequency Tuning Speed (Jae-Soo Kim) Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? (Linc Madison) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution is permitted only with unedited, complete copies of the Digest and associated mailing lists/news groups. Please obtain permission before reprinting the material herein. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: New Calling Card For Business Travelers Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 01:53:00 CST You who have been around here awhile have heard me mention the Orange Calling Card from Orange Communications; a telephone calling card with no surcharge at any time for its use, and rates of 25 cents per minute with a thirty second minimum billing period. It costs $12 to sign up and it works like any other calling card (dial an 800 number; get the tone; enter your card number, the number you are calling, and your PIN) except for the lack of any surcharge at all. Now I am offering one called the GOLD CARD. For starters, the rates are a little different, however there are some additional features available on it you should find useful. Rates: 28 cents per minute during the day; 25 cents per minute evenings and nights; As with the Orange Card, *no surcharge at any time*. So you are probably asking why you should spend 28 cents per minute during the day on calls when Orange is only 25 cents per minute. Here is why: No fee to sign up. If you qualify, you get it free of charge. Qualifying means having reasonably good credit and being a regular business traveler; You choose your own ten digit authorization code and four digit PIN; Voicemail is included -- 25 cents per message left in your box; Fax mailbx is included -- 30 cents per faxed page left in your box; Fraud protection in the form of a daily usage limit which you set and you can adjust as required; Originate calls anywhere in the USA with domestic *and international* terminations. (Orange is still just domestic USA terminations); Use # for redial or re-origination of calls; Speed dial capability for your frequently called numbers; Broadcast voicemail and broadcast fax mail capabilities; International origination of calls beginning around the middle of 1994. Orange Card has never been useful to readers of the Digest outside the USA, but beginning sometime next year the GOLD CARD will allow people in other countries to participate; Voice prompts make the system easy to use. Here are some examples: To make a regular GOLD CARD call: Dial 1-800-xxx-xxxx and listen for the greeting; Enter your self-defined authorization code and PIN; Listen for further instructions which will tell you to dial your call (with 011 if international) or press * for options. To pick up voicemail, select option #2. To pick up fax messages, select option #3 and enter the number where your faxes are to be delivered. The system will then call that number and deliver the fax(es). To change your system daily limit, press * from within the options menu, and enter your six digit limit code, then act according to the prompts given. To send voicemail messages and faxes using the GOLD CARD: Give your associates the 800 number, your ten digit authorization code and the special PIN 6245 (MAIL). They'll get switched into your voicemail box to leave messages at 25 cents each which you retrieve from wherever you are at your convenience. People also send faxes to you in much the same way. They call the 800 number, and certain prompts tell them to start the fax transmission once they have gotten to your mailbox. So, if you think this is worth three cents more per minute on daytime calls (but the same rate as Orange evening and nights along with the no surcharge arrangement), then drop me a note at ptownson@townson.com and ask for the paperwork to be mailed out to you to get an account started. The GOLD CARD is a service of Corporate Telemanagement Group and is intended for frequent business travelers. Please include your company name when you contact me for the application, and the address where it is to be mailed. ------------------------------- The same folks offer 1+ long distance service to businesses at the rate of 18.4 cents per minute flat rate, and 800 service at the rate of 18.4 cents per minute flat rate plus a $5 per month surcharge in the case of 800 numbers. As my existing 800 number customers know, Hogan was bought out by Corporate Telemanagement Group and your existing 800 numbers are being serviced by CTG under the terms of the contract you had with Hogan. Regards the 1+ dialing noted above, obviously I can only recommend this to business users with a heavy volume of daytime calls. 18.4 cents per minute is never a bargain at night, and if your long distance calling is mostly at night from home, don't apply for this. For many small businesses however, the 18.4 daytime rate might be a good deal. Again, for details or to sign up: ptownson@townson.com. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 09:23 WET From: ndallen@io.org (Nigel Allen) Subject: Businesses Should Beware of Phone Fraud During Holiday Season Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-3783 Voice: 416-363-8676 Here is a press release from AT&T. AT&T Warns Businesses Against Holiday Hackers and Toll Thieves David Bikle 201-644-7052 (office) 201-871-0104 (home) FOR RELEASE WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1993 BASKING RIDGE, N.J.-- AT&T urges businesses to guard against increased risk of toll-fraud attempts by hackers, or toll-call thieves, during the upcoming holiday season. Last year nationwide toll-fraud attempts increased by about 50 per cent during the Christmas week. Hackers "break into" PBX's or voice-mail systems, obtain passwords or access to outside lines, and then sell or use the information to make illegal international phone calls. Toll fraud cost American businesses more than $2 billion in l993. "Hackers count on being able to steal calls undetected while businesses are closed during a long holiday weekend," says Larry Watt, director of AT&T's Toll Fraud Prevention center. "'Tis the season to be wary." AT&T suggests several steps businesses can take to protect against phone fraud: o Program PBX's to block outgoing calls to foreign countries during the hours the business is closed. Also consider blocking remote access into PBX and voice-mail systems both after hours and throughout the holiday weekends. o Deactivate or restrict call transfer out of voice mail and auto-attendant systems. o Institute a regular schedule for changing access codes and passwords, and always delete unused codes. o Enroll in a fraud-prevention program that will call the customer whenever suspicious calling patterns are detected--even in the evening and on weekends--so the long-distance carrier can quickly block further illegal outgoing calls. AT&T monitors virtually all of its business customers' calls 24 hours a day, and its NetPROTECT(SM) Services include notification of fraud attempts even at night and on weekends. For example, with NetPROTECT Plus Service a business can designate three people and their reach numbers after work hours, so that AT&T can notify the representative and work with him or her to stop the fraud quickly. AT&T is the industry leader in helping companies to prevent toll fraud. Businesses that want more information on preventative measures can request AT&T's free booklet, "Tips on Safeguarding Your Company's Telecom Network," by calling 1-800-NET-SAFE. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 93 02:02:48 EST From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <100020.1013@CompuServe.COM> Subject: International Internet Association This is warning for possible fraud involving "free" Internet access offered to European users by IIA (International Internet Association). Potential users of Internet and e-mail services in Europe have been contacted by an alleged non profit organization denominated "International Internet Associaton (IIA)" based in Washington, DC, USA, promoting free access to Internet sponsored with funds provided by the US Administration. A few days later expressing interest in IIA's "free" service, companies in Europe were told by IIA that "International Discount Telecommunication Corp. (IDT)" would contact them for details on how to connect to the "free" Internet service. IDT, based in Hackensack, NJ, is a Telecommunication (phone) services provider, which basically provide a US dial-tone service to customers outside the USA, giving them access to the US phone networks at tariffs slighlty higher that the ones normally offered by AT&T, but cheaper than the ones offered by most European national PTTs. The invitation to sign a contract with IDT to get access to IIA "free Internet" must be carefully evaluated by potential users of Internet in Europe, because even at the discounted phone rates offered by IDT, Internet access will be quite expensive. There are -- depending on the particular usage of Internet by the individual companies in Europe -- much cheaper alternatives to be considered. To the profane, all this is a clear indication that everyone must be very careful when a service is offered for free. Especially when free services are offered by a non-profit organization in the US which seem to have very close ties with a commercial company. Furthermore: IDT does not indicate clearly the phone tariffs in their contract form, they ask for a credit card number to activate the service, and they only indicate that the "users will be billed directly by the American carriers (???WHO ARE THEY???) at their lowest rate", which one is not shown. No access to Internet is being offered apparently by IIA without signing a contract with IDT. Unfortunately this warning will not reach Europeans in need of an Internet access, since they would not probably be connected yet to read this message. Alfredo E. Cotroneo, PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano Italy email: 100020.1013@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1993 10:31:00 -0500 From: Ronald Lee Stone Subject: New: RADIO-L - Digital Audio Broadcasting - DAB RADIO-L on LISTSERV@UMINN1.BITNET or LISTSERV@VM1.SPCS.UMN.EDU Discussion of Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) The RADIO-L discussion list is a forum for addressing the issues involved in the transition to a Digital Audio Broadcasting (DAB) standard in the United States and other countries. Discussion regarding the relative technological merits of various DAB proposals, as well as the social and economic implications of a transition to DAB is welcome and encouraged on this list. Digital audio broadcasting offers improved sound quality, technical superiority, and economic efficiency over current AM and FM analog broadcasting. The United States is scheduling tests of various DAB proposals beginning summer 1994. Anyone can join. To join the list send a message to LISTSERV@UMINN1 on BITNET or LISTSERV@vm1.spcs.umn.edu on the Internet with the BODY containing the command: SUBSCRIBE RADIO-L Yourfirstname Yourlastname Eg. sub radio-l Marchese G. Marconi Owner: Ronald L. Stone ston0030@gold.tc.umn.edu graduate student : Scientific & Technical Communication Department of Rhetoric : University of Minnesota, St. Paul (612) 644-9706 ------------------------------ From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: X.32 Dial-up Access Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:00:00 GMT What has happened to X.32 as a dial-up form of access to X.25 packet networks? A couple of years ago it was being hailed as the great break- through that would allow POTS line and modem users to get two-way- calling access to ISDN at reasonable rates. From memory, the two-way-calling system wasn't integrated into the first release of the protocol, so it was then little more than a synchronous form of the X.28 access for people without tie lines. Was two-way-calling ever introduced? I'm interested in this because it occurs to me that the ideal combination for small business and people working from home, will be something like X.32 over ADSL or HDSL. This seems to be the ideal way to use a POTS line to get reasonable data rates into public-access X.25, frame-relay and ATM networking services. ------------------------------ From: ellis@rtsg.mot.com (John T Ellis) Subject: Miscellaneous Questions Before Leaving For China Date: 14 Dec 1993 02:31:08 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group Reply-To: ellis@rtsg.mot.com I will be moving to Beijing, China in late January to begin a two year assignment training Chinese engineers on Motorola's cellular equipment (infrastructure). As I've been preparing to pack up and move out, I compiled the following list of questions. I would appreciate a word or two from anyone who can shed some light. Thanks much beforehand. I certainly appreciate it. (1) I am looking to buy a fully compatible PAL/NTSC video recorder. When I say "fully compatible", I mean the following - : able to record NTSC : able to record PAL : able to play PAL : able to play NTSC Can anyone offer suggestions on models, brands? What experiences have people had with these kind of systems - ie. poor tape recording quality, poor playing of a tape from a particular signalling system? Also, I was given the following name and address for a company in New York that specializes in the above systems. Has anyone dealt with them before? Appliances Overseas 276 Fifth Ave. Suite 407 New York, NY 10001-4509 212-545-8001 - tel 212-545-8005 - fax (2) What experience(s) do people have with Fax/Modem/Phone switches? I have a catalog from DAMARK that has a TT System listed for $79.99. Does this sound reasonable? Is this a good buy? If not, where should I go? What should I try to avoid? (3) What problems can I expect when trying to interface American made phone equipment into a Chinese phone jack? I know that I will have to worry about power, but I'm refering to connectors, line voltages etc. The equipment I will be bringing in includes: computer modem, fax machine, ATT cordless phone. (4) ** This isn't really related to telecom, but I thought someone might know. ** I would like to bring my tape deck, record player and microwave with me. I have been told that I may need to make adjustments to the belts on the players and some other modifications to the microwave. Can anyone confirm this? If so, what changes are required? If I don't make the changes, what problems will I incur? Again, thanks much for all the assistance. John T. Ellis 708-632-7857 Motorola Cellular ellis@rtsg.mot.com ------------------------------ From: dkrause@hydra.acs.uci.edu (Doug Krause) Subject: Area Codes *and* Prefixes Organization: Lido 24 Hr. Pizza and Video Date: 14 Dec 93 12:51:49 GMT Is there a US-wide list of area codes and prefixes available? If not, I would be willing to collect this information from people around the country and post it monthly. **** Douglas Krause dkrause@uci.edu One yuppie can ruin **** **** University of California, Irvine your whole day. **** [Moderator's Note: Most of what you are seeking is in the Telecom Archives already. Check out the 'areacodes' and 'country.codes' sub- directories within the archives. Carl Moore is responsible for much of the data in that area, along with others who help him. The archives is accessible several ways: the two most common are anonymous ftp and the email information service I operate. Use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu to connect, then 'cd telecom-archives' and go from there. If you need a copy of the email information service help file (it is completely an automated thing) then write me and ask for it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 06:44 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Caller ID Project in Electronics Now (Feb. 94) The {Electronics Now} publication (formerly Radio-Electronics) has a Caller ID project scheduled for its February 1994 edition, which should be on newsstands in January. The do-it-yourself folks interested in number display things might take notice. David Leibold ------------------------------ Date: 08 Dec 93 17:37:49 EST From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Caller ID Terms Can be Confusing I'm trying to follow this CLI/ANI discussion in TELECOM Digest and in other technical publications. I guess you guys know what you're talking about, but the welter of casually-used terms and acronyms have left me rather confused. I've culled out the following acronyms and terminology. Would someone care to explain the distinctions. > Caller ID > CID - Calling Identity Delivery > ID calls - (presumably the same - or does this refer to a post-hoc call to the exchange to discover the ID of the last caller?) > CLI - Call Line Identification > CLID - (presumably the same) > CND - Caller Number Display (probably the same) > CNI - Call Number Identification > CNID - (is this only between exchanges?) > CPNI - Customer Private Network Information (is this generic?) > ANI - (Is this primarily for inter-carrier billing purposes?) > ADSI - Analog Display Service Interface (aren't all of these analog?) > STR - Source Telephone Recognition (seems to be on ISDN only?) > Ad-Hoc call trace (automatic delivery of CLI after, by dialling special number, presumably?) Also, while you are about it, could someone clear up the following: 1. What is CLI called when it is carried over ISDN's D-channel? Is this STR? 2. What is it called when it is carried in SS7 (CCS#7) packets? 3. How does Delux ID know the name of the caller? Does it need to reference some form of X.500 directory? 4. What's the distinction between "CLASS and LASS-based"? 5. What is meant (or implied) by "multi message format". What is single message format CLI? [Moderator's Note: Well, that's a big order; I suspect people are going to be writing with several responses. This is a good time to remind readers that one of the features of the Telecom Archives Email Information Service is the GLOSSARY command: When you encounter a term you are unfamiliar with, send email to the archives in the usual prescribed format (see the help file) and as your command, you enter GLOSSARY . All the various glossary files will be searched automatically and the appropriate text from each glossary sent back to you in email. Try it and have some fun with it. I guess a few thousand entries are available. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vantek@aol.com Reply-To: vantek@aol.com Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 05:33:23 EST Subject: Cox Cable to Compete with US West The following appeared in the Dec. 6, 1993 edition of {Advertising Age}: COX CABLE TO COMPETE WITH US WEST IN INTERACTIVE TEST Cox Cable Communications will test a variety of interactive services on it's system in Omaha, Neb., starting next June. Cox will use interactive technology provided by a consortium of ICTV, a Santa Clara, Calif., interactive services company; IBM Corp., which is providing digital servers; and New Century Communications, a data management company. Among the services Cox will test are movies and music videos on demand, a shopping mall, electronic classified ads and a local dining guide, said David Serlin, exec VP of ICTV. The interactive service will compete directly with a similar one planned for Omaha by US West. The Cox test is the first market test by ICTV, a four-year old company. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1993 12:12:08 EST Reply-To: 0005066432@mcimail.com Subject: Scaling (Was Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS?) From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Brendan Jones , writes: > I don't deny CDMA looks to be a promising technology. However, you > can't necessarily scale the experience of a 50 user 5 base station > system. Some particular propagation or interference effects, > negligible under low density use, may become far more important > under higher density use. I will concur with this. There have been major technological improvements and corrections in design errors of equipment used on the Internet. Some of the flaws in the design and implementation were only discovered after they were put into "live use" on a running network of hundreds of thousands of sites (then). The equipment worked fine under low usage conditions and laboratory tests. When put into service in the real world where a "baptism under fire" showed they needed to be changed to meet the conditions that actual service would cause. This is not to fault the designers of those systems; there was no way to tell until they went into service exactly what conditions would occur on a real network under actual conditions. This was one case where you can't guess at what will happen, the only way you can find out is to put it up and see why it fails, since no laboratory or simulation could provide the kind of punishment that real-life actual use would provide. Paul Robinson - TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 13:46:55 GMT From: dab@wiretap.spies.com (Dave Bonney) Subject: Shared 800 Telephone Numbers Carl Moore in writing about changes to local dialing plans quoted from a Bell letter to customers: > "We thank you for helping us to prepare for Pennsylvania's new area > code. If you have any questions, please call our We Can Help Center > at 1-800-555-5000, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m." and Carl commented: > [I tried that number from Maryland and got U.S. West Communications > -- a recording only -- in Denver, Colorado. Darn, I am not in Del. or > Pa. now.] If you try that number in New England Telephone territory, you get the 'New England Telephone Customer Response Center'. Leading one to believe that despite the TELCO and RESPORG claims of 'One Number -- One User', it's another case of 'Mother Knows Best' and 'Do As I Say, Not As I Do'. Does anyone have any knowledge of a single 800 number being used for different customers in different geographical areas?? (Other than Mother and the Children of course ...) Inquiring Minds Want To Know ... David A. Bonney <---> Telephone +1 (508) 692-4194 A Telecommunications Professional Now Available in Westford MA No Employer, No Disclaimer. Just My Own Thoughts. Inquiries to MCIMail 422-4552 or Internet ------------------------------ From: dce@netcom.com (David Elliott) Subject: Wanted: RJ Testing Tools Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 00:55:02 GMT I work for a small software company, and we do our own network and telephone wiring inside the office. Our computers are networked together using 10BaseT Ethernet and our telephone lines are all single lines. Everything is handled in one room with a punch-down panel, though some larger offices have separate Ethernet hubs in them. Our biggest problems tend to be with broken or incorrectly-made cables. Testing these to isolate problems is a big hassle. The only real tools we have are a beeper box and a multimeter. While these are a start, and we could improve things by creating some special cables and connectors, time is money. What I am interested in is a set of tools for testing and analyzing cables and jacks. Typical testing scenarios: * Cable tester - I plug in both sides of a cable (either RJ11 or RJ45) and the tester tells me what is connected to what, or at least whether the wires are connected straight through (though for modem serial cables it would be nice to have it work like a standard break-out box, too). * Line tester - I plug in a loop-back connector on one side of a run, plug in a line tester on the other, and it tells me whether each wire is good or not (it would be great if it could help isolate which one, but one bad wire usually means the whole cable needs replacing). * In-line signal analyzer - I plug this into an existing setup, and it tells me which lines have signal on them. There may be other tools that are useful, and if so, I'd like to hear about them. The main goal is to make it so that diagnosing problems doesn't require taking someone away from their regular work. David Elliott - dce@netcom.com - (408) 735-8362 ------------------------------ From: jkim@acsu.buffalo.edu (Jae-Soo Kim) Subject: Frequency Tuning Speed Organization: UB Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 01:23:42 GMT Hello, I'd like to know the frequency tuning speed of frequency synthesizer which is in market now. Any information or any direction to materials will be greatly appreciated. Jae ------------------------------ From: lincmad@netcom.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 09:58:12 GMT I have a question about the selection of 334 as the new area code for Atlanta. In numerous discussions about the generalization of area codes after "Time T," it has been stated that the first NNX area codes would all be NN0 (such as 520 for Arizona). Yet the very first NNX is not NN0. Just wondering about this picayune detail ... Linc Madison * Oakland, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #818 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08486; 15 Dec 93 5:59 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20955 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:24 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14127 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:00 -0600 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 02:23:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312150823.AA14127@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #819 TELECOM Digest Wed, 15 Dec 93 02:23:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 819 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Possible Rate Lowering by NYNEX (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere... (Greg Abbott) Re: AT&T's New Facility (Christopher C. Blough) Re: Crummy Service in NY (Carl Oppedahl) Re: Looping and Data Looping (Michael Oshea) Re: PCS Questions (Kyle Griffin) Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice (Glenn Inn) Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice (Ray Normandeau) Re: Terse 800 Failure ... Oh My! (Randall Gellens) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 19:45:12 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Possible Rate Lowering by NYNEX {Newsday} (Dec 4, 1993) had an article concerning rate cuts for New York Telephone subscribers to the tune of nearly 297 million dollars (US). "If the Public Service Commission adopts the recommendation of two of its judges, at a meeting set for Dec. 15, the cost for many New York Telephone calls and for Touch Tone service could fall starting Jan. 1, 1994. "A residential customer now pays $1.35 a month for each Touch Tone line according to New York Telephone." "The ruling illustrates the tension between NYNEX goals and regulatory concerns. On Thursday, NYNEX announced a new marketing strategy and a planned restructuring for its operations. NYNEX also reiterated its determination to be able to offer a full range of interactive and video services, including cable TV, if it can list federal regularory restrictions." I always knew we were being ripped off and this is one of the few times that the PSC has come to the ratepayer's aid. NYNEX is also setting itself up for a regulatory battle concerning video in its service area due to a purchase of a portion of a company (Teleport I think) which has portions of it owned by some cable companies. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 20:23:17 CST From: Greg Abbott Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere... > I don't know what would be displayed if I had to call 911 from my > present phone on 410-287; my mail (including my phone bills) goes to a > PO box in another town. Utility companies need to know where you > live, because that is where the physical connections for service > (electricity, phone, etc.) go, even if the bills don't. (Perhaps > you'd want to find out what exchange serves 820 Old Apex Road. I did > find Apex Road and Street listed for zipcode 27707, and Apex Hwy. > listed for zip code 27713, both in Durham.) All of the telco's I deal with have billing addresses and service addresses. The 9-1-1 Database is not (atleast in Illinois) built from only billing addresses. We make a careful review of the database before the system can be turned on. Any listings found without a locatable address (i.e. P.O. Boxes, Rural Route, etc.) are contacted and asked for their locatable address. > Question: What about foreign exchange service? An old example in > Maryland was someone in an area served by 287 prefix who brought in > 642 Perryville (the next exchange to the west) as a foreign exchange > because it is local to Aberdeen (272,273,278) and Havre de Grace > (939). Another case (glaring because a state line is involved, and I > recall seeing this at least once in the Wilmington, Del. directory), > would be someone in the Wilmington or Holly Oak exchange area bringing > in Chester Heights (Pa.) as a foreign exchange; that choice: > -Keeps Wilmington, Newport, Holly Oak as local calls > -loses local service to other parts of New Castle County, Del. > and part of southern Chester County, Pa. > -GETS LOCAL SERVICE TO ALL OF PHILADELPHIA METRO AREA FX circuits are a particular headache, but not impossible to deal with. Once they are discovered we can make specific notations on that telephone number indicating where the actual telephone service is located at. Special routing can be set up (if equipment allows) to send the call to the correct PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point). > Remote-forward, which I set up in Delaware, would not be involved in > 911. No calls can originate on my Delaware number; it can only be > activated by an incoming call, and can only automatically call the > number I am forwarding to. If a telephone number can make outgoing calls (even if it is a fax, modem or remote forwarding device) then you can be that the record has been examined for accurate service location information. If you were to disconnect your remote forwarding device and plug in a standard telephone (or hook up a butt set to the D-Marc) you could dial a number just like a normal telephone line. Granted, you don't use your line this way and there probably will never be any other outgoing calls except those forwarded, but you *could*, if you wanted to, hook up a phone and dial 9-1-1 from that line. One more quick example of something we ran across. One of the local power companies has some remote telemetry units at their sub-stations. These units are hard wired into standard telephone lines. When we ran across their telephone records with addresses like "SBS36L-W3" we inquired where they were. We were told that there was no need to address these sub-stations since "no one could *ever* make a call from these lines". I asked to visit one of the sites with the power company rep. I looked at it and indeed the wires come out of the telemetry unit and go right into the D-Marc. I pulled out my butt set, tapped into the line and produced dial tone for the rep and dialed the time and temperature number. We immediatly went back to his office and assigned addresses to each of their sub-stations. I heard of a similar incident somewhere out west where a 9-1-1 center was searching for a telephone number that had a service record showing an address in the middle of a major bridge over a dam. After several conversations with the folks who manage the dam, an old-timer remembered a long time ago when they had had a telephone down in the base of a maintenance shaft, well under the water level. Someone (I don't know if it was a public safety official or an employee of the water folks) went down in this shaft and someone else up on the surface dialed the telephone number. Sure enough, there at the bottom of the shaft, back behind some old control cabinets was a rusted old wall phone that was ringing away. The person answered the phone and conversed with the surface. That phone had to have an address since it would be possible for someone to call 9-1-1 from it. I should clarify, it had an address, but it needed a better location added to the record. Hope this answers a few questions, though I'm sure it will stir up a few more comments/questions. Happy Holidays! GREG ABBOTT INTERNET: GABBOTT@UIUC.EDU 9-1-1 COORDINATOR COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107 VOICE: 217/333-4348 METCAD FAX: 217/384-7003 1905 E. MAIN ST. PAGER: 800/222-6651 URBANA, IL 61801 PIN # 9541 ------------------------------ From: gnh-starport!cblough@clark.net Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility Date: 15 Dec 1993 02:21:33 -0500 Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc. > Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to > Washington, DC. After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T > cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor. On > Friday morning, both vessels were docked. However, on the Sunday > return trip, only one boat was still in port. Perhaps to Long Island > is where the second ship went? I personally make the trip from D.C. to philadelphia up 95 about three times a month. That is the first time in over a year that I have even heard of either ship being out to sea. Speaking of which, those ships are technically amazing. They can lay something like 20 miles of cable in a day (over a straight distance on a level sea floor). That isn't fiber optic, so I don't know how fast that goes. Christopher C. Blough InterNet: cblough@gnh-starport.clarknet UUCP: clarknet!gnh-starport!cblough Starport BBS 703-560-9308 ARPA: clarknet!gnh-starport!cblough@nosc.mil ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Crummy Service in NY Date: 14 Dec 1993 15:17:17 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In gaj@pcs.win.net (Gordon Jacobson) writes: >> Oh, and I cannot get ISDN, either. > All Business Service NYTel COs south of 57th Street provide ISDN > PRI/BRI. > Call Bob Block at (212) 395 5272. >> My service comes from the "Second Avenue" central office in Manhattan. > So does mine -- 2nd Avenue and 56th Street in fact. And I can > get ISDN whenever I want it. No, the "Second Avenue" central office is at Second Avenue and 13th Street. I expect they call it that because they don't like to repeat the number "13" if they can avoid it. There is ISDN in the Second Avenue CO, but I would only be able to receive incoming calls on it if I told lots of people to call a different number than they normally do. The exchange serving me there, which is 212-777, has no ISDN. Indeed only two out of thirty-six exchanges in that CO support ISDN, I am told. But another of my exchanges, the Yorktown Heights central office, has *no* ISDN. None. Even if I change my number there. And another central office I call frequently, 212-787 (West 73rd Street) has *no* ISDN. None. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW (patent lawyer) Oppedahl & Larson Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 ------------------------------ From: michael oshea Subject: Re: Looping and Data Looping Organization: University of Virginia Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 00:38:25 GMT I am familiar with the term looping or data looping in the sense that it relates to testing a line from here to there to see if it is functioning properly. Some looping can also be done at various stages with the electronics at the distant end to determine if it is functioning properly. I do not know how this relates to fraud. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Dec 93 11:31:06 CST From: kgriffin@ltec.com (Kyle Griffin) Subject: Re: PCS questions In response to Roy Thompson's queries regarding PCS: > what are the likely timeframes we will see for new infrastructure being > deployed? Given the FCC's rulemaking, and the congressional Budget Act, spectrum auctions are supposed to occur in early May, 1994. The FCC's rulemaking also outlines a build-out requirement that basically requires licensees to be _offering_ service to 33% of the population of their license area (either MTA or BTA) within five years of the granting of the license, 67% within seven years, and 90% within ten years. Several equipment vendors are saying they'll be rolling out equipment in the late '94 -- early '95 time frame. > Is there anything, other than frequency issues, that make the PCS > infrastructure much different from standard cellular networks? An interesting thing happened to PCS on the way to the FCC. When it was first introduced as a concept in the industry (see Bellcore Framework Advisory 90-1013), it was envisioned as a low-power, pedestrian-oriented service. A typical "cell" might serve a two to four block area, would accommodate 50-200 users, and would be designed for low-speed (<30 mph) traffic. Such a service might someday replace wireline voice and low-speed data service. But suddenly all sorts of light bulbs went on and all sorts of warning flags shot up. All sorts of players from all sorts of industries wanted to get in on this deal. The cellular industry, perhaps thinking they could "nip this thing in the bud", started saying, "We already do that. We ARE providing PCS. There's nothing new here. Cellular IS PCS." Meanwhile, the FCC is chomping at the bit to establish more competition in the cellular marketplace. Then they hear "cellular IS PCS", and they think "Here's the answer. Here's our competition for cellular." So, with the Commission's underlying agenda, and the barrage of input from all the would-be players, PCS evolved into a higher-power, wider-area concept that looks very much like cellular. So, in answer to your question, the main differences are that 1) PCS will operate at a much higher frequency (with different propagation and fading characteristics) and will require a different sort of RF transmission hardware, 2) PCS will start out as digital radio technology (which has it's own unique set of design considerations), and 3) PCS will be designed from the start to take advantage of existing and evolving Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) functionality, something the cellular carriers are having to try to "retrofit". > I suppose the micro and pico cell management will create some > uniqueness in the network. In that case (with a pico cell for example), > will more switches be required? In some major cities it is possible that more than one PCS switch will be used, but in most cases one switch will be sufficient. In most of the schematics I've seen, the "cell site" transmitters are referred to as base stations, and are connected to some sort of Base Station Controller. The BSC concentrates several base stations, and from what I can tell has enough intelligence to route calls that are local to itself without burdening the MSS. (Of course, it still must send the call information to the switch for administrative and billing purposes). > What are the unique requirements for implementing at 1.8 GHz? I'm not an RF engineer, but from what I understand the transmission characteristics, especially fading, are much more of an issue. This means that things like terrain, structures, and vegetation (as it changes seasonally) have much more impact on network design. > I understand, maybe incorrectly, that GSM uses TDMA ... You understand correctly. Actually, many of the proponents of using the GSM standard in the US are proposing a slightly modified version to take into account 1) the slightly different US spectrum allocation (utilizing more of the 1900 Mhz band) and 2) different transmission power and propagation patterns, given that most areas of the US are more sparsely populated than the areas of Europe where GSM has been deployed. > Also, as GSM becomes a defacto standard in the US, what happens to CDMA? Although there are strong proponents of making GSM (or a modified version) a US standard, there's no guarantee that will happen. The FCC has stated that they would rather let the market determine standards rather than dictate any. There are also proponents of CDMA. I've seen some of the TDMA-CDMA dialogue in this digest. I'm not on either "side" of the issue. From what I've read (from people not related to any company making either type of equipment), as well as an acquaintance at Bellcore, there is a general feeling that, as far as capacity is concerned, when all is said and done, they're going to come out about equal in terms of increased capacity over cellular AMPS (approximatly 7 to 1). > Isn't there an FCC regulation on wireless phones to support a dual-mode? There is no such regulation, at least to my knowledge. As I stated before, the FCC intends to let the market determine standards. In terms of cellular, I can pretty much guarantee that whether you buy a TDMA digital phone or a CDMA digital phone, it will be a "dual-mode" phone in that it will have the capability to fall back to an AMPS mode of operation (since it will be a while before digital makes any serious inroads, and AMPS is everywhere). In terms of PCS, I don't know that I would hold my breath waiting for a TDMA-CDMA dual-mode phone. Maybe somebody will make one someday, but I'm guessing it will be difficult enough to make the PCS handsets lightweight, compact, and affordable using one technology, let alone two. At any rate, I hope this has addressed some of your questions. Kyle Griffin The Lincoln Telephone Company kgriffin@ltec.com ------------------------------ From: Glenn Inn Subject: Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice Organization: Latitude Communications, Inc. Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 18:00:53 GMT In article , writes: > Because my son is handicapped, he needs a lot of ferrying around from > place to place. I'm considering getting a car phone for my wife (who > does over 50% of the ferrying) just for peace of mind. > Anyway, I figure there has to be some underlying principals to follow; > aspects of things that I may not have thought of; so I'd welcome > advice or being pointed to a FAQ. This is the second person who's asked a "help choosing cellular phone" question. I'm going to write my choice/decision process because I sympathize with just how painful it is to pick a phone. (I spent over a year choosing). It sounded like you prefer a vehicular phone. When I searched, I was in the market for a portable -- I ended up with the Oki 900. Why? I found that All the "hi-end" portables were the same (clarity, and tx signal). It all boiled down to "software" features -- and the Oki (at that time) beat everyone else hands down. 200 number Alpha-memory, 189 speed dial's, paging, online help, to name a few. Now for vehicular, Oki has its "800" series of car phones. Many of the 900's features are in the 800-line. The Oki 830 is the top of the line. Another kicker: the Cellular-1 salesman who helped me? He had an Oki car phone and swore by it. gLENN Inn Latitude Communications inn@latitude.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Considering a Car Phone - Need Advice From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 14 Dec 93 12:58:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) > Because my son is handicapped, he needs a lot of ferrying around from > place to place. I'm considering getting a car phone for my wife (who > does over 50% of the ferrying) just for peace of mind. In Ontario canada there is a special rate for blind users. See if you can get a special handicap rate for your area. ------------------------------ From: RANDY@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 15 Dec 1993 01:41 GMT Subject: Re: Terse 800 Failure ... Oh My! sp9183@swuts.sbc.com (Scott M. Pfeffer) writes: > In any event, I got the following: > "Click" > High-paid male announcer's voice saying > "A system error has occurred. Goodbye." > "Click" > Weird. I wonder who the carrier was ...? I wonder where the problem > was ...? > I wonder what this world has come to ...? Reminds me of the old days > when terse young men used to serve as operators (way before any of us > were cognitive human beings ...) Every now and then, when I place a call from behing the PBX at my office there is a long delay wherein nothing happens, then I get: *click* (Background sounds of a very noisy equipement room) Slighly annoyed male voice: We're sorry; your call did not go through. *click* It sounds so different from the usual telco breathless-woman intercepts, that when I encounter it I always get a mental image of a switchroom with a very harried technician, trying to fix some problem, but constantly interrupted by misrouted calls, which he picks up, barks at, and hangs up. Randall Gellens randy@mv-oc.unisys.com A Series System Software Unisys Corporation [Please forward bounce messages Mission Viejo, CA to: rgellens@mcimail.com] Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #819 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16698; 16 Dec 93 4:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23059 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:51 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21260 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:27 -0600 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:06:27 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312160706.AA21260@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #820 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Dec 93 01:07:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 820 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Ecolinking" by Rittner (Rob Slade) Executone CPI - Far Too Expensive? (Harry Skelton) Need Information on T1's and Equipment (Lee Havemann) Dedicated Line Provivsioning Systems (Yohan) 5ESS Questions (Tom Ace) NEC Information Needed (Antonio Saponaro) Cellular Phone on a PC Board (Filippo Tripiciano) Low-Bandwidth Speech (Ulrich Neumann) Magazine Contacts Wanted (Brian Combs) Help Wanted Restoring WECO '64 Six Button Set (Thomas P. Brisco) Call For Papers and Panel Session Proposals (Bing Gao) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Dec 93 15:22 -0600 From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Ecolinking" by Rittner BKECOLNK.RVW 931117 PeachPit 2414 6th St. Berkeley, CA 94710 510-548-4393 fax: 510-548-5991 800-283-9444 "Ecolinking", Rittner, 1992, U$18.95/C$23.95 donr@aol.com 70057.1325@compuserve.com drittner@uacsc1.albany.edu Working in computer virus research, I can have a lot of sympathy with those involved in the environmental movement. Both fields can be relatively unpopular. Both suffer from the fact that a "critical mass" of concerned individuals cannot often be gathered in one place. Both fields are multi-disciplinary, and require input from experts in a variety of fields. The only reason the virus research community has survived at all, is because of computer communications networks. It is quite reasonable to assume that computer networks would be of help to the environmental activist, wherever located. Rittner's book, indeed, gives numerous examples and case studies of computer links giving victory to the environmental side -- sometimes just in the nick of time. It is both introduction and resource for those who are interested in using the new computer communications tools in their ecological work and study. Part one (or, more accurately, chapter two) is an introduction to "The Basics" of getting online, dealing briefly with modems, communications software, and communications functions. Very briefly. As noted in chapter one, those involved with computers will find nothing new here. Newcomers, however, are advised to take the advice of chapter one and find a local friend for help. You are unlikely to get online successfully, with only this as your guide. As far as it goes, however, it is a reasonably good primer, with only a few idiosyn- cracies such as "8-0-1" for what most online people would call "8N1". I was happy to see a mention of virus checking, although, since most ecological researchers would be primarily interested in information, some discussion of data versus program files might be in order. Still, I suppose it's best to err on the side of caution. I was also pleased to note the brief discussion of online etiquette. Given the strong emotions involved in the environmental movement this could be quite important. It is difficult to see why parts two, three and four are separate parts. Certainly there are differences in price, interface and availability, but functionally, the similarities are greater than the differences between bulletin boards, networks and commercial services in regard to communications and access to information. Quarterman's "The Matrix" (cf. BKMATRIX.RVW) is obviously admired: its structure has also been copied. This is appropriate to a technical reference work, but, for the computer communications neophyte, a structuring of features, with discussions of the differences, by system, might have been more helpful. As it is, the VAX and Mac specific references may occasionally confuse the reader using other systems. To be fair, though, Rittner has obviously worked hard to try and keep technical matters as generic as possible. The US-centric listings of systems and access may be more of a problem for international readers. Part five, "Libraries That Never Close," demonstrates to a certain extent the enormous quantity of information now available either online or on disk. The appendices are rather odd. The first lists communications software, and states that many are cheap or free. Kermit, however, which is available (basically) free for any system, is listed only for the Mac. Appendix B is a list of Internet mailing lists with an environmental bent. Very useful -- but the Fidonet, BITNET and Usenet lists are printed within their respective chapters. Appendix C lists gateway services that provide access to the nets, this time *definitely* US-centric, while D is a sample BBS session. The most useful part of the book will likely be the listings of various environmental Fidonet "echoes," BITNET "listservs," Usenet "newsgroups," and Internet distribution lists. While these tend to be somewhat ephemeral, the wealth of research done here will quite possibly save you years, in getting linked into the proper channels. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993 BKECOLNK.RVW 931117 Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of TELECOM Digest and associated mailing lists only. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ From: zorba@netcom.com (Harry Skelton) Subject: Executone CPI - Far Too Expensive? Organization: USS Enterprise Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1993 22:30:03 GMT A bit ago our Executone rep. gave us a quote of $17,000 for software/hardware to allow our computer to access and control the Executone system directly via a Computer Port Interface (CPI). This, in my opinion, is far too expensive. This considering that it cost us $20,000 for the system. I was told directly that the cost involved is more involved in granting us permission to access and control the system than it is for software or hardware to allow this. Not being of a deep telcom background, the company found this cost ludirous. Especially since we OWN the system and it only cost us $20k in the first place. My questions are: 1. Is there a way I can gain control over the CPI without Executone's 'help'. 2. Is there an inexpensive, T1 capable, 30 phone system available that would allow us to control it? Something cheaper than the $17k? 3. Has anyone delt with Executone on this issue? If so, what happened in your environment? 4. Are there other Executone offices that might give me a better price or is this a case of proprietary schemes raised to the limits? i.e. I'm SOL? Many thanks!! Harry Skelton - 1848 Beaver Dam Lane - Marietta, Georgia - 30062 404-590-7100 or 800-366-8181 Work -- 404-578-8085 Home skelton@jdp.dragon.com ------------------------------ From: Lee Havemann Subject: Need Information on T1's and Equipment Date: 15 Dec 93 12:54:33 EST Organization: HSH Associates We are faced with the possibility of having to install a T1 on our premises, and as I am not familiar with this technology, I thought I would turn to the net for help. We would be averaging approx 50,000 minutes/month over a T1, of which 12 lines would go do a dedicated fax broadcast system. The system (using gammaLink hardware) is supposedly T1 ready. The other 12 lines would go into a Premier 24/60 phone system which is not equipped for T1. Our phone carrier says we need two channel banks, one at their POP, and one at our location to make this work. My questions: Where can I get some more info on T1's and related equipment? What do these channel banks do? Are they just a kind of digital to analog converters? Why do I need _2_ channel banks? Can I buy these channel banks from another source (preferably cheaper than paying $500/month lease from our LDC?) Does anybody else out there have any T1's installed who can answer these (and other :-) questions for me? Any info would be gratefully appreciated! Lee Havemann, Comp Ops Dir. HSH Associates (201) 838-3330 Internet: lee@hsh.com Compuserve: 70410,3507 AOL: HSH Assoc "Any opinions expressed are not necessarily those of anyone else, including myself." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 14:30:00 PST From: Yohan Subject: Dedicated Line Provivsioning Systems I am doing a study on dedicated line provisioning systems (Fractional T1, T1, T3 ). I am looking for information regarding relevant services offered by IXCs, RBOC or CAPS, the cycle times involved for provisioning and some information regarding the underlying provisioning processes and systems. If anyone can answer some of these questions or point me towards some sources I would appreciate it. Thank you in advance. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 16:30:57 -0800 From: tea@netcom.com (Tom Ace) Subject: 5ESS Questions A recent article (in a magazine not noted for thoroughgoing and authoritative reporting) discussed the White House phone system, and included the following statement: Now, stuffing a 5ESS in the White House basement would have been impressive and it would have given the Clinton Administration the telecommunications power of a city roughly the size of New York, give or take a couple of boroughs. Sensing overkill, the Clinton administration went with the cheaper Definity G3R PBXs. Could someone knowledgeable about the 5ESS please tell me: 1) I assume that a 5ESS can be had in different configurations, suitable for different numbers of subscribers. What's the minimum number of lines appropriate for a 5ESS installation, and what's the maximum number of lines a 5ESS could be configured for? 2) Does it even make sense to suggest a 5ESS for a PBX application like the White House? Tom Ace tea@netcom.com ------------------------------ Subject: NEC Information Needed Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 1:50:37 CET From: Antonio Saponaro I'm looking for technical informations about Nec cellular telephones, like service manuals and programming tips. Can anyone help me? Antonio Saponaro ------------------------------ From: phil@sibilla.it56.bull.it (Filippo Tripiciano ) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 11:49:34 MET Subject: Cellular Phone on a PC Board I'm looking for a PC board (possibly AT compatible) that provides a direct connectivity to a cellular phone line. In fact, what I'm really trying to do is to build a system that connect to a remote site (using cellular phone network) without having a modem connected to a cellular phone device. Any help would be appreciated. :-) Please answer by e-mail. My correct e-mail address is: f.tripiciano@it56.bull.it Filippo Tripiciano BULL HN Italia Voice: +39-2-6779 2553 Via del Parlamento 33 FAX: +39-2-6779 2439 ------------------------------ From: neumann@cs.unc.edu (Ulrich Neumann) Subject: Low-Bandwidth Speech Date: 15 Dec 1993 20:31:38 GMT Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Does anyone have knowledge of very low bandwidth speech communications systems? I'm looking for <10K bits/sec technology for toll-quality speech. Please email pointer to algorithms and/or hardware to: neumann@cs.unc.edu Thanks, UN ------------------------------ From: combs@quadralay.com (Brian Combs) Subject: Magazine Contacts Wanted Date: 15 Dec 1993 22:19:21 GMT Organization: Quadralay Corporation If anyone has any information about the following magazine (i.e. contact info, whether they are still publishing, etc.) I would be very grateful if you would e-mail the information to me. The list is as follows: Sun World PC Week Communication Week Communications of the ACM Computer World Data Communication Datamation Information Week EDN Electronic Design Electronic Products Electronics EDN News ECN Electronic News EE Product News I would prefer e-mail over a response posting as I do not normally read TELECOM Digest. However, I am perfectly willing to forward information I receive to interested parties. Thanks, Brian Combs Tel: 512-346-9199 Fax: 512-794-9997 Quadralay Corporation FTP Address: ftp.quadralay.com combs @ quadralay.com WWW Server: www.quadralay.com ------------------------------ From: brisco@hercules.rutgers.edu (Thomas P. Brisco) Subject: Help Wanted Restoring WECO '64 Six Button Set Date: 15 Dec 93 21:30:48 GMT Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. During a "rotary unit decom" sweep last summer (yes, we're just getting rid of all of the old rotary units) I managed to get my paws on a six button rotary set -- the bottom is marked "565HK 2-64" - presumably 1964 unit, and some of the guts bear this out. (BTW: Can anyone fill me in on the 565HK bit?). What is odd (or odd to me) about this unit is that the push button/lights are round -- not square. Anyway, I just (today) came across a "harmonica" to RJ11 converter for this beastie (one Radio Shack claimed to not have them, another had it on the wall -- go figure) so I can hook my conventional home lines into it. I get tone and can dial fine, but the bell and appropriate light doesn't work. I took off the shell, and the internals had been modified (pretty badly -- it's hard to tell if it's Bell work or not :-) for a RJ11. (I can't get anything if I plug my line into that - but I'm not concerned there). There appears to have been about four wires moved off of the wiring block in there -- does anyone know where I can get schematics for this puppy? I'd dearly love to hear that old jangle again, blinkey lights are, of course, a thrill. I've got an old 30-or-so button set also, which I can cannibalize if necessary (though I'd like to get that working -- if only for kicks). While I'm here; the unit is a bit dirty, and has some of the required "911/Emergency" sticker on it (which gives you a clue how recently it was used :-). Any hints on cleaning this thing? I'm reluctant to throw chemicals on it. Additionally, I'd like to get new paper inserts for the dial and buttons -- any clue on those? (BTW: I just took apart the handset, it looks like wax paper in the speaker, and the inside of the speaker cap is marked 2-64 also -- so I don't believe it's been refurb'd). From the top: 1) Schematics for WECO '64 era 6 button set? 2) Suggestions on cleaning the plastic/metal? 3) Where to get new paper inserts? (Maybe I'll just ask my local repair person) Thanks for any pointers/tips ... The dial and face-plate are metal, but the handset and casing are _heavy_ plastic -- was this at the beginning of the "plastic era"? Can anyone recommend any books that might detail the construction of the phones over the years? While this one is pretty nice, I think a '50's period piece would be even nicer. It adds a nice bit of charm to my den. [Moderator's Note: All the six button (five line plus hold) phones until sometime in the 1960's had round buttons rather than square ones. I think your phone is made of very hard rubber rather than heavy plastic. Does it have a curly cord between the handset and the phone or a straight cord? Straight cords were used until about the same time, and cloth cords (as opposed to rubber covering) were also common until during the 1950's. The phone you have also requires a control box (a rather big, ugly unit) which hangs on the wall nearby *if* you want the hold button to work and the lights to flash when the phone rings or a line is put on hold. Obviously you can wire five lines into it if you don't mind doing without hold and the lights. The other thing you can do is modify it a little so you use the six buttons to handle *three* lines with a hold button for each line. i.e. line one, line one hold; line two, line two hold; and line three, line three hold. You don't need the control box for that, just re-arrange the wires in the phone itself so each of three lines goes to two buttons, but with every other button terminated right there and *not* getting back to the receiver. Then, you also have to do a little surgery and castrate the phone -- cut those balls out from up in front under the buttons. See the little ball-bearings under the buttons which slide back and forth, forcing one button to rise when another is pressed down, and see how the hold button on the left end is spring loaded so it comes back up anyway when pressed? Maybe button six has the same spring loading in it in the event the former owner was using one of the lines for ICOM and the last button for the ICOM signal. Fix those so that *two* or more buttons can be made to stay down at the same time, i.e. line 'x' hold-path and line 'y' talking-path. Basically what you will then have is the GTE (Automatic Electric) ver- sion of a multiline phone from the 1940-50 era since theirs had three lines and three hold buttons. For extra points, pick up a DC transformer at Radio Shack and fix things so those buttons at least light up when you are off hook on one of them (or on hold on one of your three lines if you go that way) even if you can't get them to flash in rythmn with the ringing cadence lacking the control box. If you prefer, get a few neon test lamps; they'll sit there on the line without causing any disturbance since they don't illuminate until they get 90 volts or so. Squeeze one behind each of the six buttons or at least behind the buttons with lines. That will cause your buttons to flash when the associated line rings (but not stay lit while you are talking). Have fun and report back to us, y'hear? Those old phones can make such great hobbyist kits on their own merits. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gaob@azalea.cis.ufl.edu (Bing Gao) Subject: Call For Papers and Panel Session Proposals Date: 15 Dec 1993 22:00:22 GMT Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept. CALL FOR PAPERS and Panel Session Proposals COMPSAC 94 The Eighteenth Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference Conference: November 9 - 11, 1994 International Convention Center, Taipei Professional Development Seminars: November 7 - 8, 1994 Science and Technology Building, Taipei The conference is a major international forum for researchers, practioners, managers and policy makers interested in computer software and applications as well as software industry. Original papers and panel session proposals on various research and practical aspects as well as future trends are invited. It is anticipated that leaders and experts from industry, academia and governments will participate in the program. The following topics are examples of sessions planned for the conference. Special sessions facilitating the presentation of timely results from the industry will be arranged for those papers with presentation material only. * Software Development and Maintenance Paradigms and Environments * Software Quality Assurance, Process Improvement and Maturity Models * Software Reliability, Security and Safety * Risk Assessment and Management of Large-Scale Software Projects * Re-engineering, Reverse Engineering, Reuse and Customization * Software Metrics and Modeling * Software Development for Distributed and Parallel Processing systems * Co-design of Hardware and Software for Application Specific Systems * Interoperability in Systems and Tools * Large-Scale Software System Integration * Formal Methods * AI Tools and Techniques * Data and Knowledge Bases * Computer-Aided Support for Document Preparation * Advances in CASE * Interactive Computing and Groupware * Multimedia Systems and Virtual Reality * Software Engineering Education * Applications: Government Services, Telecommunications, Banking Systems, Health Care, Entertainment, Consumer Electronics. * Industry Trends: Downsizing, Outsourcing, Off-Shore Software Support. * Legal and Social Issues of Computer Software Information for Authors for formal papers (included in the proceedings): * Mail six copies of an original (not submitted or published elsewhere) paper (double space) of 3000-5000 words. * Include the title of the paper, the name and alliiation of each author, a 150-word abstract and no more than 8 keywords. * Include the name, position, address, telephone numbers, and if possible, fax numbers and e-mail address of the author responsible for correspondence of the paper Information for Authors for providing presentation material only: ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ * The presentation material of all accepted papers in this category will appear in a bound conference record. * Mail six copies of an original paper with the title and a 300-word abstract to the Program Chair. * Include the name, position, address, telephone number, and if possible, fax number and e-mail address of the author responsible for the correspondence of the presentation. Information for Panel Organizers: * Send six copies of panel proposals to the Program Chair. * Include the title, a 150-word scope statement, proposed session chair and panelists and their affiliations and locations, the organizer's affiliation, address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address. IMPORTANT DEADLINES: * March 1, 1994 all papers and panel proposals due * April 1, 1994 panel organizers notified of acceptance * April 20, 1994 organizers of accepted panel proposals provide final information on session chairs and panelists * May 16, 1994 au;thors notified of acceptance * July 12, 1994 camera-ready copies of accepted papers and panelists' position papers to be included in the conference proceedings due * September 20, 1994 camer-ready copies of presentation material of accepted paperd to be included in the conference record due Program Chair C. V. Ramamoorthy University of California at Berkeley Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A. Tel: 1-510-642-4751 Fax: 1-510-642-5775 e-mail: ram@cs.berkeley.edu Conference Chair Yun Kuo Institute for Information Industry 11th Floor, 106 Hoping E. Road, Sec. 2 Taipei (10636), Taiwan For further information, contact: Stephen S. Yau COMPSAC Standing Committee Chair University of Florida Department of Computer and Information Sciences 301 Computer Science and Engineering Building Gainesville, FL 32611, U.S.A. Tel: 1-904-392-1211 Fax: 1-904-392-1220 e-mail: yau@cis.ufl.edu Sponsored by IEEE Computer Society, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., and hosted by the Institute for Information Industry. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #820 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17214; 16 Dec 93 5:47 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05686 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 02:17:26 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24167 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 02:17:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 02:17:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312160817.AA24167@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #821 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Dec 93 02:17:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 821 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson When is the BFI Flag Set by the Radio Subsystem in GSM? (Vartan Narinian) Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones (Javier Henderson) Portable Satellite Phone System (Paul Coladonato) Digital Phones of the Past (Bob Smith) Check From AT&T: Here's What to Do! (Robert A. Book) Re: New 411 System in Atlanta (Charles Hoequist) Re: Double Hunt Group - Possible? (Danny Burstein) Re: Ethernet Over Laser Link (John R. Levine) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Arthur Rubin) Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem (Jay Hennigan) Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (Mark Brader) Re: A New Love Story (Solution) (Dror Lubin via Mark Brader) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 18:43:18 GMT Subject: When is the BFI Flag Set by the Radio Subsystem in GSM? Organization: Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine From: v.narinian@imperial.ac.uk (Vartan Narinian) Hello experts, Could someone tell me when the BFI (Bad Frame Indication) flag is set by the GSM radio subsystem? This is in GSM 05.05 which, unfortunately, I don't have. I'm mostly interested about the Speech traffic case, because this flag is used in the substitution and muting of lost frames section (06.11). My understanding is that the BFI is set when, after deinterleaving and decoding, the CRC on the 50 class 1 bits indicates that there are errors in those bits. However, I'm not sure about this and would like someone to confirm it, if that's possible. Thanks, Vartan Narinian Electrical Engineering Department Imperial College, London ------------------------------ From: henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com Subject: Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones Date: 15 Dec 93 11:44:54 PST Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA Hello, Some time ago I posted about the problems I had using my Orange calling card with some privately owned pay phones. Basically, some phones appeared to be programmed so they would drop the connection after a certain number of numbers have been punched. When I complained to one of the operators, I was told that it was to help law enforcement in the war against drugs (yeah, right ... more like force you to use their operator $ervice$). So I called one of the operators today from a payphone that was giving me that trouble. This time I told her "I had problems using the voicemail system at work". She suggested to push the keys slower and to leave a longer pause each two or three keystrokes. It worked. I dialed the target number leaving three second pauses between the phone number and the calling card number and waited five seconds before pushing in the PIN. Hope it works elsewhere. Javier Henderson henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com [Moderator's Note: Interesting theory. If anyone else tries this and has success (from a phone at which previously they were unable to continue pressing buttons) please write and let us know. PAT] ------------------------------ From: pc@hknet.hk.net (Paul Coladonato) Subject: Portable Satellite Phone System Organization: Hong Kong Internet & Gateway Services Ltd. Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 06:44:08 GMT Hello all, Does anyone know if it is currently possible to have a portable satellite phone system useable anywhere in the world? That would allow reliable modem communications from areas poorly served by land lines? What companies provide this equipment/services? Thanks, Paul ------------------------------ From: bob@sed.csc.com (Bob Smith) Subject: Digital Phones of the Past Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 15:32:06 GMT The term digital phone today seems to be interchangable with ISDN phone. However, I seem to recall a time in the past (70s) when a digital phone had a bunch of digital circuitry in it and talked to a pre-ISDN digital hook up. My memory may be failing but I seem to recall DTMF digitized voice and Bell's DSDS being tied to gether. Please help staighten out my graying brain!!! Am I on track or is this an erroneous recollection of an old {Popular Science} article? Thanks, bob ------------------------------ Subject: Check From AT&T: Here's What to Do! Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 23:56:17 CST From: rbook@rice.edu (Robert A. Book) I got one of those $50 checks from AT&T, and (separately) a $20 "credit voucher" good toward payment of my AT&T Unversal MasterCard bill with the same conditions (sign it and get switched to AT&T). I found a perfectly legal, ethical way to get the face value of the the voucher, the check, and then some. My primary carrier is MCI. I called MCI and told them what I had received. For the "credit voucher," they gave me a credit to my account for the face value ($20), in exchange for my sending them the voucher. For the check, the told me to write "Void" across the check, and send it to them, in exchange for which they would send me something called a "Customer Appreciation Bond" with a face value equal to the value of the check ($50). I could either send this check back immediately for a $50 credit, or hold on to it, in which case it would *gain* $5 per month every month for up to one year. I could exchange it at any time for the total value, which after a year would be $110. Gee, these guys are getting desparate! :-) NOTE: I got the idea to call MCI (which, I admit, I should have thought of myself) from another posting to this Digest in which someone with Sprint called them, and they exchanged the check for face-value credit. So ... ***** THE MORAL OF THE STORY ***** If you receive a check or similar instrument, negotiable on the condition that you change carriers, and you don't want to change, call you current carrier. They will probably match, and in the case of MCI, beat the offer, to keep you as a customer. This is a legal, ethical, and risk-free way to redeem these offers without switching carriers. Robert Book rbook@rice.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 12:20:00 From: Charles Hoequist Subject: Re: New 411 System in Atlanta In the Digest Issue 772 Les Reeves requested information about the new 411 service in the Atlanta area (it's also now in service in a couple of other areas in Georgia). Here are some details. The service is called ADAS (Automated D.A. Service). It does not use any voice recognition, just store and and playback. Its virtues are (1) saves telco money, because the front end of the call (querying city and listing) is automated and so not occupying an operator position; (2) saves operators from having to say, "This is , what city?" 1000-1200 times a shift (which is the average range). (3) increases throughput by discouraging callers who either just want to abuse an operator or want something other than DA (I listened to a couple of hours of recordings from an operator position, and I was amazed at the variety of information requests that came in). As Les noted, the application prompts for city name and listing name, then (if everything works right), a subscriber hears the Automatic Response Unit giving the desired number. From the operator's perspective, there is first a special tone announcing the arrival of an ADAS call, then the recorded city name, then the recorded listing name (i.e. what the subscriber said in response to the prompts). If the recordings aren't satisfactory, the operator opens a call path to the subscriber and collects the information, but this is infrequent. Normally, the operator does the database search and hands the call off to the ARU. Hope this helps. Charles Hoequist, Jr. | Internet: hoequist@bnr.ca BNR, Inc. | voice: 919-991-8642 PO Box 13478 | fax: 919-991-8008 Research Triangle Park NC 27709-3478 ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: Re: Double Hunt Group - Possible? Date: 16 Dec 1993 01:38:42 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC While Pat explained the process, he was a bit, ahem, wordy. So to clear this up in just a few paragraphs: Problem: Customer has a mix of computer modems and lines, wants to rearrange them so that hi-speed callers (who presumably pay extra) get high speed modems, but low speed folk get the low speed. He also wants teh high speed folk to kcik into the low speed modems when all high speed are busy. Solution: (Bear in mind that the numbers you get will -not- be sequential, nor need even be in ascenidng order, but I'm writing them this way to simplify matters.) You currently have a hunt group with 25 lines, with the numbers starting at xxx-y101 and going to xxx-y125. You only "give out" the main number, xxx-y101 and when that's busy, calls hunt over to y102, y103 ... y125. What you should do now is get an additional ten numbers (or, perhaps, exchange the xxx-y116-y125 ones) in the sequence: xxx-y091 -> xxx-y100. These ten numbers/lines should be hooked up to 'hunt' as well, and when all are busy, should continue the hunt into the old numbers, xxx-y101. You give out the super secret high speed main number xxx-y091 to your extra value customers, and do NOT give it out to the low speed folk. For good measure, you might also get an additional line xxx-y090 which you give out to NOBODY except yourself for dial-in. So, again, you will now have the following: xxx-y090 <- super secret number known only to you xxx-y091 <- start of hi speed hunt sequence * xxx-y092 ... <- the hunt sequence for hi speed xxx-y100 xxx-y101 <- start of low speed hunt ** xxx-y102 ... xxx-y125 <- end of low speed hunt * is the high speed start, you give out this number to your valued cust- omers. ** is low speed start (-and- is hunted over when high speeds are busy). dannyb@panix.com adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability, intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 10:42 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Ethernet Over Laser Link Organization: I.E.C.C. Bob Lummis (lummis@alsys1.aecom.yu.edu) wrote: > I am looking for a way to send Ethernet across a public street. Somebody > told me there is a $2500 pair of laser devices that can do that. Another > person in this newsgroup said $5,000 but gave no brand names. I know of the > LCI brand of device that costs more like $15,000 per link (both ends). I'm surprised that nobody's mentioned NCR Wavelan. It's a 2 mb/sec wireless Ethernet that uses 900 MHz spread spectrum transmission. It's good up to about 300 feet with the included omnidirectional antennas, several miles line of sight with outdoor yagis. They're really cheap, list price $800 per node, dealer price about $600. (NCR sells only to distributors who in turn sell only to dealers; I found that the easiest way to get my hands on them was to become a dealer.) For the security minded, there's an optional link-level DES encryption chip, though it's pretty hard to intercept already unless you know which of the 50,000 possible scrambling codes a particular network is using. The main complaint is that they're packaged as ISA or MCA cards to be plugged into your PC, so if you use any other kind of computer, you lose. On the other hand, at that price, you can throw in an old 286 PC and a generic Ethernet card, run PCROUTE or PCBRIDGE, and still have an Ethernet bridge or router for $1000 per end. I use a pair with PC route to connect my home Ethernet to the Internet. At 300 feet, it works adequately (except when it's raining heavily) but if I ever get around to installing the outside antennae, the rain problem should go away. If you call NCR headquarters in Dayton OH, there's a guy there who can send you some information. If you can't find a dealer and don't want to become one, I suppose you could buy them through me. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 15 Dec 93 18:17:40 GMT Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc. In gast@CS.UCLA.EDU writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). You may be able to solve the problem with software. It is possible that the "connect" line is not connected to the card, so your computer is assuming that there is no data, but that software can override. Also, I've discovered that modem cables are not quite standardized. Check the manual for your modem and computer to see if you need a non-standard cable to connect the two. (Posting this on the newsgroup/forum for your specific computer and/or modem may be more helpful.) 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: jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: Computer Cannot Receive From Modem Date: 16 Dec 1993 20:50:03 -0800 Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN) In article gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > I just purchased a new computer. I have 2400 baud modem and cable > that works just great with my old computer. With the new one, the > computer can send to the modem fine, but cannot receive anything from > the modem. For example, the computer tells the modem to dial a > number, the modem does, carrier *is* detected (per the modem light), > but the program never detects anything being sent by the modem. (Echo > does not work at all either). > Unfortunately, the I/O card does not appear, at least according to the > instruction manual, to have any dip switches. > Any ideas what I need to do? Get a new card? You'll probably wind up getting a new card, but you can find out for sure by making a simple loopback adapter from a DB-25 connector that plugs into the card. Connect together pins 2 and 3. Also connect together pins 4 and 5, and lastly connect together pins 6, 8 and 20. Plug this into the card and you should get echo. If so, the card is probably OK and the trouble is in the modem or cable. A similar connector of the opposite gender can be plugged into the modem. If it is set to auto-answer, then an incoming caller will get echo if the modem is OK. The pin 2-3 jumper loops the transmitted and received data. The 4-5 and 6-8-20 jumpers may or may not be required, and are used in some cases for "handshaking" signals between the computer and modem so that each device can determine if the other is present and ready. From your description of the problem, it sounds as if the card is defective. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 11:16:00 -0500 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized David Esan (de@moscom.com) writes: > The 905 NPA went live on 15 October, the pages were not filed until > 22 November. ... sloppy work on the part of BellCore. ... Even worse. The official date for 905 was actually October 4. I just did some experiments with a friend in area code 905 who is a local call away from me here in 416. As expected, he can still reach me by dialing NXX-XXXX or 416-NXX-XXXX. If he tries 905-NXX-XXXX, which is wrong, the recording he gets says "The number you have dialed is a 10-digit local number. Please dial 416 plus NXX-XXXX" -- which is right, but maybe a bit confusing. As noted previously, Call Return here announces the last number that called you before giving you the option to return the call, and it has always given the area code. His calls to me are still given as being from 416, irrespective of which way he dials. Similarly, I can dial his number as NXX-XXXX or 905-NXX-XXXX. If I try 416-NXX-XXXX, I get fast busy (reorder). I tried a number that is in 416; I can dial it as NXX-XXXX or 416-NXX-XXXX. If I try 905-NXX-XXXX, I get a "cannot be completed as dialed" recording. In the days when 905 and other codes reached Mexico, how many digits had to be dialed after the pseudo area code? Our Moderator thinks that a couple of years out of use is sufficiently long to avoid a serious nuisance of wrong-language wrong-number calls; I think he underestimates the number of people who do things like putting an obsolete code on business stationery or writing down a number and calling it years later. But if these calls will fail to complete anyway, no problem. Was the answer different for different pseudo area codes? Mark Brader SoftQuad Inc., Toronto utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com [Moderator's Note: Actually, there were the same number of digits; they were just parsed differently. And the did not refer to it as an 'area code', but rather, an 'access code' (I think). What we actually dialed was '90' plus a 5 then the number in Mexico City if my memory is correct. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 01:29:00 -0500 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: A New Love Story (Solution) [Moderator's Note: The other day this puzzle was printed here without including the solution so that readers who wanted to work on it could do so ... I promised to print the answer later on, and here it is now. The puzzle itself is also being repeated for those who may have not seen it earlier this week. My thanks to Mark Brader for passing it along to the Digest. PAT] From: lubin@fy.chalmers.se (Dror Lubin) Subject: A New Love Story (solution) Reply-To: lubin@fy.chalmers.se Organization: Chalmers University of Technology Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 08:33:39 GMT Here is my "official" solution (following the puzzle itself): A New Love Story ---------------- Once upon a time, in a far away land, there was a beautiful girl, who lived in a big big castle, just like in all the other stories that begin like this. Alas, the girl had a wicked mother who kept her locked. Where? In a red cell. The cell had a combination lock with three knobs. On one was written "red" on the other was written "cell", and on the third, the biggest, was written "nlrrecs". Our poor girl couldn't find out how on earth could she open this lock. As she couldn't get out, she decided to make her living in. She was a great cook, so she opened a road restaurant in her cell, or more properly: A cell-diner. She put outside a big sign saying: "NIIDSACAL CELL DINER" (niidsacal means "friendly" in her language). Of course, with such a name, not many people stopped there, and even if they did, they couldn't get in because of the lock, so business were rather slow. One day, a young prince heard about this girl. Nowadays, most princes are in the racing business, and so was he. Instead of a white horse, he had a big racing car. People often asked him if he had a white horse, and he would always say: "NO!, I have a racing car". Then they would ask him what does his car look like, and he would say: "Nice....All RED!!". The registration plate was "ICDIINPNNS". He chose this plate because these were the initials of his name and title: "Isidor Charles Darwinski the 2nd, Noble Prince of Norway, Nashville and Seattle". Well, as ICDII heard the sad story of the girl in the red cell, he jumped into his car, and raced towards the evil castle. He was so furious, he did not see the huge oil truck coming towards him on the wrong side of the road. Boy, was that an ill-end-race!! ICDII became even more ill when he got the bill: $5,172,790.20, you see, it was he who drove on the wrong side, and without insurance too! After that, ICDII wouldn't hear anymore of no princesses, so our little girl is still locked away in her red cell, waiting for *YOU* to call her. Do you know her phone number?? *************************************************************************** Solution: The puzzle is based on the kind of arithmetic puzzles in which you have to solve an arithmetic equation in which digits are represented by letters. The same letter stands for the same digit, different letters for different digits. Leading zeros are not accepted (that is 'abcd' is strictly four digits, 'a' may not be 0). These puzzles used to be very popular in weekend papers. In the above story, four such puzzles are hidden: The combination lock --- red*cell=nlrrecs The restaurant sign ---- cell*diner=niidsacal The racing car plates -- nice*all*red=icdiinpnns The accident report ---- ill*end*race=517279020 All four has a unique solution, the same to all: n=2 i=1 c=3 e=4 a=8 l=5 r=7 d=6 p=9 s=0 The best way (IMHO) to solve here is to factorize the only given number: 517279020 = (2^2)*3*5*31*71*3917, so that 'race' can be either 3917 or 3917*2=7834. We next look for 'ill', a 3 digit number in which the last one repeats. There are not many possibilities: 31*5=155 and 71*5=355. Both are inconsistent with 'race'=3917, so we are left with 'race'=7834, 'ill'=155, and we can check that 'end' comes out correct! The first three equations can be used to verify the result, and to determine s and p. Now, how to get a phone number?? There are four emphasized phrases: "In a red cell" "A cell diner" "Nice all red" "Ill end race" These are all "...Another boring anagram request...." posted by ... Cinderella! (Acknowledgement: Anagrams of 'Cinderella' found using a program by James A. Cherry) Now we have a name, and a letter-digit key, so the number is obviously: (312)6474558 And now you know that Cinderella lives in Chicago ... (If I am not mistaken, it is more than fifteen years since I have been working night shifts at the international telephone exchange). Dror P. S. I picked this number quite arbitrarily. If there is a BBS or anything else behind this number, my apologies. I did not think anybody will actually call there. Dror Lubin E-mail: lubin@fy.chalmers.se Department of Applied Physics Tel: +(46)(31)7723186 Chalmers University of Technology Fax: +(46)(31)416984 412 96 Goteborg, Sweden. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #821 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27063; 16 Dec 93 18:26 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20136 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:25:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10717 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:25:00 -0600 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:25:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312162025.AA10717@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #822 TELECOM Digest Thu, 16 Dec 93 14:25:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 822 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Combinet Users Mailing List (David E. Martin) Need Help With Ancient Western Electric 1A2 KSU (William L. Roberts) Information Wanted on Leewah Datacom Securities (Curtis Kundred) Is There a Good Cordless Headset Phone? (Lawrence D. Sher) Two Cellphones With Same Number - a Service? (Michael V. Murphy) Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted (John Landwehr) Cordless Phone Questions (Patricia A. Dunkin) ZEnith, ENterprise, Fred & Ethyl (David A. Kaye) Satellite Link Questions (Gerry Palmer) FAX Modem Needed For Disabled Worker (Charlie L. Eyster) Re: AC 520 for Arizona in March 1995 (Carl Moore) Re: Only Two "Operating" IXCs in DC (Mark Roberts) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Bob Olson) Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Barry Lustig) Re: What Happened to "811" Numbers? (Paul Robinson) Re: 5ESS CentraNet Question (Russell Sharpe) Re: Wiring a New Home - Suggestions? (George Zmijewski) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 10:45:41 CST From: David E. Martin Subject: Combinet Users Mailing List Combinet Users Mailing List I have established a mailing list for discussions among users and potential users of Combinet bridges. The list is open to anyone. To subscribe send e-mail to combinet-request@nic.hep.net with the single line: SUBSCRIBE You will then be sent an acknowledgement and a list of instruction. To submit a message to the list send to combinet@nic.hep.net. It will be reflected to all subscribers. The list is not moderated. I expect the list volume to be fairly low. Some topics for discussion: - use of NI-1 with Combinet bridges - Combinet bridge security - Interesting applications of remote bridging with Combinet - Connection set-up times with Combinet bridges - Anything else you want to disucss Please contact me with questions or comments. David E. Martin HEP Network Resource Center Phone: +1 708 840-8275 Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory FAX: +1 708 840-8463 P.O. Box 500, MS 368; Batavia, IL 60510 USA E-Mail: dem@hep.net ------------------------------ From: OldBear@world.std.com (William L Roberts) Subject: Need Help With Ancient Western Electric 1A2 KSU Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 15:09:09 GMT I have an old mechanical relay 1A2 KSU installed at my home and a slightly newer version which uses modular cards which I have salvaged from an old building. Can anyone point me to tech data concerning configuring one or the other for such items a common ring, hold circuit, etc. It would also be helpful to have some information on the six-button keysets which go with this system, particularly the differences in their internal configuation with and without the added speakerphone. Also, any thoughts on how a modem can be set up to provide A-A1 support for this sytem, possibly with some exclusion feature so unsuspecting family members cannot inadvertently pick up the line in use? ------------------------------ From: CAK@CRASH.CTS.COM (Curtis Kundred) Subject: Information Wanted on Leewah Datacom Securities Date: 16 Dec 93 02:09:59 PST Does anyone have information on a company Leewah Datacom Securities? I am looking for anyone who might have worked with or for the company and any information you might have on their products. Please reply by E-Mail to cak@crash.cts.com. Curt ------------------------------ From: sher@bbn.com (Lawrence D. Sher) Subject: Is There a Good Cordless Headset Phone? Date: 16 Dec 1993 14:45:53 GMT Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN) I know of only two cordless telephones that are headsets. Both have a belt pack for batteries, electronics, and buttons. One is sold by Hello Direct and has (at least) the fatal flaw that you cannot answer calls using it alone. The other is new from Radio Shack; it has no local ringer, a very poor range (easing the problem of no local ringer), and cuts off the connection in the presence of noise. Are there any high-quality cordless headset phones? Internet email: sher@bbn.com Larry Sher US Mail: BBN, MS 6/5B, 10 Moulton St., Cambridge, MA 02138 Telephone: (617) 873 3426 FAX: (617) 873 3776 ------------------------------ From: mvm@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (michael.v.murphy) Subject: Two Cellphones With Same Number - a Service? Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 23:37:17 GMT I am looking for a way to have two different cellular phones use the same number. Does any company offer this service? I would be willing to pay more if only for the simplicity of having a number to give out/remember. Thanks, mike m [Moderator's Note: There are companies which say they will reprogram your phones to do this, but note they are not service providers, just hardware modification people. In the next message John Landwehr will discuss this further. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John_Landwehr@NeXT.COM (John Landwehr) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 17:35:00 -0600 Subject: Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted Ameritech and Cellular One in Chicago claim that you cannot have two cellular phones with the same phone number. (This would be a nice feature if you have a car phone, and a handheld! But they claim the FCC doesn't approve. Translated -> they make more money this way). Their suggestion is call forwarding and no-answer-transfer. So what's the TELECOM Digest way around this? Couldn't you reprogram your second phone based on registration info stored on your first phone? Isn't this what those crooks are illegally doing by pulling up next to you in a van full of electronic goodies to steal your registration information as it goes over the air? (And as a side note, did anyone get a copy of the Motorola Technical Training Manual yet?) 'Inquiring minds want to know...' John Landwehr [Moderator's Note: You can reprogram your cellular phone to anything you like; that does not mean it will work when you try to transmit with it. The catch is, the tower matches the ESN (electronic serial number) of the phone -- over which you have NO control unless you are really knowledgeable about working on the innards of the phone -- with the 'phone number' of record for the instrument being used. If they do not match, then service is denied. There are exceptions which have been discussed here in the past. If you can change the ESN, and there are people who know how to do it as a hardware mod for example, then you are all set. You swap the ESN *and* the phone number, making the two always match with cell company records and you are all set. The trouble is, this defeats the fraud controls established by the carrier and you have no one to blame but yourself if later on you get stuck with a bunch of calls halfway around the world on your cellular bill. I think it is too bad the cellular carriers insist on one or nothing where the ESN is concerned. It seems like they could change that field in their records to allow for two or three ESNs to all be valid per 'number'; that would offer a compromise between security and user convenience. Having two or three eligible ESNs for users who wanted that many would still for all intents and purposes provide the same level of security as exists now. The cell companies might want to have users who request this sign off on something agreeing to accept liability for some amount of fraud should it occur in order to protect themselves. Naturally only the original ESN would be valid for calls unless a second or third ESN was specifically entered in the records, and I would probably hold the line at three; no one needs more than that if that many. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 10:33 EST From: pad@groucho.att.com (Patricia A Dunkin +1 201 386 6230) Subject: Cordless Phone Questions 1) On phones with several channels, is autoselect or do-it-yourself preferable for the average user? Autoselect sounds like a good idea, but does it work as advertised, or are most people better off having direct control over which channel is in use? 2) My sister's family has been noticing an increase in the amount of crosstalk they get. The last straw was overhearing a conversation that sounded as clear as a normal telephone connection. When she called U.S. West, they said cordless phones (not her corded phone, but other people's cordless phones) were probably causing the trouble. This was not much help to her. Is there anything she can do, or can get U.S. West to do? Thanks, Pat Dunkin (pad@groucho.att.com) [Moderator's Note: Cordless phones are becoming so common and widely accepted that those ten channels allocated for their use around 46.6 mhz are pretty busy in some areas. Perhaps the cordless phone manufacturers and the FCC never figured that a day would come when more than ten people living in the same apartment complex would all have cordless phones and want to use them at the same time. It used to be assumed that even if the cordless phone had only one channel (out of the ten channels allocated), as long as the phones were sold randomly around the country it was unlikely any two users living next to each other would wind up with a phone on the same frequency as their neighbor. Of course that's not the case any longer. With cordless phones in many households and baby monitors or children's walkie-talkies in the rest, the 46/49 territory is starting to get crowded. Add in a few Radio Shack remote-controlled toy cars and airplanes for your listening pleasure (many are in the 27 megs area squeezed between the CB channels but others are up there in 46/49 with the phones) and you can get a real zoo. Telco understandably takes the position that once they deliver the dial tone to you in good working condition to your 'demarc', the rest of the problem is yours. You don't mention if your sister's crosstalk problem is on her wired phone or her cordless phone. If on the latter, she's stuck. Tell her to buy one of the new 900 mhz phones from Radio Shack. If the crosstalk is on her wired phone *and she has her cordless phone plugged in, even if not using it* it still might be her problem rather than telco. For instance, I have around here somewhere an *old* cordless phone from the days when they were in the 27 megs/11 meter area. Some guy living a couple miles away has a CB radio he runs like a house afire, running illegal power all the time. His signal splashes so much it makes the relays in the base of the cordless chatter regardless of if it is being used or not. When he keys up his radio, the cordless base gets confused and goes off hook, busying out my phone line, and his modulations come right on down through the base and into the phone line. Two miles away ... that's how strong that signal is from his CB. Tell sister to unplug (from the power line and the phone line) any cordless phone she has. If the trouble is gone, good for her. She can go get a new improved bang-up 900 mhz cordless and have some peace in her life again. If the trouble does *not* go away at that point, *then* call telco to complain about crosstalk. She should tell them it was 'tested at the demarc' (not quite, but for all intents and purposes that's where she tested it) and the trouble persists. Then it becomes telco's problem; not before what with the nutty and overzealous CB operators in the world and babies who squall all day long into their monitors, etc. For further reading on the way in which radio signals interfere with each other and household electronic appliances, etc see the article in TELECOM Digest from a few years ago "Praise the Lord and Pass the RF Filters" which discussed the citizens of Hammond, Indiana and their battle with the very strong, improperly modulated signals of WYCA Christian Broadcasters, a local FM station which was irradiating them day after day. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: ZEnith, ENterprise, Fred & Ethyl Date: 16 Dec 1993 00:50:13 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] David Cornutt (cornutt@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov) wrote: > vice versa. I think Zenith was largely the independent telcos where > Enterprise was mostly for the Bell System. [....] > Fred & Ethyl Enterprises Birmingham > Ask the Operator For..... WX-9999 Here in the SF Bay Area the universal California Highway Patrol (state police) number was ZEnith 1-2000, though this state is 90% Bell. There were also numerous ENterprise numbers. In addition, for mobile phones there were XY numbers in the format above (Ask operator for XY 1-9000). Of course, there was a time when there really was a "Z" on the phone dial where the zero is. [Moderator's Note: I wish someone from the old Bell System who was around the company in those days would write and explain precisely the difference between Zenith and Enterprise. Was it just the telco's choice which one to use, or was there some technical reason in the accounting/revenue office that one was used some places and the other in the rest of the country, or? Come to think of it, besides seeing Zenith as the automatic reverse charge prefix used a lot by GTE, I think I saw a few sheriffs whose jurisdiction included people who were a toll call to reach him on Zenith. What was the real story? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Gerry Palmer Subject: Satellite Link Questions Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 15:16:17 -0500 Organization: ION Publishing Systems Can anyone help answer these questions? 1) Is the time delay on a bidirectional satellite link to great to allow LAN traffic (WAN traffic, that is!)? 2) For unidirectional satellite links, is a low-speed flow control line always necessary in the other direction? 3) Is there anyone out there that sells a canned satellite solution so that I can drop a file on a shared directory and have it appear at the other end (unidirectional link preferable). Thanks very much, Gerry Palmer Phone: 301-718-8857 ION Publishing Systems, Inc. Fax: 301-718-6586 4915 St. Elmo Ave. #500 Bethesda, MD 20814 ------------------------------ From: cleyste@kn.pacbell.com (Charlie L Eyster) Subject: FAX Modem Wanted For Disabled Worker Date: 16 Dec 93 18:05:35 GMT Organization: Pacific * Bell Knowledge Network I am looking for a fax modem with easy to use software for a physically disadvantaged employee. Does anyone know, or have experience with a product that is easy to use. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 05:56:14 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: AC 520 for Arizona in March 1995 Notice that one of the ideas (accurate or not) which has floated around concerning the NANP is that Mexico could become reachable with area codes of form 52x where x is not 0; the current history file refers to "not necessarily 0" and I will have to delete the word "necessarily". I see no Mexican city codes listed which start with 0. As you know, Arizona borders Mexico. There was also the idea that the first NNX area codes would be of form NN0, which fits 520 (but does not fit 334, which was announced for Alabama). Would some people get confused and try to "correct" 520 to 502? (502 is in western Kentucky, including Louisville.) ------------------------------ From: transvox@tyrell.net (Mark Roberts) Subject: Re: Only Two "Operating" IXCs in DC Organization: Tyrell Corp. Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 04:58:01 GMT Paul Robinson (TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM) wrote: > I was asked: >> I am sure there is some technicality in the word "operating" that >> I am not educated about. > This comment is correct and I used the wrong term. Rather than use > the term "operating" I should have said either "domiciled" or > "headquartered". > As far as I know, only two long distance companies have their > headquarters in Washington, DC. Mid Atlantic Telecom and MCI. Sprint > is in Shawnee Mission, KS if I remember, and AT&T is in Basking Ridge, > NJ. Number 4, which is Wiltel, if I'm not mistaken, is domiciled in > Tulsa, Oklahoma, I think. Anyone care to name who number five is? Can't name number five, but can clarify Sprint's location. It is in Westwood, Kansas, just across the Missouri border from Kansas City, MO. Sprint actually is domiciled in office buildings all throughout the area, including some in KCMO and some in Overland Park, KS. Westwood actually is a small bedroom community. The only other major business there that I'm aware of are radio stations KMBZ and KLTH (ex-KMBR-FM). BTW, there is no such thing as "Shawnee Mission, KS" -- that is a fiction of the U.S. Postal Service's imagination (and the name of the largest school district in Johnson County, KS). Mark Roberts -- Kansas City, MO -- in an orbit of mine own.... E-Mail: transvox@tyrell.net, mark808@delphi.com V-Mail: coming sometime?! [Moderator's Note: While the names of the 'big three' are never disputed where long distance is concerned (AT&T, MCI and Sprint in that order) who comes in fourth and fifth is subject to a lot of bickering among all the players. Wiltel is one candidate, but LCI (the carrier for the Orange Card) is another for fourth place. I guess it depends on how you cook the books each time Dun and Bradstreet comes looking around. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: olson@mcs.anl.gov (Bob Olson) Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk Organization: Math and Computer Science, Argonne National Laboratory Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:52:25 GMT In article , Comroe-CDCS37 Rich wrote: > However, when I recently moved residences (just three months > ago), I was surprised when Illinois Bell Telephone refused to offer > ISDN to my new house. When I asked how come, they told me that it was > only tariffed for business, and consequently not available for a > residence. That's very odd. In an ad glossy I recently received from Ameritech they hype ISDN as a solution for home offices. Perhaps you should ask again. bob ------------------------------ From: barry@ictv.com (Barry Lustig) Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk Organization: ICTV, Inc., Santa Clara, CA (408) 562-9200 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 09:13:02 GMT In article , Robert L. McMillin wrote: On Thu, 25 Nov 1993 02:45:41 GMT, westes@netcom.com (Will Estes) said: >> I think you are missing the big picture here. Within one year, people >> are going to be able to buy unlimited 10 Megabit per second connections >> to the net via existing cable TV cable, with a V.FAST or similar channel >> going upstream. This is going to cost $99/month or less for unlimited >> network use. > And who will be willing to pay $99/month for that? I certainly > wouldn't. Talk to me when you have it down to $20/month or less. I for one, would be more than happy to get Internet access for $99/month. You have to remember that, currently, Internet access (I don't mean just an account on an Internet attached machine) can cost as much as $800/month for a 56Kb pipe, depending upon you location. $99/month is cheap by comparison. barry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 00:48:50 EST Reply-To: 0005066432@MCIMAIL.COM Subject: Re: What Happened to "811" Numbers? From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA > Another reason to do away with 811 numbers is the similarity to > 911. While I have not personally experienced it, it is my > understanding that some switches are programmed with heuristic > rules so that numbers "sufficiently close" to 911 will be > intercepted to 911. Not in my area. Here's some tests I tried. (Note when I say 'supervise' I mean the small 'click' the phone company sends back to tell you it has accepted the dialed number.) Well, unlike some people's comments, dialing '91' and then sitting and waiting doesn't cause anything to happen. Dialing '211' plus most any combination of 4 digits returns busy; I tried things like the last 4 digits of my number, and that's also busy. '311' for some reason, goes to directory assistance. '411' is, of course, directory assistance. Dialing '511' or '711' *instantly* begins to ring. At midnight Friday I tried five rings; Nobody answers - no recording, nothing. C&P Telephone has returned to '611' as the number for repair service. Dialing '811' takes about five seconds to supervise, and about twelve seconds it goes to a loud 'baw-baw-baw' tone, not the same as reorder. I just tried it a moment ago. Dialing '911' takes about four seconds to supervise, and then it begins to ring. I instantly hung up as soon as I heard a ring, which from the last '1' to the ring was about five seconds. Paul Robinson - TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ From: sharpe_r@ix.wcc.govt.nz (Russell Sharpe) Subject: Re: 5ESS CentraNet Question Date: 16 Dec 1993 10:41:54 GMT Organization: Wellington City Council, Public Access Reply-To: sharpe_r@ix.wcc.govt.nz In article , Bonnie J Johnson writes: > Presently we can have Call Waiting on No Answer Diversion but NOT on > Busy Diversion. It's called a *Service Feature Conflict*, Call Waiting, and Diversion on Busy both use the same _System Register_ to direct the switch processor to the correct subroutine program. It has the same effect as instructing a processor to do two things simultaneoulsy with the same register ... you will probably get a system error, or a corruption. In my eleven years in the business, I have not yet heard of any switch, (PABX or CO switch) capable of this somewhat impossible task. In New Zealand, our NEC NEAX61E's will, if you have a Voice Mailbox, Call Waiting, and No Answer diversion, a waiting call will divert to the mailbox after the predetermined duration. If you can preset the time before diversion to between zero and thirty seconds, if you are maiking an important (or modem call), you can set your diversion time to zero, thus effectively Diversion on Busy. If your 5ESS (which I know very little about) has these services, this may be an answer. Regards, Russell Sharpe UseNet: sharpe_r@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz FidoNet: 3:771/370 & 3:771/160 Voice: +64 4 5639099 snailmail: 171 Holborn Drive Stokes Valley 6008 New Zealand ------------------------------ From: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk (George Zmijewski) Subject: Re: Wiring a New Home - Suggestions? Organization: MGZ Computer Services Reply-To: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 11:27:03 In article bobt@zeus.net.com writes: > I am having a new home built and would like to install the wiring now > that I might need for future technologies. What would you recommend? > Cable, fiber, copper, etc. Any suggestions welcome. I wired my house about four years ago. Nothe that this was done in UK and some things differ ie. one phone = four wires; two for speech, one for ring shunt, one for earth recall (for PABX); for power we have 240 volts in the socket so our 30Amps = 65Amps @110 volts. The idea was to put enough wire for next five to seven years. POWER: Each room has separate circuit for sockets (30 A - British Standard) Each room downstairs has separate light circuit (10 A) 3 Bedrooms upstairs have one light circuit (10 A) Landing/Stairs have separate light circuit (5 A) Bathroom has separate light circuit (5 A) Kithchen + Utility room 2 30 A circuits - one above the worktop for all the thing you plug in for making food, and second, below the worktop for oven , fridge, freezer Utility room only separate circuit for dishwasher and washing machine (30 A) Basement (where all wires come to) separate circuit for light, and separate circuit for sockets In the basement I have installed two sets for power fail fluorescent lights (I got them second hand from some shop fitter) they have NiCd batteries and keep one or two fluorescent tubes on for about 75 minutes; they switch on automatically on power failure. I found this the most useful feature in my house; you can take the fuse box to pieces, put it back again and all with normal light, also when RCB trips the lights I can get to the fuse box without breaking my legs over the junk in the basement. Bathroom light, kitchen "above worktop" circuits are on separate RCB the most likely to trip, also lower rated RCBs are more sensitive. Light circuits are on separate RCB from socket circuits -- I don't want lights going off when there's a fault in my HiFi. Kitchen "below worktop circuit" is not protected by RCB -- I don't want my freezer to be without power when I'm out and RCB falsely trips. I use basement circuit for "Computers only" -- it goes through UPS (latest addition). I have single core 10 A rated cable connected to each light switch and terminating near the fuse box - this allows me to connect room lights to timmer switch overrriding the wall switch (an anti burglar device) OTHER CABLING: Cables running to two opposite corners of each room: Two four pair phone cables, two shielded eight core serial cables, one ethernet, one TV coax, there is ethernet cable linking two oposite sockets in each room so that I can make loop from the basement, round the room and back to the basement. Eight core alarm type cable is terminating in all those places where infrared movement detectors get a good view of the protected space; also I have magnetic switches embeded in widows and doors (in addition to alarm use it is handy indicator that all windows are closed.) After four years I have found the most redundant is shielded serial cable (seemed to be good idea at the time second hand terminals were cheap and ethernet cards were expensive) I use it now to connect my DOS PC upstairs to PBX programming socket in I want to reconfigure it, also I have terminal connected to the call logging socket of the PBX -- (it shows me where my money goes :) ) Nowdays ethernet serves all computer related connections. A lot of phone wiring is very useful -- I have on average two phones in every room so when phone rings it is never further that an arm's length (just my lazy nature). I have underestimated my need for external telephone lines. I had six pair cable running to the connection box where telco can terminate their wires I have replaced that with 20 pair now. (If I get over 20 pair I will get ground cable feed to the basement.) I wanted to use some of the spare phone wiring to connect speakers around the house for background music -- now I can have music relayed via the speaker in my phones (reasonable quality) with the ability to switch it on/of and volume control at each point. (The switch I have now for voice extensions is Northen Telecom NortStar Compact; modems and fax are routed via another switch.) Total length of cable use I estimated at about 1.5 miles into standard English Terrace house (three up two down kitchen, utility, bathroom). Extra cost estimated at about 2000 USD Wall space in the basement used for connection matrixes 4 ft by 9 ft ! George Zmijewski [Moderator's Note: Wow! You are *wired*, no doubt about it. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #822 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04976; 17 Dec 93 18:36 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14317 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Fri, 17 Dec 1993 14:33:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12280 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 17 Dec 1993 14:33:00 -0600 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 14:33:00 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312172033.AA12280@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #823 TELECOM Digest Fri, 17 Dec 93 14:33:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 823 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Public Hearings on Privacy (US Consumer Affairs via Dave Banisar) Connecting From Europe to U.S. via ISDN, Help! (Braun Brelin) Need Information About Russian Connectivity to Outside (Tomaz Borstnar) Schedule Change for Computers in Medicine CFP (Wesley Snyder) Book Review: "Internet Passport" (Rob Slade) ISDN Availability Data Now Accessible via Internet (Jim Fenton) BellSouth Sixth to Sue Over Cable Dereg Act (Wash. Post via Paul Robinson) Questions About Identring (Thomas Chen) Recourse For Phone Tapping? (Rex Fowler) MCI Takes 150M Charge (Washington Post via Paul Robinson) Equal Access Ballots -- Multiple Names for One LD Carrier? (Robert Keller) Re: Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones (Tim Gorman) Re: High Speed Links? (Paul Robinson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Organization: CPSR Washington Office From: Dave Banisar Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 13:00:10 EST Subject: Public Hearings on Privacy Public Hearings on Privacy NEWS US OFFICE OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: George Idelson (USOCA) December 10, 1993 (202)634-4344 Patricia Faley (USOCA) (202)634-4329 PUBLIC HEARINGS ON INFORMATION AGE PRIVACY SET FOR CALIFORNIA AND WASHINGTON, DC. Sacramento: January 10-11, 1994; Washington, DC: January 26-27, 1994. Public Invited to Participate. Representatives from the public, private and non profit sectors will present their views on personal privacy and data protection in the information age at public hearings of a U.S. Government task force in early 1994. The hearings will be open meetings of the Privacy Working Group, chaired by Patricia Faley, Acting Director of the United States Office of Consumer Affairs (USOCA). The Working Group is part of a task force set up by the Clinton Administration to consider how to spur development of an "information superhighway." officially known as the National Information Infrastructure (NII), the "data highway" will be capable of exchanging data, voice and images electronically within a vast network of individuals, businesses, government agencies and other organizations around the world. Ensuring ready access to information is the goal of the Administrative initiative, but protecting individual privacy is essential to its success. The public meetings will examine privacy issues relating to such areas as law enforcement, financial services, information technology, and direct marketing. The California mooting, January 10th and llth, will be hosted by Jim Conran, Director, California Department of Consumer Affairs in the First Floor Hearing Room at 400 R Street in Sacramento. The Washington, DC meeting, January 26th and 27th, will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce Auditorium, 14th & Constitution Ave. NW. Registration begins at 8:30am, meetings at 9am. The public is invited to attend, question speakers and to make brief comments, but space is limited. Concise written statements for the record should be sent to "Privacy," USOCA, 1620 L Street NW, Washington DC 20036 or faxed to (202)634-4135. # # # United States Office of Comumer Affairs - 1620 L Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036-5605 ------------------------------ From: bbrelin@auspex.com (Braun Brelin) Subject: Connecting From Europe to U.S. via ISDN, Help! Date: 17 Dec 93 14:54:00 GMT Hello, I am facing some real roadblocks in being able to connect from my office in Paris to my company's headquarters in the U.S. I am still very much of a novice when it comes to ISDN and WAN. I would like to know of anyone who is using ISDN to connect to an office in the U.S. from France. I have a number of questions: 1. I have heard of a company called Bintec that makes ISDN sbus cards that will allow connectivity from one Sparcstation to another. I have a SPARCstation LX on my end. How does this affect the built-in ISDN available on the LX? 2. I understand that ISDN standards in the U.S. are different than in Europe. My company is located in Santa Clara, CA. Does anyone know how PacBell implements their version of ISDN? 3. Can I get greater than 64Kbytes bandwidth on one ISDN line? That is, what is the best way to use both B channels (I know about inverse multiplexing but I dont' know if it is standard or is suppported or what...) 4. Does any Internet service provider in Europe allow me to use ISDN to connect to their hubs? Thanks in advance for any responses. Braun Brelin Auspex Systems, Inc. bbrelin@auspex.com ------------------------------ From: Tomaz.Borstnar@arnes.si (Tomaz Borstnar) Subject: Need Information About Russian Connectivity to Outside Date: 17 Dec 1993 17:21:32 +0100 Organization: ARNES [Academic and Research Network of Slovenia] Reply-To: tomaz.borstnar@arnes.si Hello! My boss urgentely needs up-to-date information about Russian connectivity. He is especially interested in situation in Moscow. Can anybody provide me some pointer to this? Thanks in advance. Tomaz Borstnar ARNES (Academic and research network of Slovenia) News admin Phone:+386-61-125-9199 ext. 422; fax:+386-61-219-385 E-mail: news-admin@arnes.si | Arnes, Jamova 39, Ljubljana, Slovenia ------------------------------ From: wes@relito.medeng.wfu.edu (Wesley Snyder) Subject: Schedule Change for Computers in Medicine CFP Reply-To: wes@relito.medeng.wfu.edu Organization: The Bowman Gray School of Medicine Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:19:16 GMT CBMS-94 Advance Notice and Call for Papers Computers in Medicine -- Two Conferences, one location ONLY TWO MORE WEEKS LEFT TO SUBMIT PAPER SUMMARIES! DEC 31 IS IT! The Seventh IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems Friday-Saturday, June 10 - 11, 1994 with tutorials Saturday evening and Sunday morning; and the 12th Conference for Computer Applications in Radiology Monday-Wednesday, June 13-15, 1994 with tutorials on Sunday CBMS Sponsors *IEEE Computer Society *IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society *The Winston-Salem Section of the IEEE * with local support by the Bowman Gray School of Medicine The Symposium is intended for engineers and computer scientists in academia and industry who are designing and developing Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS). Biomedical engineers, computer scientists, medical residents, physicians, and students who are working on medical projects that involve computers are encouraged to submit papers describing their work. The conference is run this year in coordination with the annual SCAR (Society for Computer Application in Radiology) meeting, starting on Sunday, June 13, at the Winston-Salem Civic Center, next door to the Stouffer. CBMS attendees will therefore have the opportunity to combine two excellent conferences in one trip. The Program: CBMS combines technical papers, poster presentations, panel discussions, tutorials and research laboratory tours. Papers covering the following related areas are requested: Device Reliability and Safety Neural Networks and Expert Systems fault-tolerance, device testing, theory, implementations, validation and software safety pattern recognition, applications Image Processing and Analysis Prosthetic Devices registration, compression, Environmental control, word processing enhancement, restoration, devices for the hearing and vision reconstruction, hardware impaired, standards Signal Processing Cardiovascular Technologies algorithms, hardware, real-time monitoring, imaging, bioimpedance processing, monitoring, EEG measurements, micro-computing, computer applications, cardiopulmonary resuscitation Information Systems Clinical Assessment and Risk Evaluation RIS, HIS, PACS, networks, databases real-time signal processing, database systems Submission of Papers: Contributions in the forms of papers, poster sessions, software demonstrations, and tutorials in the areas listed above are invited. Paper summaries should be limited to two pages (typed, double-spaced) and should include the title, names of authors, and the address and telephone number of the corresponding author. Send four copies of your contributions to: (Authors west of the Mississippi and Asia) Nassrin Tavakoli, Info Enterprises, 3260 N. Colorado Street, Chandler, AZ 85225-1123. or (Authors east of the Missippi and Europe) Paul Kizakevich, Research Triangle Institute, POBox 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Student Paper Contest: Student papers are invited and considered for the contest. Winners of the contest will be selected by the Student Paper Contest Committee and awards will be announced and made the symposium. Awards will consist of a certificate and monetary prize as follows: First Prize: $500; Second Prize: $300; Third Prize: $150. To be eligible, the student must be the first author of an accepted paper, and must present the paper at CBMS `94. Deadlines and Key Dates: Paper summaries due: December 31, 1993 Notice of acceptance: February 1, 1994 Camera ready papers due: March 15, 1994 ------------------------------ Date: 16 Dec 93 15:05 -0600 From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Internet Passport" BKINTPSP.RVW 931118 Computer Literacy Bookshops 2590 North First Street San Jose, CA 95131 408-435-0744 fax: 408-435-1823 info@clbooks.com or (bookstores only, please) NorthWestNet 15400 SE 30th Place, Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98007 USA (206) 562-3000 fax: (206) 562-4822 "The Internet Passport", Kochmer, 1993, 0-9635281-0-6, U$29.95 passport@nwnet.net This work is a fairly bare bones and no nonsense guide to the Internet. The book is orderly, and the explanations and illustrations are clear. Each chapter covers a single topic. Each chapter ends with additional references, most often online materials or sources. The work is well researched and highly competent in most cases. There is, in the early chapters, a gracelessness to it which lacks any kind of appeal. What humour there is tends to seem somewhat contrived and sanitized: a topic on the hardware that connects computers on the Internet is subtitled "Router Rooters: 'Go Internet Go!'" Nevertheless, it is a thoroughly researched and valuable reference for those interes- ted in using the resources of the Internet. Section one, which is also chapter one, is a brief introduction to the Internet. There is minor mention of the technologies and organizations involved in the Internet, as well as brief mention of Fidonet and UUCP. The bibliography is a very solid list of valuable titles, but would have had significantly more value with some annotation. Section two covers the basic tools and functions of the Internet. The topics are well chosen, starting with email, mail servers, mail gateways to other networks and systems, telnet and ftp. Chapter four discusses mail etiquette. This section, I am happy to note, gives more space to the topic than is usual. In the end, though, it comes down to a list of rules that reduce to "keep it short, keep on topic, be complete and don't mess up." It would be nice to see one of these essays tell people how and why flame wars start, which might help to avoid them. Chapter eight, following ftp, deals with file compression and archiving. Section three moves into the next level of sophistication, in terms of communications, with group discussions. As the book puts it, these are the "Community Forums" of the net. Chapters nine, ten and eleven deal very clearly, completely and usefully with Usenet, BITNET, LISTSERVs and Internet mailing lists. I am noted for highly critical reviews: I find nothing of any substance wrong with this section, and recommend it highly and without reservation. Once again, the end of each chapter gives useful directions on how to find out further information, particularly the specifics of various LISTSERVs and mailing lists. Section four starts to look at the resources of the Internet as a library, with electronic journals, books, catalogues and data bases. Chapter fifteen is very similar to the catalog section of Ed Krol's work (cf BKKROL.RVW) with listings of sites and resources by topic. Section five deals with exploration and retrieval tools, such as archie, gopher, WAIS, WWW and directory services. The final section contains two specialized interests, the use of the Internet in public education, and access to supercomputing facilities. The book concludes with several appendices. The most interesting are likely Appendix A, which gives suggestions of online sources of information about the Internet, and, B, which gives a short list of Internet access providers and methods. The glossary is very well done: not overblown with imposing numbers of entries, but good explanations of the important terms. The unprepossessing beginning of this work hides a very carefully researched and well organized reference for those wishing to get into the Internet and its resources. Less flashy than Krol, it should nevertheless have a place on the desk of every serious Internet user. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993 BKINTPSP.RVW 931118 (Postscriptum: this work is being kept up to date. The edition I reviewed was the fourth, and a fifth is planned for next year.) Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM Digest and associated mailing lists. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 17:12:23 -0800 From: fenton@combinet.com (Jim Fenton) Subject: ISDN Availability Data Now Accessible via Internet By popular demand, the Combinet "BBS" providing information on ISDN availability in many areas of the US is now available via the Internet. The information is supplied by Bell Communications Research and various Operating Companies and is updated periodically as new information becomes available. To access the service, telnet to bbs.combinet.com and login as isdn (no password is required). After entering an area code and three-digit prefix, the service displays the availability of ISDN. Also displayed is information about carrier installation prices and monthly charges. For those without direct Internet access, the service continues to be available on a dialup basis using a 2400 bit/sec modem at (408) 733-4312. Jim Fenton Combinet, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA 408 522-9164 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:57:49 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: BellSouth Sixth to Sue Over Cable Dereg Act Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA {Washington Post}, Page F2, December 15: BellSouth became the sixth regional phone firm suing to overturn the Cable Communications Act of 1984, which prohibits BellSouth and other "Baby Bells" from providing phone and cable TV service in the same area. Its lawsuit in U.S. District court called the curbs an unconstitutional infringement on its freedom of speech. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: tchen@sdesys1.hns.com (Thomas Chen) Subject: Questions About Identring Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 23:29:50 GMT Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc. Is there a spec for identring; can someone tell me what is the on/off duration? tom [Moderator's Note: By 'identring' are you referring to the service available from telcos where separate numbers are on one line, each with their own ringing cadence? PAT] ------------------------------ From: rmfowler@landru.mtc.ti.com (Rex Fowler) Subject: Recourse For Phone Tapping? Reply-To: rmfowler@landru.mtc.ti.com Organization: Manufacturing Technology Center, Texas Instruments, Dallas Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 03:25:46 GMT What recourse does a person have against someone hooking into their phone line and making long distance phone calls? A friend of mine has been getting charged for 1-900 numbers for a few months now. She lives in an apartment complex so the phone lines all run together up through the walls to each individual apt. Her neighbor had tapped into her lines to make these calls. They probably listened in on her conversations as well. The phone company sent a technician to checkout her lines which is how they found out. Now, what can/should she do according to the laws? Press charges, file suit, ...? Please Cc: me on any follow-ups since I will be out of town until January. Thanks, Rex Fowler Inet : Texas Instruments TI MSG : rfow Dallas Tx Phone : (214)995-4001 [Moderator's Note: She certainly can sue her neighbor for theft of service. I'm surprised telco is still billing her for the calls if they are the ones who discovered the illegal connection outside her premises. Are they still after her to pay? Or did telco write it off and now the 900 Information Provider is after her? If she did not personally have to pay for the calls then her case will be a little different than if she was billed, paid for the calls and has now discovered the theft. In any event, she definitly has a case against her neighbor and should consult an attorney. Telco will assist by providing records of their service call and the technician's findings (that her line had been tapped) when they are subpoened to do so. These records will help her attorney in presenting her case to the court. I hope she wins her case, and she should without difficulty. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 19:47:44 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: MCI Takes 150M Charge Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA {Washington Post} Dec 16, Page B16 "MCI Communications of Washington said it will take a one-time charge of as much as $150 million in the fourth quarter to pay for what it described as a strategic realignment of its business. MCI is taking the charge to cover consolidation costs associated with the streamlining of its facilities and the relocation of certain operations to cheaper areas." Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ Reply-To: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 23:32:36 Subject: Equal Access Ballots -- Multiple Names for One LD Carrier? From: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) I am curious to know if the issue has ever come up in which an LD carrier that may be known by different names (e.g., an official corporate name and a trade name) has wanted to have _both_ names appear on a local exchange carrier's equal access ballot so as to increase the likelihood that its name will be recognzed by potential subscribers? If so, how was this handled? Thanks. Bob Keller (KY3R) Tel +1 301.229.5208 rjk@telcomlaw.win.net Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@access.digex.net CIS 76100,3333 ------------------------------ Date: 16 Dec 93 11:59:59 EST From: Tim Gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Calling Cards and Privately Owned Pay Phones henderson@mlnaxp.mln.com in Telecom Digest V13 #821 posted the following: > So I called one of the operators today from a payphone that was giving > me that trouble. This time I told her "I had problems using the > voicemail system at work". She suggested to push the keys slower and > to leave a longer pause each two or three keystrokes. > It worked. I dialed the target number leaving three second pauses > between the phone number and the calling card number and waited five > seconds before pushing in the PIN. > Hope it works elsewhere. This is not too far fetched. It would also be interesting to know if you held the keys down longer. While you may not have meant to, most people, when slowing their dialing, also tend to hold the keys down longer. As anyone running an operator system usually finds out, one of the biggest problems is recognizing credit card numbers input from DTMF station sets. DTMF was not originally designed for the purposes to which it is put today. Station set oscillators are not held to the tolerances needed for trouble free operation. Standard DTMF receiver specifications are not stringent enough to insure operation under many situations of noise, loss, and phase shift. By holding the keys down longer, you give the receiving system more time to recognize digits as well as the intervals between digits. This results in much more reliable operation. I would bet that lots of situations where you think the originating set has prevented the call are actually situations where the far end has received something it didn't know how to handle and, instead of gracefully ending the call with a notice, it just locked up and left you hanging. Tim Gorman 71336.1270@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 11:42:07 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: High Speed Links? Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA ajay@cedar.Buffalo.EDU, writes: > We are in the need for a temporary, high-speed (~ 50-100KBytes/sec) > link from our offices in Buffalo, to Washington D.C. I'd like to > get some information regarding how much such a link would cost, > what is involved in setting up the link at both ends, how much > would it cost to lease the equipment for the period of time, what > are our options, etc. etc. As you can see, Telecomm is definitely > not one of my strongpoints, so I'm just fishing for ideas right > now! At the Washington, DC end, you can get a connection to the Internet for 56K for about $500 a month, plus $500 to install, plus the cost of the routers and the line from the phone company to a Point of Presence, say $200 a month. So call it $700 a month on this end. Routers sell for about $6000 or so, and most rental companies charge based on cost recovery after 10 months, so figure $600 a month for the router. So figure $1400 a month on the Washington, DC end. Rates may be more, less or the same at your end. The same place will supply a T1 for $700 a month plus $2000 to install plus telco charges. Now, if you want to use a private link rather than TCP/IP packets over the public Internet, you might want to check with some of the smaller carriers like Wiltel which are hungry for your business. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #823 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07514; 18 Dec 93 7:22 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28223 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 03:10:29 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26514 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 03:10:03 -0600 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 03:10:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312180910.AA26514@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #824 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Dec 93 03:10:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 824 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Updated Summary of T1 Equipment With Modem Banks etc. (Aninda Dasgupta) Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted (Robert J. Keller) Mobilnet - Do They Know This? (Douglas Adams via Aaron L. Dickey) Re: PCS Questions (Samir Soliman) Re: Wireless LANs (Lynne Gregg) Re: Saudi Arabia NANP Area Code (Tony Harminc) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 14:20:07 EST From: add@philabs.Philips.Com (Aninda Dasgupta) Subject: Updated Summary of T1 Equipment With Modem Banks etc. [This is an updated version of a summary I posted a few weeks back. This article has more recent information obtained from USRobotics. Also, it gives a "vanilla" solution using DACS and channel banks. For those who are not familiar with T1 terms and equipment, there was a nice article on the TeleTech mailing list by scott@jackson.lambda. com (Scott Statton N1GAK) on Wed, 15 Dec '93, that explained some of the T1 terms and equipment.] A number of people from the net asked me to forward whatever information I have received regarding equipment needed to connect 24 modems to a T1 line. Below I have described the main features of each. All this information is what I have assimilated from market-speak and brochures of the vendors. Summary of my application's needs: I want to provide two kinds of services to my geographically distributed salespeople; both services are to be provided from a workstation-based server. Service 1: Salesperson dials in from his laptop and on my end I want to dump some ASCII and graphics messages on his laptop screen - pretty much like a remote terminal server. Service 2: Salesperson dials in from a POTS telephone, uses DTMF keys to choose a service and gets messages played back and/or a fax sent to a fax machine - very much like voice-mail systems, banks offering credit card balance information and fax-back systems. I need the two services to be served off one workstation because the information accessible via the two services (using modems or telephone sets) is identical and because I want to aggregate my incoming lines onto a single T1 so that I can get good LD rates from my LD provider. Vendors that have products that allow offering such services are listed below. 1) US Robotics - Total Control WAN Hub ----------------------------------- This product is offered as a chassis and various options on cards. They have a dual-T1 card with drop-insert capabilities, frac. T1 enabled, accepts ANI/DNIS and requires no external CSU. The DSP-based quad-modem cards have built-in fax-modem (V.32bis) capabilities, can access DNIS, can load DNIS-dependent modem configuration, will (someday) route the data to LAN adapters (instead of RS-232 ports) and can originate and terminate fax/modem calls. USR also talks about making LAN adapter cards (Enet and TR) available in late '94, which will allow direct connections to a Token-ring or Ethernet LAN. They will also have a LAN Gateway card that will work in conjunction with the LAN adapters to route data to/from the quad modems to the LAN. TCP/IP and X.25 will be initially supported on the Gateway cards, and Appletalk, etc. will be added later. Any application specific protocol of your choice can be downloaded onto the Gateway card. This will allow you to use any home-brewn protocols for transactions, data exchange, etc. between remote applications. A terminal server card will be avialable around mid-'94. Voice cards (with RJ11 output, I guess) will be available "later '94." USR will also have ISDN PRI, X.25 and Frame Relay cards that go in the same chassis. The chassis and most of the cards are controllable/monitorable using SNMP, either from a PC (with software available from USR) or from any other SNMP host on the LAN. Some of the cards are also controllable via RS-232 dumb terminals. For more (and perhaps accurate) information, contact US Robotics at (800) 342-5877. I spoke with Michael Cashman, Ext. 5636 (Marketing/Sales). I also spoke with Don Balton - (708) 982-5091 who used to head the group that designed this product, and Lauri Lentz in Public Relations. 2) Primary Access -------------- I found out about Primary Access from, among others, its founder, Jim Dunn. They are reachable by email. They seem to have a larger installed base of their product as compared to the USR product described above. This prouduct is also a chassis based system. The single-T1 card has drop-insert capabilities, is not capable of frac. T1 (from what I could gather from their glossies), needs an external CSU (but only for loop-back testing) and accepts ANI/DNIS. However, the ANI/DNIS is accessible to a host computer only if you use an X.25 link between the chassis and the host. This means, in order to get the ANI/DNIS, you need to buy an X.25 card for the chassis and an X.25 card and software for the host. The dual-modem cards are V.32bis compatible, can do DTMF decoding, can originate and terminate modem calls, and they promise routing of modem data to LANs within the next year. These cards don't seem to be as feature rich as the USR cards (e.g. on the fly, DNIS-dependent configuration download, etc.). They offer X.25 cards and Frame Relay too. Network management is done using CMIP. All software on the cards can be downloaded for upgrades. Voice call support is provided using their 8-port FXS cards (something that is lacking in the USR offering at this time). They have promised Ethernet support in about a year. They assured me that they can price their products very aggressively. For more information call: (619) 536-3000 Fax: (619) 693-8829 3) Dialogic -------- This is a all-in-a-PC solution. Dialogic offers a T1 interface card for the IBM PC bus. This card provides access to ANI/DNIS, has drop-insert capabilities and requires an external CSU for loop-back testing. They have various versions of the T1 card, offering various options for the number of T1 ports. Also offered is a PC-based four-channel Voice card that does DSP-based call processing. Combined with Dialogic's voice-processing software (PCM encode/decode API) and DTMF recognition capabilities, this card provides an excellent way to implement voice-based services. Dialogic also offers fax boards that will allow you to send out faxes from the PC. The PC, equipped with a LAN adapter card can, via the application software route all data to a network. I am not aware of network monitoring features (SNMP or CMIP). Also missing is any V.32bis modem capabilties. One attraction of going the Dialogic way is the elimination of any cabling which is needed to connect the USR or Primary Access products to any host system (e.g. RS-232, twisted-pair etc.). All the cards use Dialogic's PEB bus for internal data transfers. For more information call Dialogic Sales and Technical Support: (201) 334-1268. 4) IBM's CallPath Line of Products: ------------------------------- IBM offers a uniform API to interface to phone systems, independent of the the PBX vendor and the host system platform. e.g. one could use the same programs to implement CallPath-based applications on MVS, AS/400, OS/2 and AIX based systems and interface to PBXs from Rolm, NT, etc. One requirement is the PS/2 based CallPath SwitchServer/2, which seems to be a system that has hard-wired links to the PBX and sits on the LAN and serves all requests for operations from the CallPath host. The host to SwitchServer link is supported using SNA LU6.2 (yuk!!). They support DID, DNIS, CLID, ANI etc. and have T1 boards for the RS/6000 (I am not aware if they have boards for the PS/2 and mid to main frame systems, but I assume they do). Although an interesting product with a seemingly rich API to perform all kinds of call routing etc, the main drag is the PS/2 requirement to interface to a PBX (what if I don't have a PBX?) For more information call: (800) IBM-CALL and ask for information on CallPath line of products. A Vanilla Solution using DACS, Channel Banks and CSU/DSUs An alternative to all the above solutions, and perhaps much more messy (in terms of writing purchase orders and cabling), is to use a CSU box to terminate the T1 span. Then, use a DACS+Channel Bank to do the splitting of the lines into modem and voice calls. However, I am not sure how one would use two 800 numbers -- one for modem calls and one for voice, and somehow have the DACS recognize the DNIS and split them accordingly. Do they make DACS or Channel Banks that will use DNIS to split the DSO channels? (I bet they do.) After the Channel Bank, the modem lines would have to be fed into v.32bis modems. This might create a nasty cable spaghetti between the Channel Bank and the modems. Besides, buying and managing 24 or 48 modems is expensive, right? Then of course there is the cabling from the modems to the host's serial ports. I have seen a Wireless RS-232 box that transmits to 500 ft. But I don't know how 24 of them would perform sitting next to one another. The advantage of this solution is that you can buy used equipment for cheap (there are plenty of used telco equipment vendors) and get something up and running. [The following sources were mentioned in an article by scott@jackson.lambda.com (Scott Statton N1GAK)]: Channel Banks: Newbridge, Wescom DACS: Fredericks' Engineering CSU/DSU: Kentronics, AT&T etc. Summary and Wish List: The Primary Access and USR offerings both look attractive. I wish Primary Access delivered ANI/DNIS without X.25. I wish both USR and Primary Access had LAN adapters for their chassis so that I wouldn't need to run 24 RS-232 cables from the modem cards to my workstation. (Getting a workstation equipped with 24 serial ports is quite difficult.) The Dialogic product can be neatly packaged in a PC, but I don't trust a PC to do my important call processing and service providing functions. And Dialogic doesn't provide V.32bis modem-banks in their PC solutions. Finally, I wish the IBM product didn't need a PBX and a PS/2 to interface to it. Disclaimer: ---------- I DO NOT GUARANTEE the accuracy of any of this information. As I said, this is what I have understood or guessed from whatever information I was able to gather directly from the vendors. I might have misunderstood some deficiencies, or unknowingly embellished some features. If so, that was unintentional. If anybody familiar with these products finds any inaccuracies, I'd appreciate being told about it. If anybody knows of any other such products, I would like to hear about them too. Thanks to all those who responded to my queries on this (and other) mailing-list(s). Aninda DasGupta (add@philabs.philips.com) Ph:(914)945-6071 Fax:(914)945-6552 Philips Labs\n 345 Scarborough Rd\n Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510 ------------------------------ Reply-To: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 23:15:09 Subject: Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted From: rjk@telcomlaw.win.net (Robert J. Keller) Here is what the Federal Communications Commission has to say on the subject: :: Quote :: PUBLIC NOTICE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION COMMON CARRIER PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICES INFORMATION October 2, 1991 Report No. CL-92-3 CHANGING ELECTRONIC SERIAL NUMBERS ON CELLULAR PHONES IS A VIOLATION OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES It has come to the attention of the Mobile Services Division that individuals and companies may be altering the Electronic Serial Number ( ESN) on cellular phones. Paragraph 2.3.2 in OST Bulletin No. 53 (Cellular System Mobile Station - Land Station Compatibility Specification, July, 1983) states that "[a]ttempts to change the serial number circuitry should render the mobile station inoperative." The 1981 edition of these compatibility specifications (which contains the same wording) was included as Appendix D in CC Docket 79-318 and is incorporated into Section 22.915 of the Commission's rules. Phones with altered ESNs do not comply with the Commission's rules and any individual or company operating such phones or performing such alterations is in violation of Section 22.915 of the Commission's rules and could be subject to appropriate enforcement action. Questions concerning this Public Notice should be addressed to Steve Markendorff at 202-653-5560 or Andrew Nachby at 202-632-6450. :: End Quote :: The staff has informally opined (although the Commission has not yet formally ruled) that the foregoing prohibits, in addition to the direct cloning and/or manipulation of the ESN, many of the other schemes to get around it by "intercepting" and "translating" the ESN. They have proposed the following rule which will likely be formally adopted sometime early next year: :: Quote :: 22.919 Electronic serial numbers. The Electronic Serial Number (ESN) is a 32 bit binary number that uniquely identifies a cellular mobile transmitter to any cellular system. Each mobile transmitter must have a unique ESN and must comply with the following specifications. (a) The ESN must be factory set and must not be alterable, transferable, removable or otherwise able to be manipulated in the field. (b) The ESN host component must be permanently attached to a main circuit board of the mobile transmitter and the integrity of the unit's operating software must not be alterable. The ESN must be isolated from fraudulent contact and tampering. If the ESN host component does not contain other information, that component must not be removable, and its electrical connections must not be accessible. If the ESN host component contains other information, the ESN must be encoded using one or more of the following techniques: (1) multiplication or division by a polynomial; (2) cyclic coding; (3) the spreading of ESN bits over various non-sequential memory locations. (c) Cellular mobile equipment must be designed such that any attempt to remove, tamper with, or change the ESN chip, its logic system, or firmware originally programmed by the manufacturer will render the mobile transmitter inoperative. :: End Quote :: As far as staff is concerned, the proposed rule merely clarifies what is already the law, but they feel that the clarification in necessary because many in the industry are coming up with so many novel ways to accomplish the same result in clever ways. IMO, this is not something to be taken lightly for two reasons: (1) the FCC has gotten rather aggressive in recent years in the number and size of forfeitures (read "fines") imposed for (even relatively minor) rules violations, and (2) doing something like this when your carrier does not authorizes subjects you to the risk that your cellular unit will be negatively listed (and therefore rejected as a fraudulent unit). Note, however, that the staff does _not_ consider it to be a violation for the cellular carrier to offer this capability by doing some programming at the cellular switch that associates a single phone number with two or more _different_ ESN's. Apparently some carriers are starting to do this. Bob Keller (KY3R) Tel +1 301.229.5208 rjk@telcomlaw.win.net Fax +1 301.229.6875 rjk@access.digex.net CIS 76100,3333 ------------------------------ From: kieran@world.std.com (Aaron L Dickey) Subject: Mobilnet - Do They Know This? Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 21:10:23 GMT The following is being forwarded for the benefit of Douglas Adams: adamsd@cerf.net (Douglas Adams) writes: There have been some very expensive and elaborate ads on CNN recently for Mobilnet. As far as I can divine (the ads are heavier on production values than on information) they are offering a nationwide cellular service which eliminates the need for fiddling about with roaming codes etc. If this is what they are offering then I am extremely interested in it -- definitely a potential customer. Though I 'm British, I spend a great deal of time travelling round and round the States and 'cell-comms-made-simple' is exactly what I want. Right at the end of the ad they flash up a 1-800 number for enquiries. By the time I've grabbed a pencil its gone and I haven't got the number. This has happened several times. I suddenly realize it's _that_ ad, (it takes a while to spot it because it starts out like an ad for shampoo or beer or something) and have just been too late to get the number. So I've tried the 800 information service, which has no listing for Mobilnet. Now, I can't help wondering if the people at Mobilnet are sitting manning their phones and thinking 'Hmmmm -- doesn't seem to be much demand for this service. Maybe the folks out there don't really want a national cellular system ...' I think there should be some kind of award for advertising of this nature. Incidentally -- if anybody _does_ have the Mobilnet number I'd be glad to have it -- provided they haven't shut down the business for lack of demand. Douglas Adams adamsd@cerf.net (current) dna@dadams.demon.co.uk (dormant) (message passed along by) Aaron Dickey kieran@world.std.com [Moderator's Note: I tried 800-555-1212 just now hoping to find an answer, but 800 directory has nothing listed for the company. Anyone else know how to reach them? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Dec 93 20:26:26 -0800 From: Samir Soliman Subject: Re: PCS Questions At 11:31:06 CST 12/14/93 Kyle Griffin wrote: > Although there are strong proponents of making GSM (or a modified > version) a US standard, there's no guarantee that will happen. The FCC > has stated that they would rather let the market determine standards > rather than dictate any. There are also proponents of CDMA. I've seen > some of the TDMA-CDMA dialogue in this digest. I'm not on either > "side" of the issue. From what I've read (from people not related to > any company making either type of equipment), as well as an > acquaintance at Bellcore, there is a general feeling that, as far as > capacity is concerned, when all is said and done, they're going to > come out about equal in terms of increased capacity over cellular AMPS > (approximatly 7 to 1). I don't want to argue numbers here. But keep in mind that GSM is not designed for capacity or spectral efficiency. The design objective for GSM was politically motivated. In the US spectrum is becoming a very expensive commodity and a need for an efficient multiple access scheme becomes a necessity. I recommend that every one interested reads the article published by THE ECONOMIST entitled "Falling to bits" dated May 29, 1993. In that article, the author writes "The ambitious eight fold gain that Europe is aiming for has proved equally elusive. GSM averages a two-to-threefold gain. In Hong Kong, where the complicated city-scape tends to disperse the signal, GSM has managed to improve things by a mere 50%" The PCS radio environment is similar, if not worse than the Hong Kong environment (small cells, dense urban, severe mulipath, high traffic volume, in-building coverage requirements, etc. ...). I would like to hear from anyone who worked or still working on the GSM system in Hong Kong. What was (is) his/her experience with getting the system to work in Hong Kong? What is the capacity of that system compared to AMPS?. I would like also to hear how painful was it to replan the frequency at least once a month or as often as you add one more sector or cell as the system grows with time. Samir Soliman Qualcomm Incorporated ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: Re: Wireless LANs Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 08:57:00 PST Original note: > I am looking for a way to send Ethernet across a public street. Somebody > told me there is a $2500 pair of laser devices that can do that. Another Response: > John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl > I'm surprised that nobody's mentioned NCR Wavelan. It's a 2 mb/sec Another option is Motorola Altair. They may be above 2mb by now. They also had some interesting methods of extending distance, combining both infrared (line of sight) and radio receivers. Multiple protocol support's available, too. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ Date: Sat 18 Dec 93 00:07:58 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Saudi Arabia NANP Area Code > [Moderator's Note: Yes, Saudi Arabia had an international country code > like all other countries, but it also had an 'area code' which could be > dialed from the USA for the administrative convenience of some people. > The oil industry? I dunno. Anyone remember the 'area code' number, and > does it still work today? PAT] I have a business card that I got in 1981 or 1982 from someone working in Saudi Arabia. It is laid out like this: ---------------------------------------------------------------- KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA Ministry of Finance and National Economy The National Center for Financial and Economic Information Asst Coord for Tech Operations USREP/JECOR/NCFEI P.O. Box 6902 APO New York 09038 Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Ph: 404-0544 Ph: 404-3945 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The same (I presume) information is on the other side in Arabic. There is no area code -- just seven digits for each number, but perhaps the implication that both are NYC numbers, but one rings in Riyadh? Or perhaps both are Riyadh numbers, but one rings in a P.O. box in New York. :-) Tony Harminc ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #824 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10373; 19 Dec 93 1:03 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17012 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:23:45 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10315 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:23:19 -0600 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:23:19 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312190323.AA10315@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #825 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Dec 93 21:23:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 825 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Eleventh UK Teletraffic Symposium (Richard Gibbens) Namibia Telephone Codes (Carl Moore) Paper Needed on Propogation Modeling (Antonio Dell'Elce) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Nathan D. Lane) Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? (Alex Cena) Re: Broadband Technologies, Inc. (Alex Cena) Re: TDD Software Wanted (Paul Robinson) Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC (Jon Edelson) Re: SMDR Polling Device Recommendation Needed (Dave Ptasnik) Re: Modem Communication on TTY (Rich Mintz) Re: Use of British Answering Machines in the US (Liron Lightwood) Re: Use of British Answering Machines in the US (Richard Cox) Re: 603-43x-xxxx Switch? (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Listening to Cellular Calls (Eric N. Florack) Re: Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages (Paul Robinson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: R.J.Gibbens@statslab.cam.ac.uk (Richard Gibbens) Subject: Eleventh UK Teletraffic Symposium Organization: DPMMS (Cambridge Univ - Pure Maths and Mathematical Statistics) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 18:40:53 GMT Call for papers Eleventh UK Teltraffic Symposium Performance Engineering in Information Systems The Eleventh UK Teletraffic Symposium, arranged by Profession Group E7 (Telecommunication networks and services) and C3 (Information systems and networks), and co-sponsored by the British Computer Society and the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, will be held at the Moller Centre, Cambridge, from 23 to 25 March 1994. This is an annual event that provides a forum for specialists in the area to discuss the latest modelling techniques for performance evaluation of the use, management and structure of the wide variety of communication networks now being developed. Contributions are invited that review current techniques, discuss generic problems, or introduce novel methodologies and results. The areas of particular interest are: * Mobile communications * Broadband networks, management and control * Feature and service interaction * Local access techniques * Network interworking * Traffic management * Design tools * Traffic characterisation * New mathematical methods and simulation techniques * Software performance analysis Prospective authors are invited to submit a synopsis of approximately 250 words before Friday, 7 January 1994 to Dr R. J. Gibbens, Statistical Laboratory, University of Cambridge, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1SB, tel: 0223 337945, fax: 0223 337956. Following acceptance, authors will be asked to prepare a full paper, not more than six A4 sides in length, by Friday, 4 March 1994. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 13:36:31 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Namibia Telephone Codes Namibia (+264) and South Africa (+27) have city codes that look they could fit into one list -- similar to an old area code and the new one just split from it. In the following message, RSA is Republic of South Africa. --FORWARDED MESSAGE-- From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse Subject: Re: Namibia To: Carl Moore Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 06:11:04 +0000 (GMT) Organization: Windhoek Central Hospital Reply-To: el@lisse.na > Since the city codes fit in with those of South Africa: Was Namibia > once a part of the South Africa phone system? We were part of RSA until independence :-)-O The phone system is still integrated with RSA. National phone rates apply for calls to the RSA, if it were international I could not afford it. Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse Windhoek Central Hospital Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Private Bag 13215 61 203 2106/7 (Bleeper) 61 224014 (home) Windhoek, Namibia ------------------------------ From: tdnycal@dsiaq8.ing.univaq.it ( Subject: Paper Needed on Propogation Modeling Date: 18 Dec 1993 09:17:30 -0600 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway I am looking for a paper that treats Empirical Model for Urban microcells, I have a paper about it called "Urban/Suburban Out-of-sight Propagation Modeling" from various authors (IEEE cm, June, 1992) but I am looking for an updated propagation modeling description. Can any of you point to any paper/article etc about it? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 17:33:23 -0800 From: nathan@seldon.foundation.tricon.com Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos > Joel Upchurch @ Upchurch Computer Consulting uunet!aaahq01!upchrch! > joel says: > I read something in the last issue of {Popular Science} about some cable > company experimenting with providing internet access through the cable > system. Imagine a local cable company doing something like getting a > pagesat news feed and providing it to their customers as a premium > cable channel with a special modem to translate the data. And the previous post mentioned PSI. Well, PSI just two months ago announced the first (I think) venture with a cable company back east (I think it was Continental in New York). Their goal is to provide 10Mbps (yes, ethernet speeds) to cable customers, bidirectionally, for just $100/month. The equipment is installed and I believe they even have trial customers now. Now, I would imagine the 10Mbps is an aggregate load for ALL the cable customers. I doubt that each person gets 10Mbps to the Internet. (PSI would kill their telco business in an instant if they did that ... or the telco's would lower their prices drastically). I can dig up the press release if anyone would like it and sends me e-mail. Nathan D. Lane, VP Triicon Systems. Lompoc, CA (805) 733-1849 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 09:34:50 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Re: 0.6W or 3.0W Cell Phones, Which to Buy? ghuntres@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Gary Huntress) wrote: > I've been shopping for a cellular phone for my in-law's Xmas gift. > In fact I just returned a few minutes ago more confused than when I > left. I had planned on buying one of the smaller style of phones > rather than the "bag" type. My in-laws will be travelling between MA > and FL using the phone almost exclusively for emergency inbound and > outbound calls (once we get over the "guess where I'm calling from!" > phase). I would buy a 0.6W portable. If you need more oomph, you can always purchase a docking station with a 3.0W booster, hands free, recharger, antenna, etc. I use a Motorola MicroTac PT550, which I have used driving from Minneapolis, MN to New York City. I was able to use it more than 90% of the time. Moreover, I travel quite a bit (2-3 days/week) around the United States and Canada. Thus far, 0.6W has not been a problem for me. Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers acena@lehman.com, Opinions are mine not my employers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1993 17:30:12 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Re: Broadband Technologies, Inc. Randy te Velde wrote: > Is ADSL for real? And if so, how will it be switched? Can we get > what we want from it (HDTV, high bandwidth interactive services), or > will it force us to make due with less? If you need more info on ADSL, you may want to try the following companies, which are working on the technology: Newbridge Networks, ADC Telecom, Amati, Level One, Tellabs and PairGain Technologies. I hear there is a definite interest by the telephone companies and there are RFPs for equipment to be used in trials around the country. Unfortunately, ADSL still costs quite a bit of money ($?,000) due to lack of silicon. Some say ADSL must be less than $500/line to be deployed economically. Same was true w/HDSL until PairGain designed its own transceiver, which it used in conjunction with Brooktree's A/D converter to offer a single card that fit in a standard repeater bay. Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers acena@lehman.com, Opinions are mine not my employers ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 13:27:00 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA > Is there any software that emulates a TDD (Telecomm Device for the > Deaf?). This ought to be straightforward, but my local phone > company says that you 'have to buy their TDD hardware'. Say it > ain't so! It ain't so. You can buy hardware for this purpose from anyone. > I don't care what kind of computer, although UNIX-based sources > would be helpful. Modems that will handle TDD are much more expensive due to the limited market; software alone cannot handle TDD as the standard device uses 6-bit baudot, not 8-bit ascii (although some newer models handle both). A modem to handle TDD and standard ascii at 2400 baud will cost upwards of $200, e.g. as much as a 14,400 baud modem. I have heard that there is some inexpensive hardware that, if you have an original IBM PC with cassette port, can be used to do TDD through the cassette port. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: winnie@flagstaff.princeton.edu (Jon Edelson) Subject: Re: Voice Mail Cards For Home PC Organization: Princeton University Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 18:30:47 GMT In article wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) writes: > It sounds like just the thing you are looking for is from The Complete > PC. There is a product called The Complete Answering Machine as well > as a companion product called The Complete Fax Machine. > If you go off hook for more than five seconds (this is > user configurable) without DTMFing or outpulsing, the CAM will > automatically disconnect the subscriber loop and start reading you the > voice mail menu, giving you the opportunity to key in your mailbox > number and password. I've had a product called the Complete Communicator for about three years. It includes the answering machine as well as the fax. I bought it after trying out the answering machine card. The problem that I found is that it the software release that came with the CCOM, the auto pickup was lost. One _must_ use the keyboard to initiate checking one's mail. If this feature has again returned, I would appreciate knowing about it. If not, then the use of CCOM in a multi extension environment can get pretty annoying. Jon (winnie@pucc.princeton.edu) ------------------------------ From: davep@carson.u.washington.edu (Dave Ptasnik) Subject: Re: SMDR Polling Device Recommendation Needed Date: 18 Dec 1993 18:39:46 GMT Organization: University of Washington tdawson@wheaton.wheaton.edu (Anthony Palmer Dawson) writes: > I need to acquire a device that can store SMDR information provided > from a 5ESS Generic 8 to my premises. This device must allow polling > via modem and/or ISDN. Any recommendations or pointers to vendors via > email will be greatly appreciated. Just get an old PC and put in a copy of procomm. Plug it into the 5ess, you may need a 355A adapter to get from 4 pair to RS232. Set procomm to direct connection, set up a "log", and your SMDR will be automatically stored as an ASCII file. You can then do periodic dumps by modem, maybe using something like Carbon Copy to make remote changes. We do this on campus, and ship the call records around on the campus ethernet hub. It can be set up to send out the calls in real time over the campus ethernet, should we desire that. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: rmintz@ecst.csuchico.edu (Rich Mintz) Subject: Re: Modem Communication on TTY Date: 18 Dec 1993 04:38:57 GMT Organization: California State University, Chico > This is all I write or read from the port. When I run this, all I > get is \r\nOK\r\n from the modem and then NO CARRIER. Try using your normal communications program to set your modem to ignore the carrier detect and DTR leads. You can do this with something like "AT &D&C&W", the &W saves the settings so they won't be lost when you reset the modem or power-down. If your modem is an older one that doesn't support the &D and &C commands, you could physically tie those RS232 leads high or low as appropriate (only if it's an external modem). Or, what might be easier if that's the case is to find the C code for your machine that will set the DTR on. There are tiny utilities made for running right at the DOS Prompt that might do the job for you (ie: you just type DTR ON or DTR OFF at DOS). Good luck! Rich ------------------------------ From: Liron Lightwood Subject: Re: Use of British Answering Machines in the US Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 21:02:46 EST jharuni@london.micrognosis.com (Jonathan Haruni) writes: > I sent an answering machine which I bought (and tested) in London to > someone in Israel and it didn't work there. He took it to a telephone > shop where they said British answering machines don't work in Israel > because Israel "uses the American system of ringing", whatever that > means, and declined to look at it. Given that American machines do > work in Britain, I have doubts. Israel is an interesting case, because for many/most people, the ringback tone is different to the ring tone (it was when I was last there in 1987). The ringback tone (the one you hear when dialling an Israli number) is similar to the American ring tone (i.e. ring ... ring ... etc). However, the ring tone (that rings the bell on the Israli phone) is identical to the UK ring tone (i.e. ring ring ... ring ring ... etc). When I was last there in 1987, this was true for most lines. In some (older?) exchanges however, the ring tone was the same as the ringback tone (i.e. ring ... ring ... etc). Liron Lightwood ------------------------------ From: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk (Richard Cox) Subject: Re: Use of British Answering Machines Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 16:23:00 jharuni@london.micrognosis.com (Jonathan Haruni) asked: > I sent an answering machine which I bought (and tested) in London to > someone in Israel and it didn't work there. He took it to a telephone > shop where they said British answering machines don't work in Israel > because Israel "uses the American system of ringing", whatever that > means, and declined to look at it. Given that American machines do > work in Britain, I have doubts. That would be about right. In the UK, there is a master socket with a single capacitor to filter off the ringing signal, which is distributed to all sockets on pin 3. Most UK answering machines ONLY look at pin 3 for their ringing signal. Others (and American answering machines) ignore pin 3 and look across the A/B pair (with their own capacitor to act as a DC filter). So either will work in the UK. However in the US and in Israel there *is* no pin 3 for the answering machine to look at. So while non-UK machines will work, any machine that *only* looks at pin 3 for a ring signal will think it's having a quiet life. Slap a UK master socket across the A/B pair, to "create" a pin 3, and your answering machine will once again answer calls. Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 956 700111 Fax: +44 956 700110 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail address: richard@mandarin.com - PGP2.3 public key available on request ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 13:47:31 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: 603-43x-xxxx Switch? In TELECOM Digest V13 #786 hutzley@ranger.enet.dec.com (Steve Hutzley) writes: > Recently, I saw an ad in the (Manchester, NH) {Union Leader} about New > England Telephone offering Caller ID. GREAT! At the bottom of the > 3/4 page ad in the paper was a list of exchanges that had this > service. It would have saved them page space if they would have listed > the exchanges that DIDN'T have the service. They listed towns in NH I > didn't even know existed. > I'm curious, if anyone knows what switch I might be connected to, and > if this switch has the capability to handle Caller ID . the list of > exchanges that I am interested in are: area code 603: *421, *425, *426, > 432, 434, 437. The three exchanges marked by '*', are brand new, and > have just appeared in the last two years. If anyone really wants the > list of exchanges that 'DO' offer caller ID, I will post them. One thing that you can do is try a local number such as 432-XXXX where XXXX is a number that may or may not tell you what type of switch you are on. If it is either a NT DMS-100 or AT&T 5ESS then the switch has the capability to carry Caller ID. I use exchange #-9901 (ex: 281-9901) for my read back. You can try that but there are probably many numbers that could do this. Another way would be to call your business office to see if they can tell you if the switch is capable of handling Caller-ID. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 04:40:35 PST From: Eric_N._Florack.cru-mc@xerox.com Subject: Re: Listening to Cellular Calls > Mr. Fischer, you obviously have no respect for a individual's privacy. > Is business that bad that you must "prostitute" your product on the > "net"? I can only hope that your privacy is invaded in a sufficiently > grotesque manner to educate you on it's value. > [Moderator's Note: It sounds to me like you are unhappy with the idea > of people listening to your cellular calls. PAT] Indeed it does, Pat. And I can understand the position. I tend to agree that such listening devices, meaning those sold specificly to listen to cellular calls, are somewhat less than ethical. At the same time, perhaps it`s time we started looking at this in a more realistic light. The communications act of 1933 lays all this out, in living color: The EM spectrum is the property of all the people ... and anything that is broadcast `in the clear' is fair game for reception, by ANY citizen. At the same time, it`s a crime to make use of any information gleaned from listening to things not intended for public consumption... Business transactions conducted over business radio are an example of such. I raise some of these issues in an extended post I wrote about a year or so ago in response to the paranoia being spread by the CPSR and the EFF, regards cryptography and the government ... and, if I`m not mistaken, people can find it in the Telecom and Risks archives by searching on the keywords "C.P.S.R.' and 'paranoia'. The short version of the argument is this: We create more damage, giving the impression that a 'line' is secure (by means of mere law) than we do by making people on Cell phones aware /up front/, that they should watch what they say, since the technology is such that the call can be monitored by anyone with a mind to. Matter of fact, given that about anyone with a mind could tap even a hard-wire phone without even a direct connection ... (inductance pickups ...) Perhaps no such system is secure, regardless of any law. Clearly, the law prohibiting listening to cellular calls is at best ineffective, and is, perhaps, counter-productive, to say nothing of it being in direct violation of the intent of the communications act of 1933. The government, by giving the impression that such law IS effective, is doing a dis-service to the public, and is perhaps creating more of a security problem than it`s solving. Perhaps we should educate the public that anything said on any electroninc path, particularly on a public access network, is /by nature/ not secure. That education process, and that shift of responsibility away from the government, and law, and back to the comm circuit user, where it belongs, is the biggest, and least expensive security boost our telecommunications system could ever have. What we have here is a case where our lawmakers have no idea what it is they are regulating, but they have to do SOMETHING to justify their positions of power. The result is predictable. /E ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 12:43:12 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Unix E-mail Packages Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Krause asked: > I was wondering what large scale e-mail packages people might be > running off of their Unix boxes out there. In probably 90% of all sites, the standard is Sendmail from U.C. Berkely, mainly because it is free. The typical release is Berkely Sendmail with the IDA patches. For sites that don't need the tremendous power of everyone's beloved sendmail and the adored "sendmail.cf" configuration files, :) there is a smaller and less complicated program called "smail". You can do an archie lookup and find either of these. Smail is also free. I personally have copies of the sources to both. Also, CERT has announced that there is a security hole in one of the latest releases of Sendmail. Sendmail can often be run "out of the box" as it is allegedly self configurable; the real problem is writing the sendmail.cf file which some sites don't even have to do that, as they can find a prewritten one. Smail is considerably smaller and provides less functions, but also uses fewer resources and less disk space. > I am interested in receiving information (product and vendor) on > e-mail packages that can be used in a corporate environment where > one RS/6000 will act as a central point and other RS/6000's will > dial into for mail. Mail could consist of regular mail as well as > binary files (ie. spreadsheets, designs, etc.). Well, you have four choices. One is to use a POP mail server, where sites call into a repository and download mail. Another is to have them use sendmail and SMTP if they are directly connected. Another is to have them use an IMAP service to request mail from the other site. Last choice is to install a mail server program which can be executed as if the user had logged in at a local terminal and read mail. One program for this purpose is called "Pine" which is a fairly nice ANSI full-screen mailer. You can get it via an archie search also. If the local sites are directly connected, running Sendmail on the main server and perhaps SMAIL or POP on the local sites might not be too bad a choice. POP is also good for dialup mail too. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #825 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10784; 19 Dec 93 1:58 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23374 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 22:36:29 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25296 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 22:36:01 -0600 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 22:36:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312190436.AA25296@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #826 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Dec 93 22:36:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 826 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Yellow/White Pages Copyrighted? - No! - (Mark Voorhees via Danny Burstein) Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This? (John R. Levine) Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This? (David Leibold) Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Paul Robinson) Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Wire Types and Crosstalk (Gary Breuckman) Re: Telephone Company Rate Survey (Paul Robinson) Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies (Thomas Chen) Re: AT&T 9100 Phone Review (Bill Seward) Re: Phone Line Teaming (Tony Harminc) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: Yellow/White Pages Copyrighted? - No! - Date: 18 Dec 1993 14:26:22 -0500 Passed along FYI to the list: From markvoor@MINDVOX.PHANTOM.COM Ukn Dec 18 13:52:16 1993 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 13:25:28 EST Sender: Computer-assisted Reporting & Research From: Mark Voorhees Subject: copy cats To: Multiple recipients of list CARR-L Re: copyright and yellow and white pages Enough people asked for copies of these articles, I decided to make them available for general consumption. I don't pretend to know whether they would apply to duplicating the {Washington Post's} job listings here. Source: Information Law Alert BELLSOUTH PLAYS TOUGH ON COPYRIGHTS (June 18, 1993) Two years after the Supreme Court limited copyright protection for directories and databases, BellSouth Corp. is working harder than ever to protect its flank. The company is vigorously defending its copyrights and trademarks in at least six suits. "They are taking positions not being taken by the other Bell operating companies," says Elliot Kaplan of Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, who is defending American Business Information against a BellSouth suit. Many directory publishers stopped pursuing copycats in the wake of the 1991 Supreme Court decision, Feist Publications Inc. v. Rural Telephone Co. The court ruled that a telephone book's copyright does not prohibit a competitor from copying the white pages' underlying facts. The directory served only 7,700 people in rural Kansas, but the ripples from the ruling have been far reaching, throwing out a long line of case law known as "sweat of the brow," which awarded copyrights on the basis of hard work alone. SECOND LOOK The Feist case has not, however, dissuaded BellSouth, which some observers say has more directory business to lose than other telephone companies. After the Feist decision, BellSouth won an 11th Circuit case upholding copyright protection for its yellow pages. The court ruled that Donnelly Information Publishing, Inc., had violated BellSouth's copyright by extracting key information for use in a competing publication. Even that case is now up for grabs. It was briefed and argued before the Feist decision, but decided afterward. After the issuance of the Feist decision, Donnelly asked to submit new briefs addressing the high-court ruling, but the circuit refused. The court is now taking a belated, second look. In November, one-and-a-half years after the Feist decision, the circuit accepted Donnelly's petition for an en banc hearing. Since the February hearing, both sides have been eagerly awaiting the outcome. Anthony Askew of Atlanta's Jones & Askew remains confident that his client, BellSouth, will prevail. The Feist decision confirmed copyrights for compilations, Askew says, so long as there is a modicum of originality in the selection, coordination, or arrangement of the facts. "We think there is a lot of creativity that goes in to the creation of yellow pages," Askew says. PICTURE TAKING The yellow-page publisher exercises originality in its selection of headings, placement of businesses under headings, and geographic scope, according to Askew. In his brief, Askew likens the process to a photographer snapping a picture of a moving train: "The changing business population of a city is like the train moving past the railroad crossing. The instant at which the photograph is taken is like a directory close date. The camera takes a snapshot of the train at that instant just as the directory represents a snapshot of the business population at the time of publishing the directory. The type of lenses on the camera is like the geographic scope of the directory." Donnelly's lawyers decline to comment on the case. But their briefs, prepared primarily by David Foster and Theodore Whitehouse of Willkie, Farr & Gallagher, argue that Askew is simply dressing up sweat of the brow in fancy clothing. Donnelly admits to copying names, addresses, and telephone numbers from BellSouth's directory. It also says it copied the nature of a company's business, but not the actual BellSouth headings -- something that BellSouth disputes. The Feist decision, according to Foster and Whitehouse's briefs, clearly permits the copying of all those elements. Even if Donnelly had copied the headings themselves, that too would be protected. BellSouth is trying to protect routine business decisions, such as defining a geographic region for a directory, according to Donnelly lawyers. The company "tries to disguise its sweat of the brow premise by reliance upon a theory of its own invention," according to a Donnelly brief. Under Donnelly's interpretation, it would be prohibited from actually photocopying BellSouth's yellow pages -- but not much else. STAKING THE FUTURE If the circuit rules in Donnelly's favor, Bell South has its bases covered. One of its suits -- against Southern Directories Co. -- alleges actual copying of display advertising. The suit also seeks common-law trademark recognition of the "walking fingers" graphic. Bell tried to register the walking fingers but was turned down by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. In a footnote, the board left open the possibility that the walking fingers might warrant common law protection. There's no harm in trying, as the saying goes. ------------------ cut here here---------------------- BYE BYE BAPCO; 11TH CIRCUIT KNOCKS OUT PROTECTION FOR YELLOW PAGES (October 8, 1993) The 11th Circuit has ruled that the yellow pages deserve about as much copyright protection as the white pages, which the Supreme Court has said is not very much. And so BellSouth Advertising and Publishing Corp., which has aggressively pursued copyright infringement cases, must move a marker from the win to loss column. In 1991, BellSouth won a ruling in the 11th Circuit finding that Donnelly Information Publishing, Inc., had violated its copyright. Donnelly had copied information from BellSouth's Miami yellow pages in order to develop sales leads to produce a competitive book (see June 18 issue). Between the time that case was briefed and decided, the Supreme Court ruled in a different case that a company could copy the underlying facts from the white pages of a competitor. In Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co., the high court said compilations of facts deserved only "thin" protection -- and only when the selection, arrangement, and coordination of facts was original. The case threw out the so-called "sweat of the brow" line of cases that rewarded hard work in the absence of creative expression. One of the leading advocates had been Anthony Askew of Atlanta's Jones & Askew, who represented BellSouth in this case. WHITE=YELLOW At the time, Donnelly's lawyers tried persuade the 11th Circuit to take briefs on the yellow pages cases in light of the white-page ruling. But the three-judge panel refused and ruled in BellSouth's favor. One and a half years later, in November 1992, the court decided to rehear the case en banc in light of the Feist ruling. And in September, it ruled, 7-1, that although the case "concerned a directory of a different color," the Feist ruling should still govern. BellSouth had tried to casts routine business decisions, such as the geographic scope of the listing in a book, as acts of originality, the court ruled. Even if Donnelly had copied the subject headings, which it denies having done, there would not have been a copyright violation, the court found. "BAPCO can claim no copyright in the idea of dividing churches by denomination or attorneys by area of specialty," wrote Judge Stanley Birch. FOLLOWING FEIST The decision "follows Feist -- pure and simple," says one lawyer familiar with the case. Judge Joseph Hatchett, a member of the original panel, dissented on the theory that Donnelly had actually copied original elements of the pages. The majority opinion, he says, "transforms the multi-billion dollar classified publishing industry from a business requiring the production of a useful directory based on multiple layers of creative decisionmaking, into a business requiring no more than a successful race to a data processing agency to copy another publisher's copyrighted work-product." BellSouth intends to ask the Supreme Court to hear this case, which is highly unlikely given the unanimous finding in Feist. Three other copyright cases involving BellSouth had been stayed pending resolution of the Donnelly case. Those cases involve companies that compile mailing lists. In at least one of them, BellSouth Advertising & Publishing Corp. v. EKI Inc. in federal court in Atlanta, BellSouth has asked that the stay be continued. voorhees reports 411 first street brooklyn, ny 11215-2507 Mark Voorhees 1-718-369-0906 (voice) markvoor@phantom.com 1-718-369-3250 (fax) ----------------- dannyb@panix.com adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability, intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 14:10 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This? Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Mobilnet. .. they are [apparently] offering a nationwide cellular service > which eliminates the need for fiddling about with roaming codes etc. There are about five different roaming systems in operation. The newer ones operate automatically. My system (NYNEX Boston) belongs to MobileReach which is supposed to deliver calls without my having to do anything. It runs at least from New Hampshire through Mass., R.I., Conn., downstate N.Y., down to northern NJ and probably farther. I don't know if it works; nobody's called me in the car yet when I was down that way. Based on the info in the {Cellular Roaming Guide}, it'll be a long time before there's any sort of universal roaming, automatic or not, because there are so many little carriers outside of large cities that don't belong to any of the roaming networks. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 18:03:00 -0500 From: djcl@io.org Subject: Re: Mobilnet - Do They Know This? I don't know the Mobilnet number, but a North American arrangement called Mobilink may be reached at 1 800 995.4000. I don't know if this Mobilink will be the same as Mobilnet (or maybe it's a competing group). Bell Mobility (Ontario and Quebec, Canada) is part of the Mobilink. David Leibold ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 11:35:10 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA "A. Padgett Peterson" wrote: > The following announcemet appeared in my November Southern Bell > bill: > "Effective December 1, 1993, Southern Bell will begin blocking > access by long distance companies to local calls. Under Florida > law, local telephone calls must be handled by the local exchange > telephone company only." Apparently their system is allowing people to use a carrier to make local calls. This probably applies to someone dialing 10xxx plus seven digits or 10xxx plus 1 and the ten digit number which is within the same LATA. > My concern is that I often go through my LDC to make a local call > when at a pay phone and do not have change (it is less than the > U$1.00-U$1.25 charged to make a collect local call). I called > Southern Bell and was told that the ruling only affects residences > but have not verified this as yet. As long as you are either going through a 1-800 number or 950-xxxx number, no matter what the local company does (unless they disable the keypad on payphones or remove it) it should not affect your access. Further, if you are using a company not in Florida, their rules wouldn't apply anyway, since you make a 1-800 number call to some place out of state, which is an interstate terminated call at the switch operated by that company. Their connection to the party you want is a separate interstate call from their switch to the party you are calling. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 93 07:35:50 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Local Telco Blocking Carriers In Volume 13, Issue 814 cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) writes: > How do you circumvent the local company? In PacBell territory, they > will not allow you to select a long distance company on a local call. > I can, however, use my long-distance calling card (AT&T, haven't tried > with another company) for local calls. These calls are billed by AT&T > at PacBells rates and the bill reads "Local Calls Charged to Your AT&T > Card." This is true in NYTel land also. However, I can use 1-800-CALL1-ATT or 1-800-COLLECT (MCI) (1+ not required, yet). The final option is 10698+0+XXX-YYYY also (698 translates to NYT) which will allow calls to anywhere that NYT has a presence, including small portions of Connecticut, Massachussetts and Pennsylvania plus the small local calling area dialable from AC 212 in Northern NJ. > If there is a way (besides the 1-800-CALLl-ATT method) to get AT&T for > local calls, I would rather do this, as their rates are lower than > those of Pacific Bell. Have you tried 10288 + 0 + ... ? Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 06:06:18 -0800 From: puma@netcom.com (Gary Breuckman) Subject: Re: Wire Types and Crosstalk In article laird@pasture.ecn. purdue.edu (Kyler Laird) writes: > On two-pair cable, I can't remember a time when the colors weren't > red, green, black, yellow. > Our house has cheapo flat cable (grrr!) that does a fairly efficient > job presenting line 1 computer sound to line 2. The computer room is > near the telephone cable entry jack. I was thinking I'd run another > cable to the box and wire the computer in directly, and leave the > other (two-line) phones to use the flat cable (for now). My guess is > that line 2 would cease to pickup the computer noise. Is this a bad > guess? The green-red-black-yellow cable IS the reason you can hear the computer on line 2. There could be other reasons too, like leakage from one line to the other in some equipment, but crosstalk between lines is one of the reasons that most new installations are going to PAIRED cable. There can also be noise pickup from external sources with non-paired cable, and it's not good for high-frequency signals (T1, 10BaseT, etc). The G-R-B-Y cable is NOT paired, the four wires are just strung down the cable without twisting them. If you put the computer on a separate cable be sure to also not put that line on the existing cables, you will still have the crosstalk, or replace the wiring. The correspondence between the old and new wires is ... pair 1 tip green white with blue stripe ring red blue with white stripe pair 2 tip black white with orange stripe ring yellow orange with white stripe pair 3 tip white with green stripe ring green with white stripe pair 4 tip white with brown stripe ring brown with white stripe Larger cables are grouped with five pairs to a group. The groups are white, red, black, yellow, violet and the pairs blue, orange, green, brown, slate within each group. puma@netcom.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 11:52:33 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Telephone Company Rate Survey Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA "Hansel E. Lee Jr." , writes: > I am conducting a rate survey of long distance companies. > Currently I have contacted: > All Net AT&T Cable & Wireless MCI Metromedia/ITT > Opticom Sprint US Long Distance > If you know the name and customer service number to any other long > distance companies... The largest local company is: Mid Atlantic Telecom of Washington DC 800 937 6891 I used to use their Voice mail service until the price went up. Very good, but I didn't use it enough to justify keeping it. Another national company is: Wiltel 800 324 2222 Here are some ones listed locally who have 1-800 numbers: Eastern Telecom 800 448 1301 EMI Communications 800 456 2001 LCI International (Also calls itself Long Distance Service, Inc) 800 296 0220 / 24 Hr Cust Svc 800 296 7828 Here are a few local ones: Executive Telecard, Rockville: 301 770 2029 Long Distance Alternatives, Potomac 301 948 2813 Long Distance Direct, Landover 301 925 8939 Metrocomm Long Distance, McLean 703 506 6850 U S Wats, Beltsville 301 595 3055 Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ From: tchen@sdesys1.hns.com (Thomas Chen) Subject: Re: Cable and Phone Monopolies Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:48:45 GMT Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc. In article , trenton@netcom.com (The CyberMonk) writes: > Perhaps this is a stupid question (it would not be the first time), > but *why* don't they simply allow competition for local cable access? > I read somewhere that in the few communities (in the US) that have > more than one local cable operator that there are more channels, > better service, and lover prices than elsewhere. > [Moderator's Note: Cable companies don't want competition any more > than the local telco wants competition. Like telco, the cable companies > have friends in high places. On top of that, many local governments receive revenue from cable companies that they don't really want to see true compeitition that would drive the price down and thus reducing their take. tom ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 13:59:32 EST From: Bill Seward Subject: Re: AT&T 9100 Phone Review rrb@deja-vu.aiss.uiuc.edu (Bill Pfeiffer) wrote: >> out of range notification; > You mention that you lose sylables at 300 feet, what sort of 'alert' > does it offer other than the obvious loss of transmission? Does it > hang-up when out-of-range? It has an audible tone for out of range, either on or off hook. If you are on the phone and walk out of range, you have about 30 seconds to move back in range, or it will hang up. >> I have tested it for range with the following results: I can get about >> 250 feet from the base with no noticable signal degredation on either >> end. I can get about 300 feet with acceptable degredation (the >> occassional lost syllable). At 375, I lose about every other syllable. >> All of these distances are witworld. > Here, again, I see this as poor. The Tropez has been tested by a > friend, in the middle of Chicago, with good trans) in any direction, > using built-in antennas in a single-story building (frame or brick). > A friend at a local Radio Shack has tested their phone from INSIDE a > building (also steel-framed) and could make and receive calls there > with no noticable interference. I'm not an EE wizard -- maybe mine is defective. However, I do know that battery charge/condition, overhead power lines, and a lot of other arcane things will have an effect such as a 110v line in the wall. If anyone else has a 9100 and has substantially surpassed my distances, I'd like to know. To pick a nit: a mile is 5280 feet. So could you friend talk in some distances an actual 1/2 mile (2640') >> but the handset is designed so that it is not really cradleable in >> the crook of your neck. Physically, it resembles a cellular handset >> in dimensions -- and I suspect they are not cradleable for a reason. > What reason would that be, Bill? It seems to me that the phone should > be as ergonomic (sp) as possible, No? Let's put it this way -- have you seen how most people drive, with maybe half the care they should use? And have you ever seen people driving, talking on their cell phone, and driving worse than the average idiot with a license? (I have -- regularly.) Now can you imagine ne, head tilted over (skewing their view) and driving? No thank you. It is thought that cradling a phone is a cause of nerve pinches in the neck area. So what is better -- a design that attempts to force you incorrect or dangerous use? Bill Seward SEWARD@CCVS2.CC.NCSU.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 00:02:56 GMT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Phone Line Teaming Kentucky Resources Council wrote: > I want to use a standard telco line to connect to my local schools -- > they will soon have local internet connections (a big deal in the > boonies!). What I really want is a means to team a second phone > numner onto the standard number. The second number needs a different > ring cadence so I can discriminate between the two numbers -- now > comes the fun part: I want to enable the second number from 4:30 pm to > 7:30; that way we can publish the second number and not endure data > calls during the school day. Anyone who can help me enable such a > system would be a minor hero in my book -- thanks for reading this. [Moderator's Note suggests using Radio Shack distinctive ringing box.] Another approach would be to have call forwarding installed on one only of the two distinctive ringing numbers on the line. During the hours you don't want data calls, you forward that number somewhere that won't bother anyone -- say a trunk or payphone that doesn't accept incoming calls. A data caller outside approved hours reaches a recording "the number you have reached is not equipped to receive incoming calls". On the way out the door at 4:30, you unforward the number, turn on the modem, and data calls are answered. Problems: - voice calls (on the non-data number) will be answered by the modem after hours. But maybe no one calls there after the school day? - Forwarding and unforwarding is fiddly and more error prone than turning a modem on and off. If the phone on that line has programmable buttons you could set it up to do the forward. Or the modem could do it. - Call forwarding is an ongoing monthly cost. But you don't have to pay for a distinctive ringing box. Make the tradeoff -- it depends on rates in your area. - Call forwarding may not be offered on just one of the numbers on a line by your telco. Here (Bell Canada territory) forwarding can apply to the first ("main") number, and any of the other numbers, but not to secondary number(s) alone. But of course what you think of as the main number can be what you tell Telco is secondary -- the only difference is the ringing cadence. Probably the distinctive ring box is the overall best solution -- this is just an attempt at lateral thinking ... Tony Harminc [Moderator's Note: The difficulty in forwarding the phone to 'some other phone which does not have incoming service' is that most inter- cepts these days do tell you the number you reached or attempted to reach. The caller would get a message saying, "The number you dialed, xxx-xxxx is not in service for incoming calls". This would lead to much confusion by people who somehow thought *they* had dialed it incorrectly and there would be people calling the operator to ask why when they dial one number they know is good they are getting connected to a totally different number, etc. What our correspondent must do is make this as transparent as possible to the users; they should not have to get involved asking questions about why the phone rings one place sometimes and another place other times, etc. All the user needs to deal with is that the phone will be answered by modem after a certain time of day and will ring unanswered at other times. Quite some time ago, I used to know a number which was on a centrex system and it (that line) was quite restricted. It could only call other extensions (no outgoing calls via dialing 9) and it could not get incoming calls except from other extensions. When you dialed the number from elsewhere, the intercept was one I have never received before or since: "The number you dialed, xxx-xxxx cannot be reached from outside the customer's premises." In other words, the customer can call himself, and that's it! :) A few times, I forwarded my line to it just for laughs, and when invariably someone trying to reach me would ask the operator to intervene and 'see what is wrong with his line', that recording would even baffle the IBT operators. To avoid confusion then, don't get other numbers or other people involved. I don't see why though our correspondent simply does not get a second independent line rather than try to work with distinctive ringing. It would make things so much simpler. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #826 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11262; 19 Dec 93 2:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08365 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:23:43 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07854 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:23:16 -0600 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 23:23:16 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Moderator Message-Id: <199312190523.AA07854@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #827 TELECOM Digest Sat, 18 Dec 93 23:23:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 827 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference (Michael S. Baum, Esq.) Re: Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call (Paul Robinson) Re: TDD Software Wanted (Joe Whalen) Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Stewart Fist) Re: Carrier For 800 Number? (Robert Cohen) Re: AT&T's New Facility (Dave Niebuhr) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 14:55:00 EST From: BAUM@HULAW1.HARVARD.EDU Subject: Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference WORLDWIDE ELECTRONIC COMMERCE: Law, Policy and Controls Conference ****************Program Details**************** Dear Colleague: Our world is getting smaller. Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), Electronic Mail (E-Mail) and other computer-based technologies (that collectively support Electronic Commerce) are drawing individuals and organizations closer together. However, these exciting developments also present significant challenges. Corresponding audit, controls, legal, policy and security issues pose potentially serious barriers to the rapid adoption and extensive use of Electronic Commerce. Worldwide Electronic Commerce will address the implementation and control issues inherent in applying Electronic Commerce to today's environment. The answers provided at this conference will address current problems as well as provide a foundation for dealing with these complex issues in the future. We have been fortunate to have secured an unusually qualified and internationally recognized faculty to share their experience, knowledge and theories on the wide range of issues identified in this brochure. We are equally pleased to have obtained a distinguished group of organizations who, in affiliation with this conference, are lending their considerable support. Please join us at this unique and ground breaking event which will be held on January 16-18, 1994 in New York City at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel. Michael S. Baum, Esq., Conference Chair M. Todd Ostrander, Conference Co-Chair WORLDWIDE ELECTRONIC COMMERCE CONFERENCE PUT ON IN AFFILIATION WITH: American Bar Association, Section of Science & Technology Centre for Commercial Law Studies, University of London Computer Law Association EDI Association of the United Kingdom EDP Auditors Association Harvard Law School John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University National Institute of Standards and Technology U.S. Council for International Business Data Interchange Standards Association Healthcare EDI Corporation International Union of Latin Notaries CONFERENCE AT A GLANCE SUNDAY, JANUARY 16TH - Registration 17:00 - 20:00 PRE-CONFERENCE TUTORIALS: 18:00 - 19:30 * Electronic Trade Overview for Beginners * Security and Audit Overview * A General Counsel's Perspective on Electronic Trade * Electronic Commerce Policy and Regulation 101 MONDAY, JANUARY 17TH - Registration 7:00 - 18:00 OPENING PLENARY: 8:00 - 8:50 SESSION 1: 9:00 - 10:20 * Will Legislation Keep Up with Electronic Trade? * Anatomy of a Model EDI Audit Program * Will Privacy Requirements Inhibit Electronic Commerce? * Clearing Houses and Electronic Commerce SESSION 2: 10:30 - 11:50 * U.S. Efforts in Coordinating Electronic Commerce Standards Policy * How to Audit a Third Party/Value Added Network * What is Cost Effective Commercially Reasonable Security? * Anticompetitive Restraints on Trade in Electronic Commerce LUNCH 12:00 - 13:30 SESSION 3: 13:30 - 14:50 * Trading Partner and Business Agreements in Electronic Commerce * Electronic Negotiability - What Scares the EDI Users Away? * INFOSEC Standards Coordination and Interworking * Time/Date Stamping - Options and Constraints SESSION 4: 15:00 - 16:20 * United Nations Electronic Commerce Initiatives * Directory control Issues in Electronic Messaging and EDI * Comparing Critical Cryptographic Algorithms and Standards * Financial Clearing Houses - a Foundation for EDI? SESSION 5: 16:30 - 17:50 * Model Electronic Payments Agreements * What to Save, When to Save It, and For How Long * Do "Smart Cards" Provide an "Ultimate" Control Solution? * The "FAST" Initiative - Business Trust in the Computer Era? TUESDAY, JANUARY 18TH - Registration 7:00 - 12:00 SESSION 6: 8:00 - 9:20 * Negotiating Electronic Trade Agreements * Back-Up, Archival and Contingency Planning Services * Security Policy in a Global Information Environment * Electronic Software Distribution (ESD) - a Pandora's Box? SESSION 7: 9:30 - 10:50 * Value Added Networks and Interconnect Agreements * Do Criminal Laws Really Protect Electronic Commerce? * Digital and Electronic Signatures and the Law * Accreditation and Certification - the New Frontier? SESSION 8: 11:00 - 12:50 * The ICC Electronic Commerce Initiatives * Admitting, Proving and Enforcing EDI Transactions * Re-engineering the Tax Filing Process * EDI Insurance - the Next Control Approach? LUNCH: 12:00 - 13:30 SESSION 9: 14:00 - 15:20 * Central and Eastern European Electronic Trade * The Role and Future of Notaries in Computer-Based Commerce * Will Healthcare Reform Profoundly Reshape EDI Law, Policy, and Controls? * The Uses of Escrow in Electronic Commerce SESSION 10: 15:30 - 16:50 * Who Owns the Standards, Functionality and Systems? * Risk Analysis in Electronic Trade * Judicial EDI * EDI Translation Software Control and Legal Considerations CONFERENCE PROGRAMMING COMMITTEE: Robert Barger, Esq., Section of Science and Technology, American Bar Association Michael S. Baum, Esq., Independent Monitoring, Conference Chair Susan Caldwell, Executive Director, EDP Auditors Association Rachel Foerster and Garren Hagemeier, Healthcare EDI Corporation Mark L. Gordon, Esq., Computer Law Association Jerry Mechling, Ph.D. and Tom Fletcher,Ph.D., Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Mario Miccoli, Natariat, Unione Internazionale Del Notariato Latino Professor Charles R. Nesson, Harvard Law School M. Todd Ostrander, EDI Program Manager, Egghead Software, Conference Co-Chair Chris Reed, Esq. and Ian Walden, Ph.D., Centre for Commercial Law Studies, University of London Peter Robinson and Bruce Wilson, U.S. Council for International Business Roy Saltman, National Institute of Standards and Technology In Memory of the Late Professor Donald Trautman, Harvard Law School SUNDAY, JANUARY 16TH: PRE-CONFERENCE TUTORIAL EVENING SESSIONS The following tutorials provide newcomers to electronic trade with an overview of the concepts, technologies, and business practices that will make the conference more meaningful. These pre-conference sessions are scheduled from 18:00 - 19:30, January 16th, so that they will not interfere with the regular conference sessions. ELECTRONIC TRADE OVERVIEW FOR BEGINNERS An overview of "Electronic Trade" and how it applies to the business environment of the '90's & the 21st century. You will learn about the history and state of electronic commerce, including EDI, E-Mail, and other enabling computer-based trade technologies and the components necessary to implement these technologies successfully in your industry. Additionally, this session will provide an overview of electronic commerce-relevant aspects of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), United Nations/EDI for Administration, Commerce and Trade (UN/EDIFACT) and International Standards Organization (ISO) standards development processes, how they affect you, and important differences that multi-national companies will likely encounter while implementing them. SECURITY AND AUDIT OVERVIEW The basic control structures and security guidelines for an electronic trade program including cryptographic and non-cryptographic controls will be discussed in this tutorial session. This session also provides the 'non- auditor' with a description of the unique characteristics of auditing in an electronic trade environment and an understanding of how auditors must contribute to the electronic commerce environment. A GENERAL COUNSEL'S PERSPECTIVE ON ELECTRONIC TRADE Corporate counsel are increasingly called upon to respond quickly and effectively to the demands of accelerating electronic trade implementation programs. Veteran corporate counsel will summarize the critical responsive actions they have taken, and provide perspectives on how they navigated and climbed the electronic commerce learning curve. This session will provide the electronic commerce neophyte general counsel with helpful hints for making the most of the conference. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE POLICY AND REGULATION 101 The policy and regulatory issues affecting electronic commerce continue to grow without an end in sight. As a primer for an enriching Worldwide Electronic Commerce conference, this session identifies and explains the critical policy and regulatory building blocks (and road blocks) that electronic commerce professionals simply cannot avoid. It also surveys the "tools" that are used in policy development and implementation. This session provides a useful foundation for many of the policy-oriented sessions. REGISTRATION INFORMATION HOTEL & AIRLINE INFORMATION American Airlines is offering discounted air fares for the Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference. Arrangements may be made by calling American Airlines at 1-800-433-1790 and referencing "Star" Code S1814P7. Continental Airlines is also providing discounted air travel for the Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference. To make reservations, call 1-800-468-7022. Please reference Identification Code ZAB58. International travelers: please contact your local Continental phone number for specially discounted fares. For this conference, Continental Airlines has waived the need to stay over a Saturday night to obtain the lowest possible fare. The beautiful Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in the heart of New York City will be the site of the Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference. This prestigious internationally-acclaimed hotel provides the finest in accommodations and is offering a special room rate of $159 to all conference attendees. Reservations can be made by calling 1-212-355-3000. CONFERENCE HIGHLIGHTS INTERNATIONAL SCOPE: Most conference sessions will include one or more persons from a country other than the United States, or one or more representatives from international organizations, to provide a diversity of perspectives and experiences. CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS: Conference papers of all sessions will be bound and distributed to all participants. GROUP & STUDENT DISCOUNTS: Discounted registration fees will be offered to companies sending three or more individuals and to qualifying students. Call: 1- 214-516-4900 for more information. CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION: For information concerning C.L.E. points, call 1-214-516-4900. HOW TO REGISTER REGISTRATION FEE: $550 total conference registration fee. BY MAIL: Completed forms must be accompanied by a money order, check, or credit card number (American Express, MasterCard, or Visa). All checks should be made payable to Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference, P.O. Box 743485, Dallas, Texas 75374, USA. BY FAX: Completed forms, when paying be credit card, may be faxed to 1-214-424-0562. BY PHONE: Call 1-214-516-4900 for payment by credit card or questions about the conference. BY E-MAIL: Worldwide Electronic Commerce can also be reached on Compuserve at 76520,3713. REGISTRATION FORM: To register, please print out a copy of the form below, complete it by typing or printing the registration information and return one completed form with payment for each registration. Mail to P.O. Box 743485, Dallas, TX 75374, USA or Fax to: 1-214-424-0562. _____ I am registering for the Worldwide Electronic Commerce Conference (Total: $550) _____ I plan on attending one of the Pre-Conference Tutorial Sessions. (Select one below): _____ Electronic Trade Overview _____ Security & Audit Overview _____ General Counsel's Perspective _____ Electronic Commerce Policy A check is enclosed for $___________ -OR- Please bill my:___VISA ___MasterCard ___American Express Card No.______________________ Exp. Date_________________ Name on Card_____________________________________________ Signature________________________________________________ Registrant's Name________________________________________ Title____________________________________________________ Preferred First Name for Badge___________________________ Company / Organization___________________________________ MS / Dept._______________________________________________ Address__________________________________________________ City________________________ State______ Zip_____________ Telephone________________________ Fax____________________ Do You Require Special Handicapped Access? ____Yes ____No Will you be staying at the Waldorf? ____Yes ____No Final agenda subject to change, especially as the program expands and additional speakers are added. CANCELLATIONS must be received in writing and postmarked no later than December 22, 1993 to receive a 50% refund of the paid registration. No refunds will be issued after December 22, 1993, regardless of when the registration is received. NO SHOWS are liable for the entire conference fee. SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS for the handicapped will be made if requested in advance. To make a request, contact the "Conference Coordinator" at 1-214-516-4900. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 12:26:15 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Restrictions on Repeat Call and Return Call Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Carl Moore , writes: > Arriving with my Delaware phone bill, and I have put some comments > in in brackets; *69 for return call and *66 for repeat call, with > 11 replacing the * if used from rotary phone: > Some phones may not respond properly to the Repeat Call and Return > Call special rings. A local or toll charge may apply for calls > made with Repeat Call and Return Call. [What is the special ring > like, and what does such improper response consist of? I guess the > internal signal is different in some way.] The standard ring on a phone is one six second ring. The "return call ring" is three one second rings. Your phone or answering machine may take this as one ring or as three, and if you have your answering machine set at three rings, may pick up the phone. > Repeat Call and Return Call do not work with calls made to most > 700, 800, and 900 numbers. [What are the exceptions, and what > happens if you attempt this and it indeed does not work?] There is no means on "return call" to identify where the call is coming from unless the call on every single switch it traversed, ran on SS7 switches. Nothing else provides the information to tell where the call came from. There is no means on "repeat call" to put through a call to a normally busy line unless the local switch can query the destination to see if it is busy without ringing the destination. If you try to use these services on numbers that aren't accessible, you get a recording saying they can't do it. > You can request your local business office to restrict Repeat Call > and Return Call from your telephone line at no extra charge. [What > happens if such a restriction exists at the receiving end of your > intended call? Or does this mean that if I have such a > restriction, I cannot use these features?] It means if you have such a restriction, you cannot use these features. These are normally sold in two flavors: pay per view and per month. Per month means you pay a charge for usage during the month -- here in Maryland it's $4 a month, each -- and you can use it as many times as you want. "Pay per view" means you pay 75c each use with no maximum, e.g. if you used it 100 times during the month, expect to be billed $75.00. Its operation varies depending on where you are and how smart the switch is. In Pat Townson's Chicago area, if you try to repeat call to the number you are at, it calls you to tell you the number is clear, then finds it busy when you answer, then when you hang up it calls you to tell you it's clear, then finds it's busy when you answer, and so on for the next 30 minutes. Here if you try that, and the number is still busy when you pick up the phone, it informs you that it has cancelled your request because the number has become busy while waiting for you to answer the phone. I did some interesting tests on Caller ID and repeat call/return call that I'll probably mention later. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM [Moderator's Note: It has been repaired here also, and now it only attempts once to connect you with yourself. It finds your line free and calls you; then once it gets you on the line of course it finds your line busy and advises you it is cancelling the request. I sort of liked it better before it was debugged. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Joe Whalen Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted Date: Sat, 18 DEC 93 22:10:44 EST Organization: Delphi Internet Michael, You are probably aware that TDD's normally use the Baudot code instead of ASCII, like computers do. I have not ever found software that can send Baudot code. You best bet is talking to ASCII TDD's. Fortunately, most of the newer TDD's can be switched from one protocol to the other. :) Joe ------------------------------ From: Stewart Fist <100033.2145@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 02:31:00 GMT Dr Weiyun Yu writes about fax over Australian international cable systems: > Correct me if I am wrong. Exactly the opposite happens. > The 0015 lines primarily use the satellite route while > the 0011 numbers has the cable route when ever possible > to provide better voice quality (no echoes). > Apparently the fax machines are immune to echoes. That's not my understanding; I checked with Telstra's National Network Information Centre. Fax only goes over satellite when nothing else is available. In fact, the main problem that fax machines face is echo, especially on modern international circuits where the line quality is now very good (and so, therefore, are the echos). It is essential that echo-cancellation be in place or multiple errors in the receiver will likely cause the sender to retransmit the document, again, and again, and again (One morning I had five copies of an MCI 15 page press release). The problem is that the echo cancellation circuits get turned off by the 2100Hz tone in the handshaking routine. And since this is a half-duplex system (without Echoplex), cancellation needs to turn back on again to handle the 9.6k data rate. This would normally be forced by a deliberate pause following the handshake transmission (part of the fax standard), but with high-quality circuits and a bit of echo on the line, the pause is camoflaged by noise and the echo-cancellation stays locked out, which then creates problems during the transmission. This happens even on the 0015 international fax lines. Over satellites, fax has problems with protocol collisions during the turn-around at the end of each page, also, because of the delayed echo. However fax is used over satellites to the Pacific Islands (where there's nothing else available) so it obviously works, but it is not desirable. Speech interpolation and bit-stealing are however, the main reasons why special cable circuits are designated for fax. The DCME/DCMS interpolation systems tend to clip the transmissions as they switch in and out, and cause errors, and the bit-stealing during peak load periods on international circuits causes a quality loss which the fax often won't tolerate. About 80% of Australia's voice traffic and 100% of its fax traffic goes by cable to the USA and Europe, I am told. This is up from about 50% for voice and fax, a few years ago when satellite was more in vogue and before the Pacific fibre systems became operational. ------------------------------ From: robc@netcom.com (Robert Cohen) Subject: Re: Carrier For 800 Number? Organization: Calif. Home for the Unruly Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 00:25:35 GMT Gerry, Simply put, when I dial +1800.950.3535 from San Francisco, Microsoft Sales answers. Robert Cohen robc@netcom.com [Moderator's Note: But Bob, he was not asking who the customer was with the number, but *what carrier* they were using. For that info, I still suggest whoever handles telecom for Microsoft Sales is going to have to discuss that with him. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 02:42:43 GMT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: AT&T's New Facility jbutz@hogpa.ho.att.com (John J Butz) > Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I traveled south on I-95 from NYC to > Washington, DC. After emerging from the tunnel in Baltimore, the AT&T > cable laying ships are visible from the "port-side" in the harbor. On > Friday morning, both vessels were docked. However, on the Sunday > return trip, only one boat was still in port. Perhaps to Long Island > is where the second ship went? It's possible since the cable laying is to begin shortly. I was in Maryland last year (Laurel and Columbia) and saw the ships on both drives to there and back. > I've been sailing on the Great South Bay out of Islip and it looks > deep enough to handle an ocean going vessel. Also, the Robert Moses > causeway bridge to Fire Island would definitely provide clearance for > a fairly tall ship. However, I've been fluke fishing enough times to > tell you that most of the Great South Bay is pretty shallow. Dave, > perhaps you could go on a recon-mission and let us know if the AT&T > ship is there? 8-) The bay is about ten feet deep, at most except for the intercoastal waterway. If AT&T is smart, that's the way to come into the bay. Moriches Inlet is closer to the crossing point but it has been officially closed to traffic due to the offshore shoaling. Boats still use it though. There's still one more bridge to sail under, Smith Point, in Shirley where the cable will cross the bay. A large, ocean-going vessel shouldn't be needed for this part of the operation. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #827 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16697; 19 Dec 93 19:29 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06268 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 16:03:31 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26480 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 16:03:02 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 16:03:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312192203.AA26480@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #828 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Dec 93 16:03:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 828 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Calling a PBX and Billing (Neil R. Henry) Caller-ID: Southern Bell Changes Rates (A. Padgett Peterson) Future of North American Numbering Plan (Robert L. McMillin) LD Rates From "Wholesale Club" (Richard Layman) ATT, MCI, Sprint: Who is Really the Cheapest? (Rudolf Usselmann) 10xxx Dialtone (was Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D (Paul Robinson) Re: Two Cell Phones With the Same ESN (Lars Nohling) Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Charles McGuinness) Re: Cable Channels (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (A. Padgett Peterson) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Richard Cox) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Darren Ingram) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Gordon Grant) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Liz Auchinvole) Re: Inexpensive (Cheap ?) Modem Part II (A. Padgett Peterson) Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Steve Cogorno) Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number (Anthony D. Vullo) Re: 1-800 Caller ID (Dave Levenson) Re: Book Review: "The Smiley Dictionary" by Godin (Rodolfo Paiz) Re: Are Local Calls Kept on Record? (Gordon Croft) Re: Fax Networks (Steve Elias) Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage (Henry Mensch) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nhenry@netcom.com (Neil R. Henry) Subject: Calling a PBX and Billing Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:29:05 GMT I have a question for the collective net wisdom. I am doing a good deal of telephone work recently and am tracking the times and lengths of calls for clients. When I call a "direct number" at a large organization (through a PBX but direct to their desk), when do I begin to pay for the call? I hear the initial ring and then the diverted ring to voice mail. Do these make a difference? Does the PBX pick up my call and then ring its lines or does it work as its own switch? Does it mimic a switch to start billing when the line is picked up? I am on a nodding aquaintance with SS7 so I can handle the big words and acronyms. Thanks for any clarification. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Dec 93 08:01:14 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Caller-ID: Southern Bell Changes Rates As you may know from previous postings, Southern Bell was charging U$7.50/month for residential Caller-ID service. With this month's bill I see that it is now U$6.00/month for basic Caller-ID and U$7.50 for number and name. They automatically changed my charge to the lower figure. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Future of North American Numbering Plan Organization: Surf City Software/TBFW Project Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 14:13:34 GMT I'm looking for a document that contains the future plans for the North American Numbering Plan. I tried looking in the Telecom Archives, but didn't find anything satisfactory. But before you say to me, "You need the history.of.area.code.splits file", please know that doesn't have quite what I want. I would like to know the status of Bellcore's proposals for 7D or 10D only dialing nationwide, as well as the proposed upcoming area code splits. Now ... who can help? Robert L. McMillin | Surf City Software | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Dude! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 12:36:00 EST From: Richard Layman Subject: LD Rates From "Wholesale Club" On Monday I received a direct mail package from "Long Distance Wholesale Club" 1-0-297-1 offering savings of 10-30% off "ATT, MCI, etc." Of course, their mailing didn't list the specific rates and I called. After telling the clerk repeatedly that I didn't want the pitch, just the rates, he gave 'em to me. Mileage 8-5 5-11 nite 1-55 .189 .12 .11 56-124 .198 .13 .12 125-925 .207 .14 .13 926+ .16 .14 .13 For day calls, that isn't bad, especially because my volume isn't big enough to justify an account with a WilTel broker and the like. I don't know if they provide service beyond DC, MD, and VA. Their number is 703-243-4600. ------------------------------ From: rudi@netcom.com (Rudolf Usselmann) Subject: ATT, MCI, Sprint: Who is Really Cheapest? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 08:16:30 GMT OK, so now I'm getting calls on a weekly basis, asking to switch. And each of them has the cheapest rate ;). Anybody have a *total* and *complete* understanding of rates and services? Any kind of performance review? I do a lot overseas (Europe and Pacific Rim) calling. I need clean lines for mostly local high sepeed (14.4kboud) modem connections -- which is pobably handled by my local carier anyway (PacBell). Actaully I need good (clean) lines for long distance too, since I do alot faxing (mostly 9600bd). So, can any kind soul help me? Pleeeaaseee?! Thanks, rudi rudi@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Who is cheapest and who is best is purely an applications thing; there are programs available for PBXs which claim to examine every possible factor involved (time of day, distance, etc) and make a decision call by call and carrier by carrier on how to route the traffic of the moment. Most of us don't have the volume of traffic to warrant that, nor the resources and time to continue studying the matter indefinitly, so we tend to pick and choose based on what sounds good at the time. Perhaps it is a premium being offered (modem, cash, etc) or perhaps it is the rate to a specific point at a specific time. Then we decide to examine the quality of the transmission, and realize the best long distance carrier (whoever that may be) is only as good as the caller and called party's central offices. This is sort of like the analogy that the chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Choose all the long distance companies you want; you won't have the option of selecting a local telco anytime soon, yet we still talk on the same instrument over the same pair of wires. A fellow wrote a book several years ago published by the Telecom Library (Harry Newton's organization in New York City) in which over several hundred pages he examined all the long distance carriers available at that time. He laid out all the rates, terms and conditions for service, etc. I wish I could remember his name and the name of his book. It got rather technical in places and the final conclusion the reader had to reach after reading it all? What is *your* specific application? Is your traffic great enough that it really matters? A few general rules of thumb might be: Do you make lots of daytime calls and very few nighttime calls? Then you want a plan which gives you a flat rate per minute unless your calls are mostly to nearby out of state points. Mostly nighttime calls? Then you do not want flat rate since those are biased in favor of daytime users. Instead, you want something which is time of day and distance sensitive. You'll have a big savings on your short calls to nearby points. Are your calls very very short in duration? Then you want a carrier who will bill in six second (or less) increments. If the carrier has a monthly fee in addition to call charges, can you justify or amortize that monthly fee in a short time each month and still save money? Would you be better off with a carrier who charges more per minute but bills in shorter increments, etc? And on and on it goes. You tell me who is best. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:29:08 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: 10xxx Dialtone (was Re: Roch Tel 716 Goes From 1 + 7D to 7D Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Al Varney , writes: > Note these shorthands: > 00 = 10XXX+0# IXC operator > 0# = LEC operator > Also, 10XXX+# is cut-thru to IXC dial-tone (sorta like > 950-0XXX). There is no shorthand for this access, since '#' by > itself is an error. This is a special feature and is not available everywhere. Here is what happens on calls made from from Montgomery County, MD: 10000#: (A known invalid 10xxx code). Looooong pause. Click. "We're sorry, your call did not go through. Will you please try your call again." Message does not repeat. 10222#: Several seconds delay. "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please, check the number and dial again. 2CG." 10333#: Immediate click. "Your call cannot be completed as entered. Please check the number and try your call again, or call customer service. 44 230. " Message is not repeated. The voice appears to be Sprint's "Regular" error message woman. 10288# and 10732#: Several seconds delay. "We're sorry, due to telephone company facility trouble your call cannot be completed at this time. Will you try your call again later?" 10444#: Immediate click. "33-3. We're sorry, the number you have dialed is invalid. Please check the number to make sure you have used the correct area code or call directory assistance in the city you wish to reach." Where it doesn't say, the message is repeated at least once. Where it says the message is not repeated, it either goes to reorder (fast busy) after the recording or dead silence for ten seconds. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 10:05 EST From: Lars Nohling Subject: Re: Two Cell Phones With the Same ESN If I read the FCC Quote correctly it is unlawful to change a phone's ESN number. Motorola has a procedure that transfers an ESN from one flip phone to another so that a defective phone can be replaced without having to notify the carrier. It sounds like this violates the FCC rules? Lars Nohling lnohling@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not really, because other parts of the FCC regulations address the matter of what is called 'type acceptance' and who is or is not authorized to construct a transmitter and put it on the air. Motorola holds licenses from the FCC saying that their products have met 'type acceptance'. They are authorized to build and service radio equipment. ESNs have to be originated somewhere; the government does not create the ESN nor do the carriers. Motorola, as the maker of the phone originates the ESN and then advises the carrier what it is (through the registration process when a phone is purchased and put in use for the first time.) Please note also that when a firm like Motorola swaps out a bad phone for a good one under warranty for example and re-uses the ESN in the process, they are NOT permitted to return the old phone to the customer as part of the contract they have with the carrier. And despite what they say about 'not having to bother notifying the carrier', what they mean is the end-user customer does not have to bother with this. The carrier does get notified by Motorola, but it is just a paperwork transaction. The law was intended to address the cellphone phreaks who rarely are authorized to modify the phone in the first place, and never remember to complete the paperwork part (smile) ... if you get FCC authorization to build/repair cellphones and a contract or understanding with the carriers regards same, you'll be lawfully entitled to swap out ESN's also. And I dare say that if you have such authorization and decide to sneak through a few 'side jobs' for a phriendly phreak which get traced back to you, your license or authorization will be yanked as fast as you can snap your fingers. Motorola, Radio Shack, Cobra, Uniden and the others are not going to jeopardize their licenses which are worth a slight fortune to play games with ESN's. PAT] ------------------------------ From: marks!charles@jyacc.jyacc.com (Charles McGuinness) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 17:27:20 EST Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) A. Padgett Peterson writes that he thinks that there is not much of a logical reason for a 500 channel system. Specifically: > The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think > "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad > enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now > requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for > the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel > listing ? I think the perspective is wrong. It's not that a system where you have to press "upchannel" 500 times to loop around is going to be a success, but a system where I get to choose which 40 (or whatever) channels are on display instead of the cable company will be. For example, the city I live in has quite a heavy population of native Italian speakers; no doubt, they would appreciate the addition of some Italian channels. I, on the other hand, would find no value in that, but would be thrilled to get BBC and perhaps some other european channels. When you add up the individual choices of all of us, suddenly 500 channels sounds like too few, not too many. I don't want 500 channels; 40 or so will do. But I want to pick the 40! charles ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Dec 93 08:09:27 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Re: Cable Channels (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) From: UVS1::"kindred@telesciences.com" 12-DEC-1993 23:17:34.13 > channels, it is quite possible that we each want 9 DIFFERENT channels. > The advantage of a "500" channel system would be that each of us can > select what we want, without preventing our neighbor from doing the > same. Hopefully the implementation of these new systems would allow > us to pay for what we wanted, and let us leave the rest behind. From what I have seen, the delta cost between 1 channel and 500 is essentially zero. The hard part will be in knowing what is on. It is easy to set a modern television to simply skip the unwanted channels, the hard part is in knowing what channel to turn on when. Unless some sort of tailoring of the "preview guide" is possible or an intelligent "TV-Guide" becomes available (weekly download?), the choices will simply overload most people. Warmly, Padgett ------------------------------ From: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk (Richard Cox) Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:00:30 GMT zarko@genmagic.genmagic.com (Zarko Draganic) asked: >> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing >> in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this? Almost. The change is scheduled for June 1994 (which will be the start of the permissive period); the old dialling will be turned off in April 1995. >> Right now I believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London. Correct. >> What's it changing to? 001 (i.e. 00+ CCITT country code) >> Why? Standardisation with the rest of Europe (and, ultimately, most of the rest of the world, apart from North America !) UK internal area codes will be changing at the same time. With a few specific exceptions, they are to be prefixed with a "1". i.e. London (currently +44 71) will become +44 171 Richard Cox, Mandarin Technology, Cardiff (richard@mandarin.com) Voice: +44 956 700111; Fax +44 956 700110: These numbers will NOT be changing in 1995! ------------------------------ From: Darren Ingram Reply-To: satnews@cix.compulink.co.uk Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? Date: 19 Dec 1993 09:01:05 GMT > I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing > in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this? Right now I > believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London. What's it > changing to? Why? How long is the phase-out period? Correct. The UK will be harmonizing with Europe, so that the international access code will be 00. It is part of the PhoneDay project, which will also see a renumbering for *ALL* UK numbers and a recoding for five cities. Darren Ingram: (e-mail istserv@orbital.demon.co.uk and type 'subscribe satnews YOUR NAME' for satellite news worldwide. ------------------------------ From: gg@jet.uk (Gordon Grant) Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? Organization: Joint European Torus Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 10:40:56 GMT In Clive D.W. Feather writes: > Quoth Zarko Draganic: >> I heard that the international direct dialing scheme will be changing >> in the U.K. on Easter 1994. Can anyone confirm this? Right now I >> believe you dial 010 +1 to reach the USA from London. What's it >> changing to? Why? How long is the phase-out period? > Last I heard, it's been put back to Easter 1995. The IDD code 010 is > changing to 00 to bring it into line with most countries, and at the > same time a 1 is being prefixed to all fixed area codes (so +44 923 > ... becomes +44 1923) but not special area codes like 831 (allocated > to my mobile carrier) or 800 (free calls). > There is no phase-out period -- it's a straight cutover. Wrong! Both BT and Hg are allowing an eight month "Parallel running period" from the 1-Aug-1994 to Easter 1995. This applies to both the fixed location area codes and the international prefix. I have checked this information with the Hg changeover help desk on 0500 04 1995 (this number is only available from within the UK). After checking and ringing me back I was assured that the emergency number was not changing at the same time. Now I thought it was moving from 999 to 112. Anyone know when that's going to happen. BTW for overseas readers: Hg == Mercury Communications Ltd gg@jet.uk Gordon Grant Jet Abingdon OX14 3EA UK Voice +44 235 464792 Fax +44 235 464404 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 11:00:50 BST From: liz.auchinvole@aea.orgn.uk Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? The number change in the UK does not take place until 'APRIL 1995'. The international dialing code will then be 00 1 from the UK to the USA instead of 010 1 as now. Liz Auchinvole AEA Technology Harwell Laboratory ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 12:04:11 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Inexpensive (Cheap ?) Modem - Part II A likely factor in the 144 price erosion is the COMDEX introduction of a slew of v32ter 19,200 modems ranging in price from $229 (quoted for Bay Connection Inc. Spectra-Com i192MX internal for PC in PC-Week) up. This is going to rapidly erode the price of "lesser" modems. Still in the wings are the vFast 28.8 modems. However I suspect that @ U$99.00, a 144 external will still find a lot of uses if the low price does not mask any other deficiencies. For reading E-Mail and telecommuting even 9,600 is "fast enough" IMHO. Seems the MACWarehose is not the only outlet for the U$99.00 14.4 FaxModem. The have a sister organization named (surprise) the PC Warehouse also in Lakewood, NJ (thought so as soon as I saw the girl on the cover of the catalogue). For those who might prefer PC cables and software, try calling 800.367.7080. One correction to my previous posting -- apparently the modem is made Prometheus Products in Tustin, Oregon and not Practical Peripherals. I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has more information about the SIERRA chip particularly the CALLER-ID function commands (both AT#CID=? and AT%CCID=? give ERROR). The major caveat seems to be that it requires class 2 FAX software and will not work with class 1. (Lacking proper software, I still have not tried this part but the AT+F commands seem to work properly). Warmly, Padgett PS: I have no connection with any of the above other than having bought one. ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1993 11:31:21 PST > [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide > a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of > non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide > free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it. PAT] Are you sure? PacificBell's intercept message on temporary disconnects says "this phone cannot place calls except to 911 and Pacifc Bell Business offices." However, this may be PacBell or CPUC policy. Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is apparently their policy to leave phones connected during a temporary 'disconnect' and continue to provide them with dialtone and limited calling privileges. On the other hand, when Illinois Bell cuts you off for non-payment, they refuse you any dialtone at all. If you go off hook, you'll get the battery and that's all. You reach *no one*. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 10:48 EST From: Anthony D. Vullo <0003250251@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Serial Number In V13 #801, we are confronted with: > [Moderator's Note: Landline telcos are under no obligation to provide > a connection to 911 if your service was otherwise cut for reasons of > non-payment or fraud. Neither do cellular carriers have to provide > free air time to reach 911 to someone who won't/can't pay for it. PAT] Pat, I've experienced several instances in my travels, where I've attempted to call 911 from my mobile phone to report a disabled car on the side of a highway, only to find that I was out of range. Most times, I found that I could switch to the other system (I have one account on one system) to make the call. I think that it is in the public interest for the carriers to connect emergency calls, even when no account exists. The analogy with disconnected landline service shouldn't carry here. Regards and Happy Holidays, Tony Vullo (No disclaimers needed when you speak honorably.) [Moderator's Note: I agree with your public interest theory, sort of, but what you did on the highway is nothing that anyone with cellular service can't do, i.e. change the A/B switch and make a call on the competitor's system when roaming. The only time I know of that you cannot go back and forth between A/B is when you are in your home territory. There, you have to specifically register with one or the other. Once you start roaming, neither of the carriers where you are at is going to know who you are; either or both is going to automatic- ally extend you the courtesy of one call while they validate your ESN and cellphone number with your home carrier. Now when they find out (through the validation process) that you are from the wrong side of the A/B divider, you'll likely get hassled on your second and subse- quent calls. But I don't think it is necessarily 911 they are giving you as a courtesy, it is that first call so you are not sitting there wasting your time while they do a validation check. The cell companies here also give 911 free of charge regardless of your credit status, and it is likely if Illinois Bell ever gets to the point they leave your line live during a suspension they will also provide calls to the business office and 911 during that interim. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: 1-800 Caller ID Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 06:19:16 GMT In article , Pat writes: [regarding ANI delivery on 800 calls] > [Moderator's Note: Just call the carrier handling your 800 service > and tell then you want automatic number identification displayed in > real time as calls are received. If they can't do it, you will need > to switch your service to some carrier -- such as AT&T -- who can. > You will *not* like the price they charge you for it. By comparison, > Caller-ID on a regular POTS line is quite cheap. PAT] U.S. Sprint charges $0.01 per call for real-time ANI delivery as part of their Clarity(tm) bypass 800 service. There is a one-time charge of $500 or so to activate the feature. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well as I said, you won't like the price they charge you for it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rpaiz@husc9.harvard.edu (Rodolfo Paiz) Subject: Re: Book Review: "The Smiley Dictionary" by Godin Date: 19 Dec 93 07:25:21 GMT Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts Rob Slade writes: > For even slightly more serious use, stick with Sanderson and > Dougherty. And we get this ... where? I'm interested ... Rodolfo ------------------------------ From: Gordon_Croft@mindlink.bc.ca (Gordon Croft) Subject: Re: Are Local Calls Kept on Record? Date: 19 Dec 93 19:37:00 GMT Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada > That one to Aurora cost me ten message units every five minutes, and > the guy called it for a half hour one day and twenty minutes the next Pardon my ignorance but what is a "message unit"? Is that local measured service or something? Just a comment on the original question ... I'm sure that some COs don't have the ability to record local calls. What I'm thinking of is some of the old Step by Step switches that we still have in some of the smaller areas of British Columbia. Just my CDN $0.02 worth... that's about US $0.0000002 !! :) Gord [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In Ameritech/Illinois Bell territory, a 'unit' under the old system (in the 1970's) was a measure of time and distance. Local calls have been measured here for years unless you had the old unmeasured plan, long since discontinued. Calls cost a certain number of 'units' and each business telephone was given 80 'units' per month as part of the basic monthly charge. Extra 'units' in those days cost about three cents each. On the real old equipment, the only way they had of keeping track of local calls was by the use of a device called a pen register. Typically a pen register was only placed on a subscriber's line when the subscriber insisted the message count from one month to the next was inaccurate. Of course the security department tended to use pen registers a lot also in the course of their duties. There was never any law (and still isn't) saying telco can't keep track of who calls where; after all, it is their system and their responsibility where accurate billing is concerned. Its just that in the old days it was usually too much to bother with on local calls unless the need was present. PAT] ------------------------------ From: eli@glare.cisco.com (Steve Elias) Subject: Re: Fax Networks Date: 19 Dec 93 13:20:50 GMT Organization: cisco Systems Bob, the email->fax network that you have described is currently set up on the Internet. It is called the tpc.int remote-printing experiment. Mail to tpc-rp-request@aarnet.edu.au if you would like to join the experiment as a user and/or a server. There is also a FAQ file available. eli ------------------------------ From: hcm@netcom.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:24:12 PST Reply-To: hcm@netcom.com Subject: Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage On Dec 2, 2:07, TELECOM Moderator quoted someone else: > "Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million > typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare." > -- Blair Houghton On the Usenet, nobody knows you're a monkey. -- h [Moderator's Note: Not only that, they are so liberal they don't even care if you are a monkey or not. A few even openly admit to being monkeys and say they are proud of it. For those of you who are unable to benefit from the wisdom of the ancients shared each day in news.groups (a fine example of what Abusenet is all about) you'll be interested to know they have been on quite a rampage the past couple weeks since they went into involuntary TELECOM Digest withdrawal. "Put it back!", they screamed as only noisy, angry monkeys can do. "It belongs to us! You only work for us; you don't own it!". From the commotion, you'd have thought they found someone had stolen the monkey-chow out of their bowls at mealtime. In a sense, maybe I did. I wonder if I should reconnect them? After all, its not the fault of the vast majority that a few of the monkeys are more vicious than the others but it had gotten a little more than I was willing to deal with. I'll accept comments in private email from *list subscribers only* on whether or not Usenet should receive the Digest as before. Consider this the Call For Discussion, Call For Votes and Call For Sanity all at one time. If the mailing list members want to include Usenet, I'll give it favorable consideration -- its YOU I am trying to serve, although you must know by now how I feel about the net. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #828 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17965; 19 Dec 93 22:46 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13446 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 19:15:32 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24846 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Dec 1993 19:15:05 -0600 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 19:15:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312200115.AA24846@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #829 TELECOM Digest Sun, 19 Dec 93 19:13:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 829 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Schedule of Events (Bjoern Kriews) Shared 800 Telephone Numbers (Paul Robinson) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (John R. Levine) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Nathan Lane) 112 Emergency Calls From a GSM Phone (Juha Veijalainen) Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere ... (Carl Moore) Re: Check From MCI; What to Do? (Marshall Levin) Re: NYC Area Central Office Outage, PSAP Shutdown (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting (Peter M. Weiss) Cellphones and RJ-11 Adapters (Lynne Gregg) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bkr@drdhh.hanse.de (Bjoern Kriews) Subject: Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Schedule of Events Date: 19 Dec 1993 23:28:24 +0100 Organization: Digital Island "Ten years after Orwell" 10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993 - The European Hackerparty - December 27.-29. 1993 in Hamburg, Germany Eidelstedter Buergerhaus Elbgaustr. 12 / Hamburg-Eidelstedt Information * Discussion * Workshops Chaos-Cafe * Archive + Photocopier Hack-Center * Internet-FreePort Phonenumbers of the Congress : + 49-40-5710523 (General) + 49-40-5710810 (BBS) + 49-40-5714010 (Telefax) + 49-40-5710133 (Congress-Editorial / Press) Dauerkarte: "Normal" 42.- DM Reduced price 32.- DM Members of CCC e.V. 23.- DM Press 77.- DM Organization Chaos Computer Club e.V. Tel: +49-40-4903757 Schwenckestr. 85 Fax: +40-40-4917689 D-20255 Hamburg Mbx: +40-40-4911085 10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Congressschedule -1- Monday 93/12/27 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Time Theatre Conf1 Conf2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09:30 -------------------------------start------------------------------ 10:00 +---------------------+ | Opening / Welcome | | | +---------------------+ 11:00 +--------------------+ +-------------------+ | How do computers | | ISDN - Everything | | work at all ? | | about a network. | +--------------------+ | | 12:00 +---------------------+ +--------------------+ | Experience & ideas| | Internet and Multi- | | Datacommunications | | from its users and| | media applications | | for beginners | | some programmers. | | | +--------------------+ +-------------------+ 13:00 | MIME / Mosaic | +--------------------+ | Gopher / | | Internet for | | Worldwibe Web | | Beginners | +---------------------+ +--------------------+ 14:00 15:00 +---------------------+ +--------------------+ | Media & flow of | | Encryption for | | information - | | beginners. | | What is left from | | practical PGP | 16:00 | the truth ?! | | | | direct democracy: | | | |Informational needs | +--------------------+ | of citizens | 17:00 +---------------------+ 18:00 +---------------------+ |alternative netsworks| |ZAMIRNET (ex-Jugos- | |lavia), APS+Hacktic | 19:00 |(NL),Green-Net (GB), | |Knoopunt (B), Z-Netz | | and CL (D) | +---------------------+ 20:00 20:30 Organizational announcements, sleeping accommodations 21:00 ------------------ End of this day - on congress...------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - 13:00 : Editors / press conference Announcement of congress program and further information. - starting at 14:00 the women's room offers a continous program. 10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Congresschedule -2- Tuesday 93/12/28 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Time Theatre Conf1 Conf2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09:30 -------------------------------start------------------------------ 10:00 +--------------------+ | Administrivia, | | Discus. of schedule| +--------------------+ 11:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+ | Encryption: | | Modacom-DataCom | | priciples, systems | | Bernd Mielke | | and visions. | | presents concepts | 12:00 | Problems of social | | and applications | | and political | +--------------------+ | relevance. | +--------------------+ 13:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+ | Electronic Cash | |Mailbox-UI's for | | | |citizens | | | |participation | 14:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+ 15:00 +--------------------+ |"Peep Attack" what's| |left from private | |communication - | 16:00 |The plan to ban en- | |encryption. | |Referents: | |a.o. / Peter Paterna| 17:00 |(MdB), Peter Schaar | |stellv. DsB-Hamburg,| |Gero von Randow a.o.| +--------------------+ 18:00 18:30 Organizational announcements, sleeping accommodations 19:00 +---------------------+ | How does an | | Intelligence work ? | | Example: Stasi | 20:00 | | | Educ.Films from MfS | | | +---------------------+ 21:00 ------------------ End of this day - on congress...------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - starting at 11:00 the womens room offers a continous program. 10. Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Congresschedule -3- Wednesday 93/12/29 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Time Theatre Conf1 Conf2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09:30 -------------------------------start------------------------------ 10:00 +--------------------+ | Administrivia, | | Discus. of schedule| +--------------------+ 11:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+ | Thoughts about | | Computerrecycling | | authorship... | | | | | +--------------------+ 12:00 | | +--------------------+ |Prof. Kurd Alsleben | | Network Stupidity | +--------------------+ | Electronic Warfare | +--------------------+ 13:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+ | Lockpicking- how to| |Workgroup for free | | open non-electric | |Bulletin Boards | | lock systems. | |introduces itself. | 14:00 +--------------------+ +--------------------+ 15:00 +--------------------+ | Ten years after | | Orwell ... | | Hacker's & Scene's | 16:00 | visions | | Final meeting. | | Goodbye... | +--------------------+ 17:00 ------------------------ EOC - End of Congress---------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - starting at 11:00 the womens room offers a continous program. ----------------- bkr@drdhh.hanse.de - Bjoern Kriews - Stormsweg 6 - D-22085 Hamburg [76] - FRG ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 11:36:46 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Shared 800 Telephone Numbers Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA Dave Bonney , writes: > Carl Moore in writing about changes to local > dialing plans quoted from a Bell letter to customers: >> "We thank you for helping us to prepare for Pennsylvania's new >> area code. If you have any questions, please call our We Can >> Help Center at 1-800-555-5000, Monday through Friday, from >> 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m." > and Carl commented: >> [I tried that number from Maryland and got U.S. West >> Communications -- a recording only -- in Denver, Colorado. >> Darn, I am not in Del. or Pa. now.] > If you try that number in New England Telephone territory, you get > the 'New England Telephone Customer Response Center'. 1-800-555-5000 has been in use as a 'shared' telephone number by the (then) or (former) Bell System entities for many years, possibly even back before the AT&T Breakup or just after. Because most companies do not (explicitly) claim to only serve one area, such a service isn't of much use to them. If a company is, it could be, but it's more expensive to do that (see below). > Leading one to believe that despite the TELCO and RESPORG > claims of 'One Number -- One User', it's another case of > 'Mother Knows Best' and 'Do As I Say, Not As I Do'. > Does anyone have any knowledge of a single 800 number being > used for different customers in different geographical areas?? > (Other than Mother and the Children of course ...) > Inquiring Minds Want To Know ... The company Pat Townson uses to provide 800 service has much stricter credit requirements for 800 numbers than I could meet, so I got an 800 number from Sprint. Cost is $10 a month plus 30c a minute - which is fine, since I don't expect to use more than a few minutes a month - and terminates on an ordinary local dial number. And it is listed with 800 information. For my purposes this service is sufficient. If I was going to be using a lot of call time, I'd probably want a less expensive rate. When setting up the service, I asked the customer representative who called me about the ability to have a number served by more than one IXC (long distance company). He said that it can be done and you can make it as complicated as you want, with the only real restriction being that each area (not sure if that's as small as any particular switch or each LATA) can only be served by one IXC. It's also more expensive. For example, due to the large number of lines in New York City and AT&T's heftier presence and larger number of trunks, if I was doing a lot of calls from there, I could have AT&T handle calls from the area codes there, and let Sprint handle the rest of the country. Or have a local company take all calls that occur, say, in DC/MD/VA and have the rest from Sprint, or however I wanted to do it. A similar feature can be done by one IXC, for example, if I have offices in New York, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Phoenix and Los Angeles, then I could have each office handle traffic for its own regional area and calls are diverted there *until local closing time*. At 5:00 New York can shunt its calls to Chicago or Dallas depending on volume. Those offices shunt their calls to Denver or Phoenix when they close, and perhaps they transfer to Los Angeles as 5:00 rolls around there. Or perhaps I put my national all-night response center in Phoenix. Then after Los Angeles closes, all of its calls get shunted there, so we can have the following map: East Coast shunts to Chicago at 5:00 then shunts to Denver at 6:00 then Los Angeles at 7:00 then Phoenix at 9:00 until 7:00 then back to New York Midwest shunts to Denver at 5:00 then Los Angeles at 6:00 then Phoenix at 8:00 until 7:00 then back to Dallas Chicago... etc. Now, since each response center is a different local trunk or terminating telephone number, there is nothing that says that in each area that same 1-800 number can't be terminated to a different company instead of a different regional office of the same company. Since telephone companies currently by law cannot offer service outside their own area, they have probably decided to each terminate calls to 1-800-555-5000 to their own service bureau where they use that number. The big issue is cost. My 1-800 number costs me $10 a month plus usage, is listed with 800 information and is "good anywhere in North America" (which means USA, Alaska, Hawaii and Canada - the represent- ative asked if I wanted to include Canada and I said yes.) Any other service, such as shared 800 numbers requires that: (1) you give up use of the area in question for that 800 number to someone else; (2) the area in question is such that you can delineate service in specific areas to separate companies; (3) there are no antitrust considerations; (4) you're wil ling to pay more for a number that is only available to part of the country. In short, it would require the company in question only do business in part of the country, not be interested in (or able to take) calls outside its service area, and be willing to let someone else take them. Franchised companies or organizations specially licensed for specific areas might be able to use such a feature, but they would need a reason to share the same telephone number. A franchise operation might be a good idea, but most franchises imply operation under the same family name with a specific company. In short, this type of feature is not likely to be used much unless 800 numbers become in short supply, or there is some "special" spelled number that several organizations in the same business in different areas all want that they can arrange not to compete in each other's area. A plumbing contractor in Philadelphia could possibly use the same 800 number a local plumber advertises here, as could one in Atlanta, Cinncinati, St. Louis or San Francisco. But it would cost more for them to do that than to get their own specific 800 number. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 13:32 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > And the previous post mentioned PSI. Well, PSI just two months ago > announced the first (I think) venture with a cable company back east > (I think it was Continental in New York). Their goal is to provide > 10Mbps (yes, ethernet speeds) to cable customers, bidirectionally, for > just $100/month. The equipment is installed and I believe they even > have trial customers now. I believe that the first IP via CATV is supposed to be here in Cambridge, but I haven't seen any evidence that it's anywhere near ready to go, nor have other people I've asked. The existing CATV wiring only passes signals in one direction, head end to customers, and nobody has any idea what they're planning to do for the reverse direction. Indeed, we're not even sure that Continental realizes that there has to be a reverse direction. Neither Continental nor PSI has a stellar technical reputation in their respective industries. They said Ethernet speeds, up to 300 people sharing the same "ether", DES envceryption to keep us from intercepting each others' traffic. For $100 per month I'd love to have it, since it'd be faster and cheaper than what I have now. But what I have now has the distinct advantage of actually existing, so I'll stick with it. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 10:46:30 -0800 From: nathan@seldon.foundation.tricon.com Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos > But what I have now has the distinct advantage of actually existing, > so I'll stick with it. Tell me about it. Me too. (I use PSI, and I agree with you when you say they don't exactly have a stellar technical reputation). PS - is comp.dcom.telecom still alive? Obviously my post got through, but since that time (two weeks ago), telecom has been completely silent. Regards, Nathan Lane [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Delivery of the Digest to comp.dcom.telecom is not happening at this time. Some decision will be made in the near future on what to do with it. I don't like the mess on Usenet at all, but several readers have strongly urged the gateway to continue. I've asked for input from list subscribers on this, and will be reading and consid- ering what everyone has to say. News later this week on the subject. PAT] ------------------------------ From: JVE%FNAHA@eccsa.Tredydev.Unisys.com Date: 19 DEC 93 15:01 Subject: 112 Emergency Calls From a GSM Phone My GSM phone manual states, that it is possible to make a 112 (911 to you folks in USA) call even in the areas where normal calls are not possible (phone sees the network, but considers the signal too weak - in my phone 'SERV' indicator is flashing). Does anyone know how this is done? Does the phone boost its power? Something else? Juha Veijalainen 4ge system analyst, tel. +358 40 5004402 Unisys Finland Internet: JVE%FNAHA@eccsa.tredydev.unisys.com >> Mielipiteet omiani ** Opinions are PERSONAL, facts are suspect << (dirty look) I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to argue any more. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 17:09:42 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Emergency Services Will be Elsewhere... What do you mean, "remote forwarding device"? If I were to disconnect my remote-forward and plug in a regular telephone, I'd have to make arrangements (including with the phone company) to have a place available to plug the phone in. That number USED to be in an apartment, but then I left and converted that number to a remote-forward, and thus deleted its association with that apartment; the number exists only in the phone company's facilities with a note of the number to forward to. So there cannot be any other calls placed from the number which is now a remote-forward. ------------------------------ From: mlevin@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Marshall Levin) Subject: Re: Check From MCI; What to Do? Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept. Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 12:41:22 GMT jmm@Elegant.COM (John Macdonald) writes: > But if you try to treat it as a check and cash it, then you are > accepting the unsolicited offer, just as if you filled in your name > and sent back an unsolicited subscription request. Trickery about not > signing the check as a deliberate ruse could be charged with fraud (it > may be clear in *your* mind that the charge would fail but I sure > wouldn't bet *my* future on it). Now hold on one second -- it is my understanding that it is perfectly legitimate to DEPOSIT a check without endorsing it, and unless you endorse it, you have not signed anything legally binding. Is this not true? Marshall [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That falls under the 'deliberate ruse' category. You knew what you were doing and attempted to unjustly enrich yourself by taking advantage of a flaw in the banking system: that because of the volume of paper processed, immediate return of unauthorized or improperly prepared documents cannot be done. Why do you suppose the bank stamp on the back of the check says 'Prior Endorse- ments Guarenteed'? It is so the paperwork can be hurried along through the system. But that guarentee means that should the payor be dissatisfied with the endorsement or lack thereof, he can repudiate the check and send it back down the line to where it originated. Your bank could then in turn use its right of offset to recover the money it had given you from your account and send you the check back in the mail with a notation 'Refer to Maker'. No one is going to sue you for fifty dollars and it almost isn't worth the bother to audit all those checks issued for promotional purposes to insure compliance. But you may get reprimanded for it and after a few of your 'deposits' get charged back to your account due to Stop Pay or Refer to Maker your bank may well send you a letter and tell you that you (and they) would be happier if you took your checking account somewhere else. What goes around comes around. PAT] ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: NYC Area Central Office Outage, PSAP Shutdown Date: 19 Dec 1993 11:31:57 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) TELECOM Digest Editor commented on the prudence of having at least one responsible employee on duty in a CO at all times to avoid disasters like the fire in Hinsdale, IL in May, 1988. We have been telling our company that for years, but they don't seem to be listening, at least not on a level that can take any action. We have has some outages caused because of the lack of personnel on site; they could have been worse. The systems are monitored but sometimes things do get missed. =========== [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The last time I went shopping for a 5-ESS switch, the best price I could find was a couple million dollars, and that was if I agreed to purchase in quantity from a certain well-known manufacturer of same on a long term basis. How many years would it take to amortize that with a single clerk who worked on the overnight shift and walked around the physical plant occassionally noticing things that were wrong like a room full of smoke, or water dripping out of the ceiling from a broken pipe on the floor above? And if the person had other duties as well, such as data-entry stuff the day crew had not finished then his salary could be mostly taken from that budget rather than from some budget set up specifically for 'watchman' duties and the amortization would take even longer. Plus, wouldn't it be nice to know that never again would your subscribers be denied service for even five minutes in the middle of the night if you had a competent, responsible employee present to take immediate, emergency remedial action while notifying others of what was going on? Did you know in the Hinsdale case, they had to throw away the switch and install an entire new one from scratch, that's how badly corroded the original one was after the water damage it suffered while the fire was being put out? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 08:13:33 EST From: Peter M. Weiss Subject: Re: Research on the Effects of Telecommuting Organization: Penn State University The LISTSERV list FLEXWORK discusses telecommuting issues too. To subscribe, send e-mail to: listserv@psuhmc.hmc.psu.edu with a simple body-of-text message (no .sig): SUB FLEXWORK first-name last-name Notebook archives of previous e-mail available. To find the naming convention (file names), include a line in the above e-mail: INDEX FLEXWORK Later, when you find the names, issue more LISTSERV commands: GET FLEXWORK LOGnnnnn /Pete (pmw1@psuvm.psu.edu) -- co-owner LDBASE-L, TQM-L, CPARK-L, et -L Peter M. Weiss "The 'NET' never naps" +1 814 863 1843 31 Shields Bldg. -- Penn State Univ -- University Park, PA 16802-1202 USA ------------------------------ From: Lynne Gregg Subject: Cellphones and RJ-11 Adapters Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 12:57:00 PST edg@netcom.com wrote: > 1. You can use any cellphone that has an RJ-11 adapter. You can use it > with any modem. You can try, but you may see variable results. I recommend and use a modem with MNP-10. It's a Compaq Speedpaq in my Contura and it works just great. On the other hand, I've got a Pocket Peripheral 2400 baud on my PC at home. I've used it with a cellular connection, but you are apt to see garbled data on your screen. > 2. The cellular companies suggest that you do this while stopped so you > don't get handed off. With the Compaq config, I've tooled around a wide area (Seattle to Everett and yes, I WAS a passenger) transferring files and sending email. No problem. > 3. The RJ-11 adapter for my phone, a Motorola DPC550 "Flip" phone, is > more expensive than the phone was. Mmmm. What was the price of the adapter? Your phone was probably discounted by a retailer. Accessories generally are not discounted. Regards, Lynne ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #829 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01764; 20 Dec 93 14:31 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18488 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:08:33 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21981 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:08:05 -0600 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:08:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312201608.AA21981@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #830 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Dec 93 10:08:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 830 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Collecting Switches and Cards (David Leibold) Siemen Phones Wanted (Steve Bauer) Rural Telco Service/Internet Access? (Bruce Klopfenstein) Standards and Where to Get Them (Mike Storke) Checking up on Dialing Changes in 717 (Carl Moore) San Ramon, CA and Pac Bell Headquarters (Darren E. Peterson) Voice Mail Hardware Wanted (Joseph I. Ceasar) Re: Automated FAX Delivery (Bob Frankston) Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Calling a PBX and Billing (Fred Goldstein) Re: Caller ID in Software? (Paul Robinson) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (David Leibold) Re: Acoustic Coupler For PCMIA Modem Wanted (Mark Earle) Re: NBTel Goes Digital (506) (Curtis R. Nelson) Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Alex Cena) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Mike Lanza) Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized (David A. Kaye) Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? (Carl Moore) Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Joe Harrison) Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Dave Niebuhr) Overheard ... (Mark S. Brader) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-Date. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 0572 aTRh0<: Sun, 19 Dec 93 21:13:30 -0500 From: David Leibold Subject: Collecting Switches and Cards From a letter to {The Toronto Star} 28 November 1993, one Bruce Crawford collects SxS (Strowger) switches, meeting other such collectors from Britain and America, but no one else from Canada. Those who want to contact him can write c/o Box 1000, Cargill, Ontario, Canada N0G 1J0. Meanwhile, in the {Star} 18 December 1993, the coin collector column was devoted to telephone cards (stored value, thus something like currency) such as the Israeli Telecards or Sprint Instant FonCards (and the new Bell Canada "Hello Phone Pass" cards). There are periodicals such as "International Telephone Cards" from the UK (address: Box 777, Colchester UK CP3 3LQ) with the associated "World Telephone Cards" catalogue. There is also the new bi-monthly "Premier Telecard" (Box 3451, San Luis Obispo, CA USA 93403), or one might join the Telephone Card Collectors Group c/o Alex Rendon, Box 323, Massapequa Park NY USA 11762. David Leibold ------------------------------ From: STEVE BAUER Subject: Siemen Phones Wanted Date: Sun, 19 Dec 93 20:48:35 CST Pat, I am very interested in locating a source for Siemen telephone models 2111 and 2212. I used these phones and had good luck with them. If anyone knows how I can get some please let me know. I heard they were still manufactured, but in Germany and not sold in the U.S. anymore. If I can't find these phones, I am looking for a good 2500 type feature phone. Have been using the ITT 3480 and 3490 series, but have not been real happy with them. Some are saying Panasonic phones are good. I usually order 50 to 100 at a time for use on my Plexar system. Steve ------------------------------ From: klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu (Bruce Klopfenstein) Subject: Rural Telco Service/Internet Access? Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh. Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 03:38:45 GMT I am looking into buying a house in rural NW Ohio (United Telephone). This will leave me with a long distance call to either my university or the University of Toledo, making access to this account and the Internet a long distance call. What are my options? Can a residential subscriber get WATS service at a reasonable charge? Are their tollfree numbers for getting access to the Internet? Where other than this newsgroup can I get some very quick help? Thanks in advance for taking the time to reply. Bruce C. Klopfenstein | klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu Department of Telecommunications | klopfenstein@bgsuopie.bitnet Bowling Green State University | (419) 372-2138; 372-2224 Bowling Green, OH 43403-0235 | fax (419) 372-8600 ------------------------------ From: storkus@netcom.com (Mike Storke) Subject: Standards and Where to Get Them? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 04:52:06 GMT CCITT v.* standards and the Bellcore DS* (aka T*) standards? Mike P. Storke Paranormal Investigator and Researcher; Inet nut... Inet: storkus@netcom.com Amateur: No bbs locally :{ Snailmail: 2308 Paradise Dr. #134 Reno, NV 89512 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 03:50:03 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Checking Up on Dialing Changes in 717 I went to a payphone on the Hensel (717-548) exchange at a little crossroads called Peach Bottom, in southern Lancaster County, PA. The new instructions aren't posted, but 233-xxxx (no leading 1) was apparently recognized as a long distance call to Harrisburg. I have no word available regarding local calls from 717 area to other area codes. 717-548 has no such service; the closest place (or one of the closest) in 717 that does is 529 at Kirkwood, elsewhere in Lancaster County near the Chester County line. In late October, I did try 452-xxxx from a pay phone on 717-456 at Delta in York County, and it was still recognized as a local call to Cardiff, Maryland. ------------------------------ From: darren@netcom.com (darren) Subject: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 20:32:00 GMT >> San Ramon, CA has 102 phones per 100 people ... Just a wierd thought -- but San Ramon is home of Pac Bell (at Bishop Ranch) which means if you drive the 680 corridor to work every morning, you reach a massive traffic jam. There are 100,000 people who work at Bishop Ranch every day, which seems like nothing big right? I mean San Fran probably has 1,000,000 and New York has 7,000,000 workers entering every day -- but aside from Bishop Ranch, San Ramon is a small sleepy town of maybe 30,000 -- too many of them yuppies who are making it very hard on us younger types who want to buy homes in our own region. Maybe some of those Pac Bell employees could speak to this ... Also, AT&T has an office in Pleasanton -- don't know what is there. Never liked the place anyway. And if you work for Pac Bell, just kidding; my phone service is wonderful and soooooooo cheap. Merry Christmas. darren e. peterson Odessa darren@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: jic@panix.com (Joseph I. Ceasar) Subject: Voice Mail HW Wanted Date: 20 Dec 1993 01:43:00 -0500 Organization: CLS Computer Solutions I am looking for voice mail cards that can be fully programmed. I have to build digital dictation machine for a customer. They have one, but were charged $40,000 for a 386SX with some voice mail cards in it. I told my customer that since they will be needing more of them machines, I could duplicate 'em for about $10,000. The question is where do I find voice mail cards? I have one from Talking Technologies, but it supports only two lines/card. I need something that can support four lines/card. I've heard of a Canadian company called Bicom, but cannot locate them! Can anyone help? Yossi (Joseph I. Ceasar) @ CLS Computer Solutions ---> e-mail: jic@panix.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dialogic also makes voice mail cards capable of handling four lines. They are (I think) in Parsippany, NJ. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Re: Automated FAX Delivery Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 15:04 -0400 The problem with using a PBX is that it would generally not be integrated with a PC delivery system. In the United States, simpler solution is to bypass the PBX and use DID (Direct Inward Dialing). There are a number of boards that support DID including Brooktrout and Gammalink. At least as of 1990. I don't know what the European equivalent is, though one would assume that ISDN with called number delivery would be an alternative except that there might be a limit on the number of callable numbers associated with a single link. I guess assigning everyone an extension with a modem in their PC is also possible. I suspect the economics are perverse in that the fax/modem board is the smallest part of the expense. An additional line card or a capable desk instrument is probably more of the problem. ------------------------------ From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! Date: 19 Dec 1993 17:27:46 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA) There have been follow ups on this and it appears GTE plans to take the same action as Bell Atlantic has done and bring suit against the FCC. The above statements maybe mine and have nothing to do with my employer. Steven H. Lichter ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 18:15:09 -0500 From: goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com Subject: Re: Calling a PBX and Billing If a PBX has Direct Inward Dialing, then the call is not supervised until it is answered. During that interval, the speech path is only supposed to be open in one direction, PBX-to-caller. Supervision makes it two-way. Thus ringtone, busy, and announcements are "free". Semi-amazing Fact #1: On the old Rolm CBX, they figured out that the "autopark" feature can be unsupervised, even if it took a while. So you called a busy extension with the feature enabled (default), waited ten seconds listening to busy, then got silence or music-on-hold. The callee got a beep tone and could "connect" to the waiting call, or hang up and get rung by the waiting party -- even minutes later (though by default it timed out to the operator after a while). Only then did the line supervise/charge. I don't know if anyone else picked up on this feature. Semi-amazing Fact #2: Some PBXs can be combined into clusters, with some feature transparency between separate switches. In most cases ("satellite operation"), at least in the early '80s when I looked into it, supervision occurred when the first PBX decided that the destination was in the second PBX and seized a tie line. Thus for some extensions, the caller could get charged for busy or ring-no-answer, because the PBX with the DID trunks thought it connected (though only to another PBX). I avoided setting up this sort of arrangement; when I set up SatOps, I got each PBX its own trunks. fred ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 12:14:42 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software? Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA John Allen , writes: > Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not > want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here > ready to do some work for me. Software only goes so far. Caller ID is sent on a telephone line as a stream of data between rings to a telephone line which is on-hook. Therefore, you still need hardware that can monitor an on-hook line and retrieve the data that is delivered. Software can't do this unless there is hardware there to pick up the information, any more than a color paint program can generate colors from a black and white scanned image. Paul Robinson - Paul@TDR.COM ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 00:08:27 -0500 From: David Leibold Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD changing 4/94? Richard Cox writes: > UK internal area codes will be changing at the same time. With a few > specific exceptions, they are to be prefixed with a "1". i.e. London > (currently +44 71) will become +44 171 The +44 956 I have listed as a PCN phone system, so I guess that's why those numbers won't be changing ... I don't have specifics on what exact service is represented by 956, though. Meanwhile, I've seen some posts on uk.telecom which suggest that the prefixing of geographic UK area codes with '1' was not a necessary thing, and some claims that the number of area codes were actually being reduced because of consolidation of exchanges and such. Can anyone confirm or deny whether UK was really running out of area codes, or is the idea to distinguish between "geographic" codes (regular phone service in specific regions) and "non-geographic" codes (such as cellular, 0800/0500 services, PCNs)? David Leibold ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 03:38:31 CST From: mearle@cbi.tamucc.edu (Mark Earle) Subject: Re: Acoustic Coupler For PCMIA Modem Wanted Computer Products Plus, Inc 16351 Gothard Street Huntington Beach, CA 92647 +1 800 274 4277 +1 714 847 1799 +1 714 848 6850 Fax I have one of their Telecouplers; works very well, especially at 2400 - 9600 baud (w/wout error correction) and my Motorola 8000H portable cellular phone. It has also seen service in offices with "digital" phones; and in hotels who frown on customers taking apart their instruments. The one I have cost about $150. The company has a whole line of products designed to make life for the "road warrior" easier. Suggest you call for their catalog! Do not 'reply'. Instead, send to mwearle@mcimail.com Note the 'w' it's mwearle Mail FROM me may originate at a variety of addresses for a while. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 2:09:30 CST From: CRN@VAX3.ltec.com Subject: Re: NBTel Goes Digital (506) In V13 #794 (Derek J. Billingsley) writes: > The New Brunswick Telephone Company (New Brunswick being on the east > coast of Canada -- mostly rural with a few major centers ... well > major being >50k people) has recently announced that it is running all > digital switches with the final analog switch being taken offline > about a month ago. They are proclaiming to be the first telco in > North America to do this. Lincoln Telephone Company (200,000 lines in SE Nebraska, 19th largest independent in the US) became 100% digital (switching and inter-office trunking) in December of 1992. By the middle of 1994 we will have replaced about a dozen of our older digital switches to allow full Equal Access capability and prepare for enhanced features like CLASS services. The city of Lincoln (about 100,000 lines) has SS7 in place and CLASS features have been offered for about a year and a half. Curtis R. Nelson, P.E. email: cnelson@ltec.com Lincoln Telephone Company phone: (402) 476-4886 1440 'M' Street fax: (402) 476-5527 Lincoln, NE 68508 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 01:42:46 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted On Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST Jason Demarte wrote: > I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call > Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each > version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD. If anyone has > some any information on this please post me a response, thanks. You should call Aspect Telecom for some information. Their stand alone ACD is used by companies like Microsoft, Intuit, Sharper Image, Wal Mart and Nintendo. Their number is 1-800-541-7799. Moreover, many PBX vendors offer ACD capabilities as well. Alex M. Cena Lehman Brothers acena@lehman.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 16:18:47 PST From: Mike Lanza Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos What we really need is a new packet-switched network that is more aggressive and forward-thinking than the ones we've got. Maybe the Internet service providers are the ones to do it. The existing big three (SprintNet, CompuServe, and BT Tymnet) are all procrastinating and whining their way toward 9600 coverage. This should be in place at roughly half of their POPs by the end of this year, with 100% coverage to supposedly come shortly thereafter. 14,400 deployment is slated to begin next year. There isn't even a plan to make this ubiquitous -- they're going to "wait and see what the market wants." Have these guys seen statistics for modem sales lately? v.32bis (14,400) is already outselling the other speeds. In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number access, but the big three are really behind on this one as well. Sprint does offer an 800 packet service (it can, since it has both 800 service and SprintNet), but it's grossly undermarketed and grossly overpriced. BT Tymnet says they'll have something like this as a result of the merger (or is it an acquisition?) with MCI, but this seems to be moving pretty slowly. How about a new 950 service (950 is better than 800 since it avoids local access charges) that hooks into a state-of-the-art packet network? Does anyone know of anything like this that's in the works? If you do, I know of some potential customers! Mike Lanza [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You might try 950-1288 which is an AT&T service connecting several places together. See the file in the Telecom Archives on exploring 950-1288 for details and a help file. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: NPA 905 Not Universally Recognized Date: 20 Dec 1993 00:14:32 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] David Esan (de@moscom.com) wrote: > companies do not. They rely on a tape or floppies from BellCore. And > BellCore was late in getting this information into the system. The > 905 NPA went live on 15 October, the pages were not filed until 22 > November. But, what's wrong with Bell Canada for not allowing at least a six month grace period as is done in the USA to allow for these kinds of problems? I've seen a lot of area codes split in California and there always has been a changeover time of six months to a full year. I don't mean dialing from within one of the affected area codes, but from without as well. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 9:04:59 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? I don't know why the first NNX area code won't be of the form AB0, unless there was concern over people getting confused and trying to "correct" it to A0B. Remember the biggest concern is the people getting the first area codes of form NNX, and the other people who can't reach them because of improperly-programmed equipment. I had to re-word the comment in the history file about NN0 when I learned of 334. There was an "official" list of early NNX area codes in this digest long ago. But 520 in Arizona will be next door to Mexico, and some people were wondering if Mexico would become reachable through area codes of form 52x where x is not zero (I removed the word "necessarily" from a new version of the history file when I learned of 520). (502 is in Kentucky.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 08:16:33 GMT From: J.Harrison@rea0803.wins.icl.co.uk Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite Here's something from the UK Telecom FAQ, I'm afraid I haven't tried it myself. {start quoting} Question 30: How do I get a guarenteed non-satellite circuit to the USA ? [from the UK] Answer: To get a guaranteed non-satellite circuit to the USA, useful for certain data transmission requirements which involve a lot of handshaking, dial 0101 83 + area code + number. The code 84 allows you to obtain a satellite link, if you really want one for any reason. And before someone asks -- no, it doesn't allow you to dial 800 or 900 numbers. I believe it did once. {end quoting} Joe ICL Ltd. Reading Berkshire RG1 3PX United Kingdom (+44-734-586211) * J.Harrison@rea0803.wins.icl.co.uk * * S=Harrison/I=J/OU1=rea0803/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB * ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 07:49:41 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number storpis@kaiwan.com (Console Cowboy) writes: > I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800 > number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to > any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The > number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why? I just checked 800-884 and found that it was assigned to Sprint. You might want to contact them and find out who the number was assigned to by them. Unfortunately, I don't have the phone number for Sprint. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 04:24:39 -0500 From: msb@sq.com Subject: Overheard ... Overheard ... a co-worker hanging up the phone and talking softly to himself in a "this is a recording" tone of voice. If you have a touch-tone phone, please hang up now. If you do not have a touch-tone phone, please stay on the line and a representative will explain how to buy one. Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #830 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02515; 20 Dec 93 15:29 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31864 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:45:32 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07409 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:45:03 -0600 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:45:03 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312201745.AA07409@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #831 TELECOM Digest Mon, 20 Dec 93 11:44:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 831 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Pournelle's PC Communications Bible" (Rob Slade) Time Warner's Full Service Network (Alex Cena) Wireless Local Loop in India (Alex Cena) Send the Digest to abUsenet? (Mike D. Schomburg) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Barry Lustig) Re: Checking Up on Dialing Changes in 717 (Carl Moore) Administrivia: Messages Lost (TELECOM Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu. The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob- tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross- postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact and unedited. Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 Dec 93 0:50 -0600 From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "Pournelle's PC Communications Bible" by Pournelle/Banks BKPCCOMB.RVW 931119 Macmillan of Canada 29 Birch Avenue Toronto, Ontario M4V 1E2 Elizabeth Wilson 416-963-8830 Fax: 416-923-4821 or Microsoft Press 1 Microsoft Way Redmond, WA 98052-6399 USA "Pournelle's PC Communications Bible", Pournelle/Banks, 1992, 1-55615-393-7 2814144@mcimail.com 3259579@mcimail.com Michael Banks is known to us through a couple of previous works (BKPRTCOM.RVW and BKMDMREF.RVW). Jerry Pournelle, of course, is known to everyone. With the Microsoft Press imprimatur, and the prestigious title, usually reserved for the definitive work in a given field, one could have high hopes for this book. So, in the slightly altered words of the old joke, "Believe in the PC Communications Bible? Heck, I've *seen* it!" And it brings me no joy. The "Bible," in a given technical field, is usually a work which collects a considerable wealth of technical material. Usually, however, it is crafted with great care and skill in order to ensure that the material is accessible to, at least, the diligent newcomer. Not so here. Technical material there is -- thrown in at random as a kind of nerdish grandstanding ("Look! See how much we know about CRC?"). For the neophyte, the basic material is here -- buried in verbiage, and presented with little logic or order. Section one is entitled "Basics." There is an eminently forgettable "history" of data communications, an extremely limited account of "what's available," and a terse and short-sighted view of the future. Chapter two supposedly tells you what you need to get online: it takes thirteen pages to say you need a computer, modem, software and a telephone. Chapter three purports to tell you how it all works. The explanations will make a data communications professional cringe. But, some would say, does it really matter that these pages are simplified to the point of inaccuracy? Does the average user really need to know the details? Well, no. In which case, this chapter is completely unnecessary. It serves only to allow the authors to show off the fact that they can use the term "phase shift keying". (There is no evidence that they actually know what it is.) Section two is "Getting Started," with chapters four and five discussing making a data call and signing onto a BBS or online service. Both chapters are disorganized and of very little help to the novice user. Within nine pages, chapter four is discussing the oddities that the authors found with different ports and interrupts. Is this, then, for the advanced user? No. The material is far too elementary for anyone with any computer communications background to rely on. It is simply self-indulgent posturing. Section three discusses modems and communications software again. I take it back about the phase shift keying. By a lengthy and charitable stretch of the imagination, the definition given is almost, but not quite, completely unlike the truth. The material, however, does start to become a bit more technical at this point. Having thrown around "AT" command strings in earlier discussion, chapter six finally prints out a limited list of them. The list could have been copied from any modem "quick reference" card: there is no discussion of the needs or functions for various features. The same holds true for the chapters on software (with an incomplete list of ANSI codes), and scripting (with a five-page Mirror III script for signing on the Delphi, presumably from wherever Michael Banks lives). The material is all heavily recycled, largely opinion, and of little technical or instructional value. Sections four and five are intended to give an overview of "who to call." BBSes are given a chapter of their own, but only in limited form. There is almost no mention of Fidonet or other networking systems. The authors then show their commercial bias with discussions of the larger (and higher priced) online systems. (And other biases as well: BIX gets first mention several times; guess who just happens to write a column for {Byte} magazine?) Of the Internet, of course, there is not a word. There is a short chapter later on which talks of "international" computer communications -- mostly how to call the US from Europe and Japan. Section six is a miscellany of fax, online databases, "Doing Business by Modem," the aforementioned international chapter and another short-term look to the future. Appendices include vendor listings; a reasonable, but verbose, and overly personal, cabling guide; a rather random troubleshooting guide (as in the chapter on getting connected, there is no discussion of the typical problems you see with incorrect parameters); and an ASCII table. This is a more verbose, but no more helpful, version of Banks' earlier books. While one can see the additions Pournelle has made (quite clearly, in some cases), there is no improvement in either technical accuracy, completeness of material or organization. Once again, for a better generic introduction one has to turn to the system specific texts of Gianone (BKUMSKMT.RVW) or LeVitus/Ihnatko (BKDMGTOU.RVW). copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993 BKPCCOMB.RVW 931119 Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM Digest and associated mailing lists. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 09:20:34 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Time Warner's Full Service Network From a Time Warner Press Release: ORLANDO, Fla., Dec. 16 /PRNewswire/ via First! -- Dennis R. Patrick, president and chief executive officer of Time Warner Telecommunications, today announced that the company had installed and demonstrated the first phase of its wireless Personal Communications Services (PCS) field trial network which employs state-of-the-art Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) digital technology. When completed this spring, the trial network will be integrated into Time Warner's Full Service Network (FSN) in Orlando. In making the announcement, Patrick said: "The combination of personal communications service and Time Warner's upgraded cable network is a significant development in the creation of the Full Service Network and the evolution of the electronic superhighway. This test network will permit the use of wireless phones in the home, in the car and in the office. Qualcomm, the leading innovator in highly advanced CDMA cellular telephone systems, is creating a specialized package of personal communications handsets and infrastructure that will help us explore numerous exciting consumer services and move forward to a new era in telecommunications." In addition to demonstrating common use of FSN and PCS networks and service availability in multiple environments, technical trials will also study coverage and capacity of the Qualcomm system. Patrick added, "The small, lightweight wireless PCS phone soon will give the customer a single telephone number wherever he or she may go. PCS will extend voice and data services to callers in their homes, cars and offices." Time Warner's PCS network eventually will become a wireless gateway to a wide range of FSN voice, video, data and entertainment services. The PCS phone will become a key component in an interactive electronic superhighway that will permit customers to access the FSN even while outside the home. The vendor for the PCS trial is Qualcomm Incorporated, a developer, manufacturer and operator of advanced digital wireless telecommunications products and systems based on CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access). Qualcomm's products include the OmniTRACS system and digital wireless telephone systems and products based on Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) technology. The company also develops and markets a range of VSLI devices. CONTACT: Alex D. Felker of Time Warner Telecommunications, 202-331-7478 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 09:34:56 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Wireless Local Loop in India Does anyone have details of the Wireless Local Loop System in Southwestern India? The system was used to restore communications following the earthquake in India. Specifically, I am interested in: 1) the equipment vendors involved; 2) spectrum allocation; 3) technology in use AMPs, TDMA, CDMA, GSM, etc. Thanks in advance, Alex M. Cena, Lehman Brothers, acena@lehman.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 09:56:06 CST From: mschomburg@ltec.com (Mike D. Schomburg) Subject: Send the Digest to abUsenet? Pat: I suggest you re-connect the dung heap just after Hell freezes over. Mike Schomburg mschomburg@ltec.com [Moderator's Note: Well, that occassion may come sooner than you think. The National Weather Service says that Hell, Michigan may get real cold toward the end of this week. Hell, a tiny little village just a few miles northwest of Ann Arbor in Livingston County, Michigan on highways 36/106 was the site of an NWS monitoring station for many years, and regular reports were issued in the winter months advising when when the temperature in Hell dropped below 32 degrees farenheit. The only business around the area seems to be a tourist shop which specializes in T-shirts and coffee mugs with "I've Been Through Hell" printed on them. On my visit during the summer a few years ago, the tourist shop was quite busy and traffic was heavy on the highway leading into town. It did not help that the highway was undergoing construction work (possibly being paved with good intentions?) and was down to two lanes; one in each direction. When you are in the area, stop and check the place out. Part of the Pinckney State Forest/Recreational Area, phone service in Hell comes from the Brighton and Dexter, Michigan phone exchanges, depending on where in Hell you are calling from. The best way to go straight to Hell is by taking Highway 43 north out of Ann Arbor for about 12 miles to Highway 36 and turning east for another five miles or so. Its an interesting place to visit, but I'm not sure I would want to live there. A few of the locals however say they have been in Hell all their lives and like it a lot. They also wish to emphatically dispell the rumor started by Henry Ward Beecher; the place does exist and lots of people come every year. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 11:37:49 EST From: Barry Lustig Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) wrote: > I believe that the first IP via CATV is supposed to be here in > Cambridge, but I haven't seen any evidence that it's anywhere near > ready to go, nor have other people I've asked. The existing CATV > wiring only passes signals in one direction, head end to customers, > and nobody has any idea what they're planning to do for the reverse > direction. Indeed, we're not even sure that Continental realizes that > there has to be a reverse direction. Neither Continental nor PSI has > a stellar technical reputation in their respective industries. It is very likely that PSI and Continental will use for their one way cable systems a system such as that developed by Hybrid Networks. The Hybrid system uses a 10Mbit/sec. downstream channel and a telephone based upstream channel. At the headend of the cable system, there is a terminal server like box which deals with the upstream traffic. Barry Lustig ICTV, Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 12:30:41 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Checking Up on Dialing Changes in 717 Since the earlier message, I made it to a Kirkwood (717-529) pay phone. There is a 717-932 prefix at Lewisberry, and apparently the local call to Oxford (215-932, to go into 610) requires 1 + NPA + 7D. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:27:17 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Subject: Administrivia: Messages Lost I am sorry to report that a processing error Monday morning at 10:15 AM caused the loss of about a dozen or so messages waiting in the queue for inclusion in the Digest. If you sent messages on Saturday, Sunday or today (Monday) **and they have not yet appeared here** then they are lost forever, and I ask humbly that you resubmit them. I am not including the several messages pro/con reconnecting Usenet; only the actual messages for the Digest itself. Of particular interest to me was the 'Technical Analysis' holiday message sent to me. That person received a message saying I would use his message in a few days. Unfortunatly it got bashed also. So if you will resubmit those messages from the weekend or this morning not yet printed I will appreciate it. There will be a few more issues of the Digest, probably on Tuesday/Wednesday, then a break for the Christmas holiday with publication resumed probably over the weekend. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #831 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06660; 21 Dec 93 9:02 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24840 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 21 Dec 1993 04:54:25 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18083 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Dec 1993 04:54:01 -0600 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 04:54:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312211054.AA18083@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #832 TELECOM Digest Tue, 21 Dec 93 04:54:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 832 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: The Digest and Usenet (TELECOM Digest Editor) Voicemail on the PC (Chris Nelson) How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified (Brian Bulkowski) Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Erik Berg) GTE Files Request re Cerritos Cable Television (Steven H. Lichter) Frequency Database VIRUS (Alfredo E. Cotroneo) New Patents Information Wanted (Mark Voorhees) T1 MUX Recommendations Wanted (Ray Wong) WDC on Orange Card Bill (Carl Moore) Re: Cable Channels (and Satellites) (Lars Poulsen) Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors (Paul N. Hrisko) Re: TDD Software Wanted (kmcledd@delphi.com) Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (Carl Moore) Technical Analysis: Santa Claus Science and Myth (Dan L. Dale) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 03:56:05 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Administrivia: The Digest and Usenet On December 8, as a result of the long and often bitter conversations in the Usenet news.groups forum regards comp.dcom.telecom.tech, the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup and this Digest, distribution of TELECOM Digest to Usenet and the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup was suspended. This was something that did not happen without a lot of thought as to the ramifications of the decision, and although I said at the time it would be permantently removed, I had not realized the large number of readers who would object to that decision. A few days ago, after receiving numerous comments from Usenet readers about the absence of the telecom feed, I posed a question to the members of the mailing list asking for guidance in deciding whether or not to reconnect the Usenet feed. I'm not really in favor of doing so, but the consensus was it is unfair to the Usenet readers who have various reasons for not receiving the email version of the Digest. Of 189 persons who responded, 165 said the feed should be restored. A dozen were specifically against it, saying that 'the added hassles were not worth it' (they were people who had all followed the news.groups thread; some had contributed to it. Several expressed indifference either way. Six of the respondents were quick to point out that the restoration of the telecom feed would simply start the news.group flaming all over again; others mentioned that if the feed was not restarted, the flames would continue for that reason also. It appears that either way this goes, there will continue to be criticism and flaming. Rather than unfairly punish the Usenet readers who have been without the feed since December 8, I've chosen to restore it beginning with this issue. As noted above, this is not entirely my decision, and I hope everyone will understand I am a little bit wary and more than a little weary about the continued controversy. I'm anxious to bring an end to all the fighting going on and the inconvenience this has caused the many loyal readers of the Digest who prefer to receive it on Usenet for whatever reasons. The members of the mailing list seem to in general approve of the decision, and that is what the most important to me. Finally, in the spirit of the holiday and in an effort to better serve the users of the Telecom Archives, I am extending an invitation to the proprietor of the Telecom-Tech mailing list to have it included automatically in the Archives in its own sub-directory where it will be available automatically for anyone who wants to see it or get back issues, etc. A sub-directory will be established with a special address to which Telecom-Tech should be mailed if Mr. Higdon wishes to have it automatically part of the archives of record at lcs.mit.edu. I'm not convinced these gestures will make any real difference in the way things have deteriorated in recent months; but I think its the right way to go and I'm willing to try and make it work. There is room on the net for an unmoderated telecom group, and I am willing to put aside my differences with the group's originator for the good of telecom news distribution in general. Perhaps others will put aside their differences with me for the same reasons. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: cnelson@sedona.intel.com (Chris Nelson~) Subject: Voicemail on the PC Date: 21 Dec 1993 01:25:52 GMT Organization: Intel Corporation Thanks for reading ... I recently purchased a used PC voicemail card, titled "The Complete Answering Machine". It is 1987 vintage and was produced by "The Complete PC, Inc.", Milpitas, CA. The company no longer has a phone number in the 408 area code. I'm looking for a lead on what company may have purchased the rights to the product. My quest is to find a later version of software that may have been produced for the card. Windows support would be most wonderful! Please send any response to this query directly to me. Thanks, Chris Nelson, N7VEC | Internet: cnelson@sedona.intel.com Intel Corp. CH5-217 | Phone: (602) 554-2799 FAX (602) 554-7830 5000 W. Chandler Blvd. | Opinions are for those who don't know the facts. Chandler, AZ 85226 | Facts are for those who don't have opinions. | These are my opinions, not Intel's ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 00:03:43 EST From: brian bulkowski Subject: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? Hi oh those in Telecom land - I've been wondering about two things, and a recent short thread has touched my memory. First question is, how do they verify phone calling card numbers? My calling card is a Pac Bell card, and it works absolutly everywhere within the US I've ever tried to use it, including out of area Bells (like NyNex). Since NyNex doesn't touch PacBell, they would have to traverse a long distance carrier's line, which seems odd. Or there's a central clearing house somewhere. Or there's a simple algorythmic check on the number. Maybe with the added backup that known bad numbers are stored and denied service. It would seem reasonable that routing information be stored in the calling card number, like first three digits are 510, so talk to PacBell, but what to do about people like ATT who are issuing calling cards but don't have local phone numbers? If there's a central clearing house, how big is it? A >100M record database, dutifially fault tolerant, able to answer all those queries in two seconds each, must be something to see. In any of these systems, how do smaller providers like the Orange Card get the same universality in coverage, or maybe they don't? This, perhaps, answers the question of the person recently who asked about how to avoid paying collect charges: use thy calling card. Second question is this: What's the telecom situation in Alaska like? I remember there was a discussion a while ago about Hawaii. But then I was up in Alaska a few months ago, and pay phones weren't too good on the 10xxx numbers. AT+T seemed to give me something called Alascom. Does MCI really not serve Alaska, or just not the pay phones? Is there a different set of regulations for the Upper State that allows the payphone people to not route 10xxx numbers? This was true both in a city and the sticks. I was in a small village a bit north of the circle, Anaktuvuk Pass, and found a pay phone. Easy to find: right next to the big satellite dishes. No roads lead to Anaktuvuk Pass. A very interesting place. The pay phone worked great, took my calling card and everything. Here's another tidbit: when I call 10xxx - 0 - 510 xxx xxxx from my 415 work number, in order to get lower rates (intra LATA calls that Pac Bell makes a fortune on), Pac Bell's error message is: "We're sorry. It is not necessary to dial a long distance company access code for the number you have dialed. Please hang up and try your call again." :-) Regards, brianb brianb@starlight.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 15:07:40 CST From: berg@disney.donnelley.com (Erik Berg) Subject: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Well in a nutshell is there anyway to really block your phone number from the person you are calling? Here in IL, Ameritech does have Caller ID and Auto Callback. You can maybe block your phone number by using *67, but Ameritech does not guarantee that this will work with non Ameritech equipment. Problem is, my wife works with DCFS, a government agency that looks after the welfare of the state's kids, sometimes taking them away from their natural parents. She called a client and used the *67, blocking out our phone number from the person she was calling. Problem is the client has Auto Callback as well as Caller ID. Even though when my wife called her, the person was not home, her caller ID box said the time of the call and it was a private number. Well this person saw the private number, freaked and called our house for the last 24 hours with Auto Callback. We were out during this time, but our machine is filled to the rim with these frantic messages, and other wierd things from the person. I eventually had to go to work and call her from a fax machine to erase our number. On top of that at the end of the month, this person will have our phone number from the Ameritech bill, if they ask for an itemized bill of their calls (which the person threaten to do). We tried everything we could with Ameritech. Their solution, use another phone and change your phone number. This does not seem a fair solution, and an invasion of some basic privacy. In six months, Ameritech will have caller ID and User ID so your name and number appear when you call someone. Are there any devices out there that can scramble your phone number from Caller ID and Auto Callback? erik berg (hoping the crazy people stop calling us after one call to them) berg@disney.donnelley.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Caller-ID and Auto Callback information are both passed to the called-party's central office and there is no real way to avoid having that information available if making a direct call to someone. You can do *67 to ask the CO not to give out your number but you can't defeat the call-return part of the process. There is a ser- vice which operates on a 900 number at a premium fee which allows you to call through it and out to wherever causing the called party to get no usable ID/return call information. Even that guy won't cover for you in the event of legal action against you, but for all intents and purposes, it provides an effective shield. I think the number is 1-900-BLOCKER. PAT] (?). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 16:35:14 -0500 From: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: GTE Files Request re Cerritos Cable Television Reply-To: co057@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steven H. Lichter) GTE files request to continue its Cerritos cable-television operations IRVING, TEXAS (DEC. 20) BUSINESS WIRE - GTE filed a stay request on Friday, Dec. 17, with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco requesting the company be allowed to continue its cable-television operations in Cerritos, Calif. The action follows a recent (Dec. 6) Federal Communication Commission (FCC) denial of a similar stay request. If granted, the stay would allow GTE to continue operating its cable-television facility in Cerritos, Calif., until the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rules on an earlier GTE petition challenging the constitutional right of the government to prevent GTE from offering video programming to its in-franchise customers. Although the FCC denied GTE's stay request, it did extend from Dec. 9, 1993 to Jan. 10, 1994, the required date for GTE to file how it intends to comply with the FCC rescission order. "It doesn't make sense for the FCC to stop our Cerritos project now, if the court could eventually grant us approval to continue our operations there," said Geoff Gould, vice president-regulatory and governmental affairs for GTE Telephone Operations. "All we are asking for is enough time for the court to make its decision on GTE's right to offer video programming to our in-franchise customers." "In Cerritos," said Bob Calafell, vice president-video services, "GTE has gleaned tremendous knowledge about interactive-video services, and we are seeking the opportunity to bring the full benefits of what we have learned to consumers. In fact, the Cerritos project has already spawned one commercial product -- GTE Main Street -- which transforms the customer's television set into a dazzling new tool for education, information gathering, travel, shopping and entertainment." GTE's request to the FCC on Nov. 26 asked for a permanent stay on the Cerritos rescission order, or at least a delay of 30 days after the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling. The stay, in addition to preserving GTE's current working relationships in Cerritos, also would keep the FCC from forcing GTE to use government compliance rules that are being currently challenged in the courts. In turning down the stay request, the FCC stated, "The commission found, in particular, that GTE had failed to demonstrate it would suffer irreparable harm if a stay is not granted. GTE is the largest U.S.-based local telephone company and the second-largest cellular-service provider in the United States. With $20 billion in revenues in 1992, the corporation is the fourth-largest publicly owned telecommunications company in the world. GTE also is a leader in government and defense communications systems and equipment, satellite and aircraft-passenger telecommunications, directories and telecommunications- based information services and systems. CONTACT: GTE Telephone Operations, Irving Dick Jones, 214/718-6924, or 214/931-5447, after 6 p.m. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Dec 93 16:23:32 EST From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <100020.1013@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Frequency Database VIRUS *** VIRUS ALERT *** [Feel free to repost as necessary] We have just received a warning by fax from Bob Zanotti of Swiss Radio International that the computer diskette containing the latest ILG (International Listening Guide) database produced by Bernd Friedewald in Germany contained a ParB virus. Bernd Friedewald has been alerted of the problem, and considering Bernd's good reputation there is no evidence of the fact that the diskette might have been intentionally contaminated. Given the extremely fast service of the Swiss Postal Administration, there are reasons to believe that Bob Zanotti could have been one of the first to receive the diskette, and first to discover the problem. Hope this message get to you on time to take all necessary measures. You have been warned! (e.g. DO NOT attempt to either read, or write on the diskette, unless you are sure that you got a good copy, or you know how to deal with computer viruses. Contact your nearest computer expert or system administrator for advice or Bernd Friedewald to know if yours is a good copy. In any case it is always a good practice to check every "unknown" diskette with a most recent anti-virus program before using it) Thanks to Bob Zanotti for the alert! Alfredo E. Cotroneo, President NEXUS-IBA is a NEXUS-Int'l Broadcasting Association non profit org. PO Box 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy which operates Phone: +39-337-297788 / +39-2-2666971 IRRS-Shortwave & email: 100020.1013@compuserve.com ____ IRRS-GRM on FM ------------------------------ From: markvoor@mindvox.phantom.com (Mark Voorhees) Subject: New Patent Information Wanted Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 12:46:33 EST Organization: [MindVox] / Phantom Access Technologies / (+1 800-MindVox) Does anyone know anything about the following patents, which were all just issued? 5228055 Spread spectrum communications device 5228053 Spread spectrum overlay communications system 5228029 Cellular TDMA communictions system offset frame synchronization Appreciate any help. markvoor@phantom.com Mark Voorhees ------------------------------ From: rayw@research.otc.com.au (Ray Wong) Subject: T1 MUX Recommendations Wanted Date: 21 Dec 1993 06:26:57 GMT Organization: Telstra Corporation Limited I have a requirement to connect a 64 Kbps digital link via a leased line from New York to Sydney (Australia). I'm told that the 64 Kbps link between our equipment(in NY) and the carrier (in NY) has to be carried on a T-1 service. That means some kind of MUX will be required. Could someone please recommend a suitable MUX equipment or a better solution? Our equipment has a X.21 interface. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 16:21:47 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: WDC on Orange Card Bill I have previously seen WDC on my Orange Card bills for calls made from Washington DC and the Maryland suburbs. But it appeared for calls made from northeastern Md. (where I'd expect BAL to appear) on Nov. 29-30. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 22:35:58 +0100 From: lars@eskimo.CPH.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Re: Cable Channels (and Satellites) Padgett Peterson (padgett@tccslr.dnet.mcc.com) writes: "The hard part is in knowing which channel to turn on when." Here in Europe we have a system called "text-TV": 500 alphanumeric pages of information hidden where the US system has the "closed captioning" stuff. This includes program schedules for the channel. Several VCRs can capture the schedule data and use this as a menu system for requesting what programs to tape. This is one feature that the US would do well to import from Europe. Another innovation that I have seen here: The largest satellite operator (German ASTRA which has a near monopoly on service to Germany, Scandinavia and I think Be-ne-lux as well) has two birds in the same nominal slot (and a third one planned) so that you can get 24 channels without re-aiming the dish. This has allowed the sale of very inexpensive receiver systems (I have seen a low end system with 18" dish on sale for USD 155 including 25% VAT!! A normal price is about twice that for a system with built-in descrambler with 2 "smart card" slots). This kind of pricing for "wireless cable" led to sharp reductions on cable service prices. Lars Poulsen Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM CMC Network Products Phone: (011-) +45-31 49 81 08 Hvidovre Strandvej 72 B Telefax: +45-31 49 83 08 DK-2650 Hvidovre, DENMARK Internets: designed and built while you wait ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:26:32 EST From: WJCS75A@prodigy.com (PAUL N HRISKO) Subject: Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors Hi, I'm looking for information on cellular phone the either have, or can be adapted (with a dongle, whatever), to provide, an RJ-11 phone jack. The whole idea is fairly simple -- I want to be able to use my laptop to send mail, faxes, etc ... while mobile. I'd also appreciate information on the best modems to use for this type of application. PCMCIA-type modems being preferred. Please reply by e-mail either to this address: wjcs75a@prodigy.com or preferably to: phrisko@world.std.com However, if you feel that it won't take up too much bandwidth and may be useful to others, feel free to reply to the Digest. Thanks, Paul ------------------------------ From: KMCLEOD@delphi.com Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted Date: Mon, 20 DEC 93 23:37:36 EST Organization: Delphi Internet Mike, the phone company is right -- you can't get ASCII to Baudot (code used by TYs) communication by software alone. You're going to need a hybrid ASCII/Baudot modem. There are several on the market, including the MIC300i, and they have a version for the Mac too. Ultratec in Wisconsin produces the Intelemodem, and Phone-TTY in Hackensack, NJ has a model called the CM-4. Pricing for these products runs about $350. As for software, there's Futura for PC compatibles from Phone TTY, and the MIC 300i comes with FullTalk. I don't think anything is available specifically for working with UNIX, tho. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 12:45:59 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite This refers to calls originating in the UK: > To get a guaranteed non-satellite circuit to the USA, useful for > certain data transmission requirements which involve a lot of > handshaking, dial 0101 83 + area code + number. > The code 84 allows you to obtain a satellite link, if you really want > one for any reason. 010 is international access code in the UK, and 1 is the country code which includes the U.S. Now you're telling me that EXTRA digits are inserted for non-satellite/satellite links? The equipment at the UK end can handle these extra digits and would not be confused by the coming of the NNX area codes? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 03:43 EST From: Dan L. Dale <0005517538@mcimail.com> Subject: Technical Analysis: Santa Claus, Science and Myth SANTA CLAUS: Science and Myth As a result of an overwhelming lack of requests, and with research help from that renown scientific journal SPY magazine (January, 1990) -- I am pleased to present my scientific inquiry into Santa Claus and his merriments. 1) No known species of reindeer can fly. BUT there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and microbes, this does not COMPLETELY rule out the flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen. 2) There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world. BUT since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million according to UN'S Population Reference Bureau. At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each. 3) Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits per second. This is to say that for each Christian household with well-behaved children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever LEFT-OVER snacks, scurry back up the chimney, get back into the sleigh and speed on to the next house. Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for our calculations purpose - we will suspend our beliefs), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc. This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man- made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second - a conventional reindeer can run, tops - 15 mph. 4) The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized "Lego" set (2lbs), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably described as overweight. On land, a typical reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that "flying reindeer" (see point #1) could pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we cannot do the job with eight, or even nine. We need 214,200 reindeer. This increases the payload - not even counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons. Again, for comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth II. 5) 353,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous drag - air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy per second each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake. The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second. Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times greater than gravity. A 250-pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force. Observation: In order for Santa to deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he and Rudolph's mates will indeed be DIVINE. Merry Christmas with all the Blessings, Wishing You and All at Home Joy, Happiness, Peace, Prosperity and Success for the New Year. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sentiments exactly! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #832 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09655; 22 Dec 93 16:27 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05701 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:39:26 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06674 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:39:01 -0600 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:39:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312221839.AA06674@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #833 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Dec 93 12:39:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 833 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: Online Users Encyclopedia (Vedder Wright via Monty Solomon) Book Review: On Internet 94 (Dan L. Dale) Viewdata Terminal For Sale (Leigh M. Preece) Need Two to One Phone Line Switcher Help (andy@helios.njit.edu) Hardware Wanted For Compressing Data Over WAN Links (Ove Hansen) 911 Changes in Toronto (Tony Harminc) NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity (Will Martin) ATM Tariffs - Anyone Have the Facts? (D.E. Price) Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Tom O'Connell) Call For Papers - SIGCOMM'94 (Patrick Dowd) Looking For Papers on Cellular Phone Technologies (Dell'Elce Antonio) Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce (Tara D. Mahon) Digital Cellular Information Wanted (Alex Cena) Source For Cellular Phone Accessories Wanted (drhilton@kaiwan.com) AT&T --> Earn Miles ON DL, UA, US (Eric Seiden via Monty Solomon) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 02:46:29 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Book Review: Online Users Encyclopedia FYI. From misc.books.technical. Newsgroups: misc.books.technical From: vwright@world.std.com (Vedder A Wright) Subject: Review: Online Users Encyclopedia Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 22:39:30 GMT Massive Telecom Book Arrives c 1993 Vedder Wright Bernard Aboba's "Online Users Encyclopedia" scoops the entire field with breathtaking scope from bulletin boards to the Internet, from how-to's to overview. This is a book for every level, beginner or advanced. It clearly stands out from the pack in tone, organization, and detail, offering specific information together with the big picture -- the "vision thing." The book is huge: about 800 pages on large format like a Sears catalog. The graphics and constant human touches help greatly to lead the reader through the daunting range of technical information it contains. The book is for both Mac and PC platforms. Unix tips and tricks are also found among the appendices. Other books don't attempt to tackle this scope. Of particular note is the detailed information for setting up SLIP and PPP connections to the Internet, together with reviews of TCP/IP software tools. The book contains helpful reviews of choice products, lists of sites, software and hardware discussion, and much more. The sections on compression utilities and file transfer are more detailed than any other book I have found. It's well-researched and well-organized. Yet Aboba doesn't lose sight of the purpose of all this: to communicate with other human beings. Vital human issues as well as the technical details are addressed, such as the role that bulletin boards play in relation to the Internet. Articles from online pioneers from Tom Jennings to Vinton Cerf help to inform us of the issues at stake. Vedder Wright vwright@world.std.com ****** The Online User's Encyclopedia, by Bernard Aboba Addison-Wesley Trade Computer Books ISBN: 0-201-62214-9 Suggested Retail Price: $32.95 Discounts: Single-copy discounts of 25% are available for schools and libraries; steeper volume discounts are available for user groups. For information, contact Addison-Wesley Special Markets at (617)944-3700, ext. 2915. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 17:42 EST From: Dan L. Dale <0005517538@mcimail.com> Subject: Book Review: On Internet 94 From the publishers of Internet World. Title: on INTERNET 94 453 pages ISSN: 1066-9973 ISBN: 0-88736-929-4 Preface: Daniel Dern Edited: Tony Abbott Publisher: Mecklermedia, 11 Ferry Lane West, Westport CT 06880 203-226-6967 Mecklermedia Ltd. Artillery House,Artillery Row,London SW1P 1RT 071-976-0405 Cost: US$45.00 Certainly one of the most comprehensive directories of Internet information services anywhere. For those of you that have ever requested a List Global from a Listserver, you will appreciate the tidy cross-referencing and healthy index. This is exactly what I was looking for when I first started using the Listserv and FTP-Server functions of the Internet. Other books on the Internet are great ... but reading them sometimes takes as much effort as navigating the Net itself. Jack Webb wanted "Just the Facts" well they are definitely in this book ... but can they keep it updated? Table of Contents Section 1: Discussion Lists and Special Interest Mailing Lists Section 2: Electronic Journals and Newsletters Section 3: Electronic Texts,Text Archives,Selected FTP Sites Section 4: Freenets and Other Community-Based Information Services Section 5: Campus-Wide Information Systems Section 6: Commercial Services on the Internet Section 7: Usenet Newsgroups and Other Mailing Lists Section 8: WAIS-Accessible Databases Appendix: List Review Service Subject Index END ------------------------------ From: mda03@keele.ac.uk (L.M. Preece) Subject: Viewdata Terminal For Sale Date: 22 Dec 1993 12:10:11 GMT [ Article crossposted from comp.terminals ] [ Author was L.M. Preece ] [ Posted on 21 Dec 1993 14:04:45 GMT ] Is anyone looking for a Sony Viewdata terminal ? It has composite video/RGB/TTL inputs and has inputs for an external modem. Also included is a Prestel type facility for hooking up to a phone line. You can access loads of places with it and maybe even Internet or your local server. Mail me back and I can furnish you with the model number and more specs. I am advertising it on behalf of a colleague and not my organization. Leigh.M.Preece. Keele University.Staffordshire.UK mda03@seq1.cc.keele.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: andy@helios.njit.edu (andy) Subject: Need Two to One Phone Line Switcher Help Organization: EIES2 - NJIT Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 15:54:21 GMT I am looking to either build or buy a device that will do the following: I need to plug two standard phone lines into a device that will detect which line is ringing and then connect the output to the line that is ringing. The device does not need to answer the call, just switch it to the output line. I realize two line phones and answering machines are readily available, but that is not my application, this is just an easier way to explain what I need. Any replies would be appreciated to: andy@helios.njit.edu For example: Line 1 Line 2 | | | | | | --------------------------------- | | | | | Device | | | | | --------------------------------- | | | Telephone or Answering machine [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Isn't the Radio Shack thing still available which allows two lines to be switched into one phone (either manually or automatically) still available? I've had one for a few years and it works fine. LEDs even tell you which line is currently switched. You can turn the automatic switching on or off, and choose which line you want to use for outgoing calls. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ove@neu.sgi.com (Ove Hansen) Subject: Hardware Wanted For Compressing Data Over WAN Links Date: 22 Dec 1993 17:17:09 GMT Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc. I'd be interested in receiving information about hardware products available for compressing data sent over WAN links. I've heard about a product called Symplex Datamizers and am awaiting more info about this, does anyone have any experience with Symplex and their products, or can anyone direct me towards other vendors offering similar hardware? Thanks in advance, Ove Hansen - Network Administrator e-mail: ove@neu.sgi.com Silicon Graphics Manufacturing S.A. (Switzerland) Phone : (41-38) 433 535 Chemin des Rochettes 2, CH-2016 Cortaillod Fax : (41-38) 433 900 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 17:23:36 EST From: Tony Harminc Subject: 911 Changes in Toronto I saw the following bizarre notice in the paper last week: NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices In order to provide the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto with an effective, efficient emergency response service, the Metropolitan Toronto ambulance, fire and police service providers utilize the 9-1-1 emergency telephone system. Technology has recently been made available to the general public which allows an alarm device to auto-dial the 9-1-1 emergency number by pushing a button. On receipt of the call by an Emergency Operator a microphone is activated which acts as a one-way listening device for the operator. These alarm devices are intended to function without supervision by automatically accessing the 9-1-1 emergency system, implying that a need for an emergency service exists. The subsequent one-way transmission inhibits proper communications, resulting in unnecessary confusion and delays, monopolizing the time and efforts of emergency services personnel who would otherwise be serving the public in more appropriate ways. These calls should be received and verified by a private sector monitoring station, where the expertise and resources are available to manage such activity. For these reasons, effective January 1, 1994, the Emergency Services of Metropolitan Toronto will not respond to, or act upon any alarm transmitted directly to the 9-1-1 system, from any auto-dial alarm device. Members of the public are cautioned accordingly and advised to place no reliance on these alarm devices, which transmit an alarm directly to the 9-1-1 system, as a means of obtaining emergency response. Your best access to emergency services is a personal telephone call using the 9-1-1 emergency number or through a professionally monitored alarm system. Dated at Toronto this 1st day of December, 1993. (signed) Director, Metropolitan Toronto Ambulance Service Coordinator, Metropolitan Toronto Fire Chiefs Chief, Metropolitan Toronto Police Force -------------- Well, I can see their point, but in my humble-and-not-lawyer's opinion they are setting themselves up for a lawsuit. There is no technical means to differentiate a 911 call from an alarm auto-dialer from the case where a person manages to knock the phone off the hook, dial 911, and perhaps mumble a few words about the emergency. If they are really going to ignore 911 calls where the caller says nothing, then they've thrown out half the benefit of the expensive ANI-ALI system installed some years ago. Now what they may have *meant* to say is that they will ignore calls where the auto-dialer plays a pre-recorded message, which makes reasonable sense, but it sounds as though they've confused auto-dial burglar alarms with personal safety dialers. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 04:39:52 CST From: Will Martin Subject: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity When I make an outside-line call on our NEC NEAX 2400 system here at work (dialing 9 and then the local seven-digit number), the system has the annoying habit of giving me a ring-sound (in the handset or the speaker, depending which is turned on) and then a click that sounds *exactly* like the far end picking up on the call. However, it is not -- the ring sounds then continue until the called party answers or I hang up. What is going on that causes this initial ring-tone that I hear followed by that click? Is it the process of the unit selecting an outside trunk? If so, why does it give me a ring first? It is extremely bothersome -- that click sounds so much like the called party picking up that I am constantly reaching for the phone handset to start the conversation (our phones have speakers but no mikes, so we can start a call with the handset hung-up, but have to grab it to speak when the called party answers). It doesn't matter that I'm used to this and it happens every time -- I still can't train myself to ignore that initial click. If these are intentional sonic signals presented to me to indicate that the unit is working, I don't appreciate them. I'd prefer a pause of dead silence until it grabs a trunk and really begins the call. There's so little correspondence between the ring sounds I hear and the actual rings the called party's phone emits that I can't say if that first ringing I hear is before or after the called party's phone rings the first time. I'm guessing it is always internal-only; that the click is when the outside connection is made. Can anyone tell me just what is going on when I call out? When I dial the initial "9", am I handed off to a telco trunk then, or does the NEC just suck up all my dialled digits and only emit them to the telco switch after I finish? Or am I "talking" to the telco switch right after I dial the initial 9? I suspect the NEC waits until it detects a complete and valid-by-its-standards number before it passes it to the telco. That makes detecting and forbidding 976- and 900- calls easy. If the NEC holds the numbers and then passes them on later, how fast can it do this? Are the trunks it has to the telco higher-speed or special lines, or the same as any generic business-type phone line? Does it spit out DTMF at some far-higher-than-normal speed, or try to emulate human-dialling speed? (It would seem there isn't all that much time between the end of my dialling and that magical click ...) I have no experience with other competing phone systems -- we were on Centrex before we moved to the building which has this NEC NEAX 2400. So do other systems do the same thing? Regards, Will ------------------------------ From: dap@aber.ac.uk (D E Price) Subject: ATM Tariffs - Anyone Have the Facts? Organization: University of Wales, Aberystwyth Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 11:57:55 GMT Dear All, I have just spotted some articles in the trade press about a tariff for ATM announced by the German Telecom. Does anyone have the full tariff for them or indeed for any other ATM provider (e.g. Sprint)? I want to be able to calculate charges for a range of customers so I need to know as much information as you have. Thanks in advance, Dave Price ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Dec 93 11:02:43 -0800 From: fico!fico0!tjo@apple.com Subject: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem with our voice mail system. She will be leaving a message in someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she hadn't. The problem has been re-occurring. Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones generated by the keypad. The system interprets the voice as a key being punched. This seems odd, but I have HEARD of it on other systems. Has this happened to anyone else? Anyone come up with a solution to this problem? (Other than HORMONE PILLS?) Thanks, Tom O'Connell Fair, Isaac Co. - San Rafael, CA. Internet: fico!tjo@apple.com ------------------------------ From: dowd@acsu.buffalo.edu (Patrick Dowd) Subject: Call For Papers - SIGCOMM'94 Reply-To: dowd@eng.buffalo.edu Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 22:19:17 GMT Call for Papers ACM SIGCOMM'94 CONFERENCE Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications University College London London, UK August 31 to September 2, 1994 (Tutorials and Workshop, August 30) An international forum on communication network applications and technologies, architectures, protocols, and algorithms. Authors are invited to submit full papers concerned with both theory and practice. The areas of interest include, but are not limited to: -- Analysis and design of computer network architectures and algorithms, -- Innovative results in local area networks, -- Mixed-media networks, -- High-speed networks, routing and addressing, support for mobile hosts, -- Resource sharing in distributed systems, -- Network management, -- Distributed operating systems and databases, -- Protocol specification, verification, and analysis. A single-track, highly selective conference where successful submissions typically report results firmly substantiated by experiment, implementation, simulation, or mathematical analysis. Papers must be less than 20 double-spaced pages long, have an abstract of 100-150 words, and be original material that has not been previously published or be currently under review with another conference or journal. In addition to its high quality technical program, SIGCOMM '94 will offer tutorials by noted instructors such as Paul Green and Van Jacobson (tentative), and a workshop on distributed systems led by Derek McAuley. Important Dates: Paper submissions: 1 February 1994 Tutorial proposals: 1 March 1994 Notification of acceptance: 2 May 1994 Camera ready papers due: 9 June 1994 All submitted papers will be judged based on their quality and relevance through double-blind reviewing where the identities of the authors are withheld from the reviewers. Author's names should not appear on the paper. A cover letter is required that identifies the paper title and lists the name, affiliation, telephone number, email, and fax number of all authors. Authors of accepted papers need to sign an ACM copyright release form. The Proceedings will be published as a special issue of ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review. The program committee will also select a few papers for possible publication in the IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking. Submissions from North America should be sent to: Craig Partridge BBN 10 Moulton St Cambridge MA 02138 All other submissions should be sent to: Stephen Pink Swedish Institute of Computer Science Box 1263 S-164 28 Kista Sweden Five copies are required for paper submissions. Electronic submissions (uuencoded, compressed postscript) should be sent to each program chair. Authors should also e-mail the title, author names and abstract of their paper to each program chair and identify any special equipment that will be required during its presentation. Due to the high number of anticipated submissions, authors are encouraged to strictly adhere to the submission date. Contact Patrick Dowd at dowd@eng.buffalo.edu or +1 716 645-2406 for more information about the conference. Student Paper Award: Papers submitted by students will enter a student-paper award contest. Among the accepted papers, a maximum of four outstanding papers will be awarded full conference registration and a travel grant of $500 US dollars. To be eligible the student must be the sole author, or the first author and primary contributor. A cover letter must identify the paper as a candidate for this competition. Mail and E-mail Addresses: General Chair ------------- Jon Crowcroft Department of Computer Science University College London London WC1E 6BT United Kingdom Phone: +44 71 380 7296 Fax: +44 71 387 1397 E-Mail: J.Crowcroft@cs.ucl.ac.uk Program Chairs -------------- Stephen Pink (Program Chair) Swedish Institute of Computer Science Box 1263 S-164 28 Kista Sweden Phone: +46 8 752 1559 Fax: +46 8 751 7230 E-mail: steve@sics.se Craig Partridge (Program Co-Chair for North America) BBN 10 Moulton St Cambridge MA 02138 Phone: +1 415 326 4541 E-mail: craig@bbn.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 11:42:18 GMT From: tdnycal@dsiaq3.ing.univaq.it (Dell'Elce Antonio) Subject: Looking For Papers on Cellular Phone Technologies Do you know of any network-available paper regarding celllular phones communication (I mean research papers, but anything else is also ok.) please email to me: tdnycal@dsiaq1.ing.univaq.it A. dell'elce ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 11:28:20 EST From: Bob Rosenberg Subject: Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce An article that ran in the 13 December {Wall Street Journal} said that 28 companies were to about to announce their support for the Info Super Highway. We know that IBM, Apple, BellSouth, AT&T, CitiCorp, H-P, and Cable Labs were to take part in the announcement, but the other shoe hasn't dropped yet. Does anyone know the names of the 21 other companies that are/were going to take part in this PR fest? Or when/if this announcement will be made? Any information would be greatly appreciated. Bob Rosenberg bob@insight-corp.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 16:00:23 EST From: Alex Cena Subject: Digital Cellular Information Wanted Some cellular carriers have made it known, which digital cellular technology they plan to adopt today and in the future. For example, McCaw and Southwestern Bell already are deploying TDMA digital cellular systems around the country, while Bell South is perceived to also be leaning toward TDMA given their intent to purchase infrastructure equipment from Hughes Network Systems. US West, Pactel Cellular and Bell Atlantic have announced CDMA deployment plans and MCI plans to use GSM for its PCS deployment. Does anyone know where Ameritech and GTE are with respect to digital cellular technology? What are the issues involved in the selection process. Thanks in advance, Alex M. Cena Lehman Brothers, acena@lehman.com ------------------------------ From: drhilton@kaiwan.com (Doc) Subject: Source For Cellular Phone Accessories? Reply-To: drhilton@kaiwan.com Organization: kaiwan.com Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 01:16:47 GMT I recently bought an AT&T cellular phone, and would like to know of mail order houses or other outlets for accessories, such as extended life batteries. I have a couple of friends who also need such things as chargers, antennae, etc. We don't want to pay the rates charged by the cellular provider's outlet. Any suggestions? Best, drhilton@kaiwan.com - "Doc" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 02:08:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T --> Earn Miles on DL, UA, US FYI. From rec.travel.air. Newsgroups: rec.travel.air From: darsys@pro-entropy.cts.com (Eric A. Seiden) Subject: AT&T --> EARN MILES ON DL, UA, US Organization: Pro-Entropy +1-305-265-9073 (DAR Systems Int'l -- Miami, FL) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 20:38:17 EST Call 1-800-7-REWARD and sign up. If you use AT&T for over $25/month in long distance calls, you can get enrolled at NO CHARGE. I responded to the ad in the paper and was pleased to find out you can apply five miles for each dollar to any ONE of the three airlines. In your first month get TRIPLE CREDITS too. There is no charge for this program -- it's designed to keep people with AT&T. (You can also apply credits to LD service rebates instead). Keep trying -- the line was busy for almost an hour before I got through. What a great idea! RealName: Eric A. Seiden (DAR Systems International: Miami, FL, USA) ProLine : darsys@Pro-Entropy [Call Pro-Entropy at 305-265-9073] Internet: darsys@Pro-Entropy.cts.com [24 hours a day of chaos at 14.4K] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #833 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10129; 22 Dec 93 17:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02071 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:54:18 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27339 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:53:52 -0600 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:53:52 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312221953.AA27339@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #834 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Dec 93 13:51:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 834 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Caller ID in Software? (Todd D. Hale) Re: Caller ID in Software? (james@kaiwan.com) Re: Technical Analysis: Santa Claus, Science and Myth (Jim Agnew) Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Kristin J. Rehberg) Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? (Curtis R. Nelson) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (John R. Levine) Re: Voice Mail HW Wanted (Jeff Kenton) Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! (Mark Voorhees) Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number? (William Bauserman) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Jon Edelson) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (John R. Levine) Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Wilson Mohr) Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (David A. Kaye) Re: Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage (Don Lynn) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: thale@Novell.COM (Todd D. Hale) Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software? Organization: Novell, Inc., Provo, UT, USA Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 15:54:32 GMT In article Paul Robinson writes: >> Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not >> want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here >> ready to do some work for me. > Software only goes so far. Caller ID is sent on a telephone line as a > stream of data between rings to a telephone line which is on-hook. > Therefore, you still need hardware that can monitor an on-hook line ... So, what is the easiest (cheapest) way to access Caller ID? What simple hardware device is available to do this? And, which modems allow me to access it before the phone is answered? Thanks in advance! Todd D. Hale thale@novell.com halet@ernie.cs.byu.edu Unofficially speaking, of course. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The cheapest and most effecient way is to purchase a Caller-ID Display box from telco or some other supplier of same. Seriously. Don't bother re-inventing the whole process. In addition, there are modems which display Caller-ID messages in the process of otherwise doing their thing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: james@kaiwan.com Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software? Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279, 714-539-0829) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 08:16:24 GMT In article , Paul Robinson wrote: > Software only goes so far. Caller ID is sent on a telephone line as a > stream of data between rings to a telephone line which is on-hook. > Therefore, you still need hardware that can monitor an on-hook line > and retrieve the data that is delivered. Software can't do this > unless there is hardware there to pick up the information, any more > than a color paint program can generate colors from a black and white > scanned image. Zfax has an option to detect Caller ID. Unfortunately, there is no Caller ID in CA for me to test it. You also need a ZyXEL modem to do it. Zfax is free. info@kaiwan.com,Anonymous FTP,Telnet kaiwan.com(192.215.30.2)FAX#714-638-0455 DATA# 714-539-0829,830-6061,310-527-4279 818-579-6701 16.8k/14.4k 8-N-1 ZyXEL U-1496E 16.8K: $279.00, U-1496E+ 19.2K: $389.00 Voice/FAX/Data Modems AT&T DATA Port 14.4K: $189.00(Int) $209(Ext) w/ QuickLink II, FAX/DATA Modems ------------------------------ From: Brainwave Surfer Subject: Re: Technical Analysis: Santa Claus, Science and Myth Date: 21 Dec 93 09:09:02 -0400 Organization: Medical College of Virginia In article , Dan L. Dale <0005517538@ mcimail.com> writes: > SANTA CLAUS: Science and Myth Stuff deleted ... > 5) 353,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous drag - > air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as > a spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of > reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy per second each. Well, according to quantum theory, if you pinpoint the energy of a particle, you cannot pinpoint the location of Santa, plus you're leaving out quantum "tunneling", which is probably facilliated by Elf-assurance!!! If Santa seems to have mastered quantum tunneling, then he does his work while the night of the world has no end, as time does not seem to exist in a quantum tunnel. > Merry Christmas with all the Blessings, > Wishing You and All at Home > Joy, Happiness, Peace, Prosperity and Success > for the New Year. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sentiments exactly! PAT] And mine also!!! Remember the reason for the season!! a VERY Merry Christmas to you all. Jim Agnew AGNEW@RUBY.VCU.EDU (Internet) Neurosurgery, AGNEW@VCUVAX (Bitnet) MCV-VCU This disc will self destruct in Richmond, VA, USA five seconds. Good luck, Jim..." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since as you point out, under the circumstances there is no real measurement of time, maybe Santa Claus in fact works all year around if you decide to let him ... PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) Reply-To: krehberg@vnet.IBM.COM Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 09:34:46 EST From: Charles McGuinness writes: > A. Padgett Peterson writes that he thinks that there is not much of a > logical reason for a 500 channel system. Specifically: >> The point I am trying to make is that it is a common fallacy to think >> "if enough is good, more is better". Simple logistics would be bad >> enough: for example the TV viewing guide that comes in the paper now >> requires four pages of bar charts for every day -- and this is just for >> the "standard" channels, can you imagine the size of a 500 channel >> listing ? > I think the perspective is wrong. It's not that a system where you > have to press "upchannel" 500 times to loop around is going to be a > success, but a system where I get to choose which 40 (or whatever) > channels are on display instead of the cable company will be. The idea behind the so-called "500-channel" cable system is that you have between 50 and 150 channels of "regular" cable channels of which you choose the channels you want. These will be the "regular" networks which most people recognize today, such as MTV, CNN, Comedy Central, various SuperStations, and movie channels. The rest of the 300 or so "channels" (not all of which may be "TV" channels; cable companies say 500-channels to brag about the bandwidth of the new fiber lines) are used for things such as Direct-To-Home viewing of Request or Pay-Per-View events, some of which can be displayed ON DEMAND for the customer, INTERACTIVE television, and, in addition to various audio and computer services such as Telephony/Voice Mail and the Internet, and (in the case of our local cable company) a fully monitored home security system that won't depend on the telephone company anymore. Once our local cable fully implements the 500 channel bandwidth in our area they can potentially destroy the monopoly that NY Telephone (now NYNEX) holds on the local calling area, unless antitrust regulations subvert this. Why NYNEX isn't replacing its ancient copper street pole wire with fiber optics TODAY is beyond me, because telephony is such a simple application when compared to video. It is also interesting to note that NYNEX's ISDN and "Switched-56" service won't be available in this area until at least 1995. It is even more interesting to note that full deployment of the local cable company's fiber-optic network is nearing completion well ahead of schedule, currently in 2Q94, and this is in an area which usually sees such services very late in the game. It's going to be a great decade for local cable companies! As a side note, I believe they will handle upstream traffic either by using two fiber optic lines, or (for remote areas) the same fiber optic with split download/upload bandwidth, or existing telephone wire. Whether there are two conductores are inside the same wire on the pole right now or not isn't known by me. In very many, more populated locations you will see two wires on the pole in parallel, but in remote areas you will see only one wire. For some reason I don't see upstream traffic as posing such a large problem in the present day because it will be mostly small request packets for programming and transfers, with the bulk of the bandwidth almost always happening in the download portion of the transmission (except for the occasional video telephone conversation, of course! :) Kriston J. Rehberg Internet: krehberg@vnet.ibm.com Associate Programmer/Analyst IBM Internal: V2ENA81 AT OWEGO ENSCO, Incorporated or (AFS): v1ena81@legend.endicott.ibm.com IBM Corporation, Owego, NY USA phone: (607) 751-2180 or tie: 662-2180 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 06:28:28 CST From: CRN@VAX3.ltec.com Subject: Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? > First question is, how do they verify phone calling card numbers? My > calling card is a Pac Bell card, and it works absolutly everywhere > within the US I've ever tried to use it, including out of area Bells > (like NyNex). Since NyNex doesn't touch PacBell, they would have to > traverse a long distance carrier's line, which seems odd. > Or there's a central clearing house somewhere. Or there's a simple... Once upon a time (before divestiture), Alternate Billing Services (calling cards, collect, third number billing) were supported by an AT&T database called the Billing Validation Application (BVA) and AT&T's CCIS6 signaling network. The BVA was used to validate AT&T calling cards as well as cards for Local Exchange Companies (LEC). If the LEC provided operator services and Mechanized Calling Card Service (MCCS), the switch had CCIS6 links to the BVA. In early 1992, the LECs and AT&T divorced themselves of the BVA and migrated to a new system, the Line Information Data Base (LIDB). LIDB is composed of a number of separately owned databases (RBOCs, AT&T, and some of the large independent LECs), accessed via the Signaling System 7 (SS7) network. Those telcos not large enough to have their own LIDB had to make arrangements for their numbers to be placed in someone else's LIDB. When the LEC needs to validate a calling card or third party number for billing, an SS7 query is launched from the operator switch to a hubbing provider's Signaling Transfer Point (STP). Anyone that provides a hubbing service has SS7 links to all the various LIDBs. The STP looks at the first three digits of the billing number and determines which LIDB the query should be routed to (Global Title Translation-GTT). The query contains the identity of the orignating switch and a transaction ID, which allows the response to return to the proper switch and the switch to match the query with the response. Bellcore maintains a guide called the LARG (LIDB Access Routing Guide), which is updated monthly. The LARG is used for maintaining STP global title translation tables. The transition from BVA to LIDB was a little shaky at first, but it works well today. It normally takes about half a second to receive a response to a query. > Second question is this: > What's the telecom situation in Alaska like? I remember there was a > discussion a while ago about Hawaii. But then I was up in Alaska a few > months ago, and pay phones weren't too good on the 10xxx numbers. > AT+T seemed to give me something called Alascom. Does MCI really not > serve Alaska, or just not the pay phones? Is there a different set of... Although Nebraska is a long way from Alaska, I have one theory. It's possible that Alascom may have an agreement with some or all of the LD carriers to provide operator services on their behalf and then pass the call to their trunks. If you dial 10XXX + 0 and end up at an Alascom operator, that may be the case. > Here's another tidbit: when I call 10xxx - 0 - 510 xxx xxxx from my > 415 work number, in order to get lower rates (intra LATA calls that > Pac Bell makes a fortune on), Pac Bell's error message is:.... In Nebraska, LD carriers must get approval from the Public Service Commision to carry Intra-LATA calls. If they don't have that approval, we (Lincoln Telephone) have to block those calls. I don't know if the same exists in California. References: 1) United States Telephone Association (USTA) National Services Advisory Committee (NSAC) Bulletin TD 91-131, 11/27/91 Curtis R. Nelson, P.E. email: cnelson@ltec.com Lincoln Telephone Company phone: (402) 476-4886 1440 'M' Street fax: (402) 476-5527 Lincoln, NE 68508 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 09:17 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > What we really need is a new packet-switched network [with faster dialups] ... > In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number access, ... > How about a new 950 service (950 is better than 800 since it avoids > local access charges) ... Holy modem tax, Batman! There's a good reason you don't see one number access: it costs more. When a long-distance company connects to the local phone network, it pays, by modem standards, a stiff price, four or five cents per minute, or roughly $3/hr at each end of the connection. If you call a 950 or 800 number, whoever the carrier is pays that, even if you don't directly see it on the bill. AT&T has one-number 950-1288 service, but it's only used for on-line services that are already so expensive that an extra $3/hr isn't a big deal. The 'modem tax' brouhaha from 1987 was about these connection costs. The FCC, not totally unreasonably, said that packet networks look a lot like long-distance phone companies, so they should connect to the phone network in the same way. This would allow all sorts of swell features not now available, e.g. Sprintnet could assign each of their providers a 700 number so you could dial directly to the service you want, using the same number regardless of where you're caling from, instead of having to dial a local Sprintnet number, then go through a second dialing dialog to tell it who you really want to talk to. But along with a real phone connection comes real phone pricing, and nobody wanted to pay that extra $3/hr. So the FCC backed off and left us with the current situation where packet nets have a special rule that lets them connect to the phone network like ordinary business customers, without paying any per-minute charge. I suspect the main reason you don't see 9600 bps dial-up packet network connections is that there's not much demand for them. By the time you factor in the slowdowns due to network connection, and consider how much cheaper normal long distance is compared to ten years ago when the packet nets were getting giong, it's about as fast to dial direct at 14.4K. If you want to complain about slow data connections, complain about the local telcos who have been slow to introduce ISDN, which provides dual 64K bps connections, and have done so at prices that make it unattractive. There's also a chicken and egg problem here: ISDN per-minute prices are, by and large, the same as toll rates, but ISDN connections can be set up and taken down very fast, so a connection of a few seconds makes sense. If Compuserve, say, were set up so you called in via ISDN, it blatted a few hundred K of screens and hung up, then you pondered off-line for a few seconds, then reconnected, it blatted a few more hundred K and hung up, you could actually be connected for only five minutes out of each hour, and even at regular phone rates, the phone bill would be on the order of 75 cents/hr. But since there isn't much ISDN, there's not much incentive to make things work that way. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: jkenton@world.std.com (Jeff Kenton) Subject: Re: Voice Mail HW Wanted Organization: Kenton Systems Corporation, Weston MA Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 14:51:59 GMT jic@panix.com (Joseph I. Ceasar) writes: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dialogic also makes voice mail cards > capable of handling four lines. They are (I think) in Parsippany, NJ. PAT] Dialogic is in Parsippany -- four line voice mail cards for a PC are $1150. Also try Rhetorex in Campbell, CA, which has similar equipment for about the same price. Jeff Kenton (617) 894-4508 jkenton@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: markvoor@mindvox.phantom.com (Mark Voorhees) Subject: Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 09:56:05 EST Organization: [MindVox] / Phantom Access Technologies / (+1 800-MindVox) Steve Lichter writes: > There have been follow ups on this and it appears GTE plans to take > the same action as Bell Atlantic has done and bring suit against the > FCC. GTE has effectively taken the same action as Bell Atlantic. By going to court to seek to continue the Cerritos project, it is raising the same constitutional issue, as did Bell Atlantic: whether telephone companies can offer video programming (as opposed to just transport) to their customers. The Cerritos project had operated under a waiver from that prohibition, and GTE now seeks to have the prohibition declared unconstitional, which is exactly what Bell Atlantic successfully did. markvoor@phantom.com Mark Voorhees ------------------------------ Date: 22 Dec 93 09:48:02 GMT From: Bauserman, William Subject: Re: Two Cellphones With Same Number? John Landwehr writes: > Ameritech and Cellular One in Chicago claim that you cannot have two > cellular phones with the same phone number. (This would be a nice > feature if you have a car phone, and a handheld! But they claim the > FCC doesn't approve. Translated -> they make more money this way). > Their suggestion is call forwarding and no-answer-transfer. This is not exactly true. If they are using an AT&T Autoplex Cellular Switch, there is a software feature available that allows up to three cellphones to have the same directory number (without this feature you are only able to assign ESNs and DNs on a one to one basis) . So it is available and I don't know why the FCC would not approve. But why wouldn't you want to do it? The best reason is as Pat stated, you will probably wind up in a fraud database and then none of your phones will work or worse yet your monthly bill will come in a box :) Also, the current setup of the cellular network wasn't designed to handle two units with the same DN and it creates problems. These problems are avoided if you NEVER turn both phones on at the same time. But, if you do, it creates paging problems, alerting (ringing) problems, and conversation problems (both land and mobile). As always these opinions are completely my own. Bill Bauserman william.d.bauserman@gte.sprint.com ------------------------------ From: winnie@flagstaff.princeton.edu (Jon Edelson) Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Organization: Princeton University Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 01:42:30 GMT In the first message of this thread, a question was asked about blocking Caller ID in a situation where a social worker was calling from home. Rather then getting into the whole 'right to Caller ID discussion' it seems to me that calls from someone representing the social agency should be identified as calling from the social agency. The social agency is 'responsible' for the call, and while I think that people have the right to know who 'made' a call, I don't see why a home number needs to be made known for a business call, as long as the business is identified. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are suggesting then that perhaps a valuable solution to one part of the Caller-ID controversy would be if an 'alternate ID message' was available to certain individuals for use at their home under controlled circumstances, i.e. a police officer could have his ID shown as that of the Police Department, etc. Not a bad idea really. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 01:11 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > Are there any devices out there that can scramble your phone number > from Caller ID and Auto Callback? Well, there's distinctive ringing. You get two numbers on your phone, and they ring differently, one long ring or two shorts. Telco considers the one long ring number to be the true number and provides it as the Caller-ID number. It's an inexpensive service, $3/month around here. For under $100, you can get a box known as a ring leader which listens to the first ring of all incoming calls and connects to one of two lines plugged into it. I'd suggest getting a ring leader, attaching it to the phone line where it comes into your house, and plugging the rest of the phone wiring into the line two output. Line one can either go to an answering machine or be left unhooked. This way, anyone who calls your main number gets on answer, the second line is the number you actually give out. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 13:53:19 CST From: mohr@orange.rtsg.mot.com (Wilson Mohr) Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number storpis@kaiwan.com (Console Cowboy) writes: > I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800 > number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to > any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The > number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why? Well FWIW, welcome the new scam on the block. I got a page to 800-473-9323 number. When dialed the number thanks you "for calling about making extra money!" I hung up at that point. If you are interested you can hear it out, otherwise save your time. BTW, it really peeves me that the pager user has to *pay* for each page and some bonehead can waste my money without my consent. (that is, if *I were paying for it.) OTOH I *could* call the number and hear it completely through a billion or so times? Nah. not worth the effort. Bottom Line? If I don't recognize the number, I ignore it. (I was bored ...;) ) If it is important they will page again (and again ...) What about emergencies? I have a "code" set up for determining that nature of the page. No code? No return. Wilson Mohr mohr@rtsg.mot.com Strategic Quality - Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group "ME speak for Motorola? No, I don't think so . . ." ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number Date: 22 Dec 1993 15:53:49 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Dave Niebuhr (dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov) wrote: > storpis@kaiwan.com (Console Cowboy) writes: >> I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800 >> number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to >> any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The >> number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why? I don't know if this is an option, but some unscrupulous people were billing back calls to 800 numbers with telco look-alike bills a few years ago. This may be a scam to get you to call them. In this way, they have proof that you did indeed call their number. Sounds fishy, I know, but this scam was being done. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 10:29:45 PST From: DLynn.El_Segundo@xerox.com Subject: Re: Angry Monkeys Go on Rampage I think that there is something to be learned from the policies of the satellite Global Positioning System. They have first-class customers (the military), and second-class customers (everyone else). The second-class customers receive their information (concerning their position on earth) with intentionally added inaccuracies. The justification was that your average man-on-the-street should not be given the accuracy sufficient to place a smart bomb in your pocket. Clearly the Usenet should not be given accuracy sufficient to endanger others, so just feed the TELECOM Digest to Usenet with intentionally added inaccuracies (the nature of which can be left to your imagination). Disclaimer: :-) /Don Lynn [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But of course, Don! 'Everyone knows' I send secret messages to the mailing list not seen by comp.dcom.telecom and in fact what I do is leave the c.d.t. version a little messy sometimes with spelling and grammatical errors *on purpose* not seen by the list people (who's copies and the messages therein are always perfect -- so perfect as to be divine). Then whenever I see a message on Usenet with spelling or grammatical errors or just downright wrong I know it had to be copied from my writings to the net. I was in the local Radio Shlock store the other day when a customer came in and ask the clerk for a dummy load to use in place of an antenna when tuning up his radio. The clerk pointed at me and said "He's the only one we have right now, but sometimes the store is full of them." Remember Don and other readers: Let's put the 'X' back in Xmas. 'Tis the season to be jolly even if you don't feel comfortable wearing any gay apparal. Tra-la-la-la-la and all that. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #834 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13250; 23 Dec 93 7:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04075 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:07:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13644 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:07:06 -0600 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:07:06 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312231007.AA13644@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #835 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Dec 93 04:07:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 835 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (David A. Kaye) Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (Laurence Chiu) Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (davidson@medcolpa.bitnet) Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (Macy Hallock) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Macy Hallock) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Chris Ambler) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Steve Bauer) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (Richard Cox) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (George Zmijewski) Re: Wireless Local Loop in India (Gerald Serviss) Re: Standards and Where to Get Them? (Michael D. Griffin) Re: Calling a PBX and Billing (Andrew Klossner) Re: Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors (John R. Levine) Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite (George Zmijewski) Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? (Joe Kimbrough) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters Date: 22 Dec 1993 15:48:51 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] darren (darren@netcom.com) wrote: > Ranch) which means if you drive the 680 corridor to work every > morning, you reach a massive traffic jam. There are 100,000 people who > work at Bishop Ranch every day, which seems like nothing big right? It's funny. Bishop Ranch is probably the largest non-city in California. They have, what, 19 telephone exchanges now? Still, ask someone where Bishop Ranch is and you're likely to get a blank stare. I had no idea there were 100,000 people working there now. It *is* a huge complex, and includes all the major telco carriers. Funny that they'd think to concentrate so much firepower in one location. An accidental power line cut, say from a storm up at the Altamont Pass, or a nuclear spill from Lawrence Livermore and it would just wipe them out for many hours. I wonder if anyone has thought through these possibilties. ------------------------------ From: lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:42:29 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access In article , darren wrote: >>> San Ramon, CA has 102 phones per 100 people ... > Just a wierd thought -- but San Ramon is home of Pac Bell (at Bishop > Ranch) which means if you drive the 680 corridor to work every > morning, you reach a massive traffic jam. There are 100,000 people who > work at Bishop Ranch every day, which seems like nothing big right? I > mean San Fran probably has 1,000,000 and New York has 7,000,000 > workers entering every day -- but aside from Bishop Ranch, San Ramon > is a small sleepy town of maybe 30,000 -- too many of them yuppies who > are making it very hard on us younger types who want to buy homes in > our own region. I fail to see how the many people who live in San Ramon make it hard for you to buy a house in your own region. > Never liked the place anyway. And if you work for Pac Bell, just > kidding; my phone service is wonderful and soooooooo cheap. Merry > Christmas. Besides Pac Bell contributing the jams on the 680 corridor, don't forget Chevron Corp. which has an equally large complex at Chevron Park. I used to work there and hated the commute but quite liked the offices. Also I think Northern Telecom had offices in the same general area. Laurence Chiu Walnut Creek, California Tel: 510-215-3730 (work) Internet: lchiu@crl.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 20:25:07 -0400 From: DAVIDSON@MEDCOLPA.BITNET Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto Tony Harminc submitted a public notice and wrote about 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices in Toronto. > NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC > RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices > If they are really going to ignore 911 calls where the caller says > nothing, then they've thrown out half the benefit of the expensive > ANI-ALI system installed some years ago. Now what they may have > *meant* to say is that they will ignore calls where the auto-dialer > plays a pre-recorded message, which makes reasonable sense, but it > sounds as though they've confused auto-dial burglar alarms with > personal safety dialers. This is all a very good point, but speaking from the point of view of EMS dispatch (ambulances for medical emergencies), it is hard for the call-taker at the primary PSAP to shift the call to police, fire or EMS without at least some caller information. The default often goes to police, though in some enlightened urban systems 9-1-1 calls with no caller present and an open line are handled as a "(wo)man down" meaning a "send in the Marines" EMS response (first responders and advanced life support ambulance, both on emergency response--lights & sirens). Then too, the problem of the call-taker at the primary PSAP during busy hours trying to figure out what is happening could cause call "stacking" and delay the response to others. I'd suggest a response and a warning if the call is inappropriate. We just got that in Philadelphia for "false" burglar alarms, five "false" calls allowed (warnings will be issued), but on the sixth it will cost you $250. Regards. ------------------------------ From: fmsystm!fmsys!macy@wariat.org Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 20:35 EST Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto Reply-To: macy@telemax.com Organization: F M Systems/Telemax Medina, Ohio USA In article Tony Harminc writes: > I saw the following bizarre notice in the paper last week: > NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC > RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices [contents of notice about denying response to alarm auto dial devices calling 911 deleted ...] This type of event has been brought on by several situations: 1. The sale of "panic button" and "medical alert" devices on the consumer market that the manufacturer says "program this to call a number for assitance" 2. Persons who want some type of alarm signalling for aid to be sent (often burglar alarms), but do not wish to subscribe to a commercial alarm monitoring service. This is often done by "do it yourself" types installing their own equipment. 3. The use of autodialing monitor units, such as the "Sensaphone" that will iniate a call to a programmed number, and open a room monitor mic, on dectection of a noise or other event. Radio Shack sold a unit of this type at one time. In most cases, the user does not consult with the Police Dept, or 911 agency before doing this. The assumption is that they authorities are there to respond to any occurrence. The fault perceived by the agencies involved is false alarms and unverifiable events. A very large number of these calls come from unoccupied premises. The operational basis for most 911 systems is the receive calls from citizens with an emergency need. This means response, and verification of each event. Since most of these devices are installed by untrained persons, false alarms are common when typical events occur. Power failures, thunderstorms, swinging doors, radio interference, accidental operation and equipment malfunctions are typical causes of unwanted alarm signals being sent to 911. These unwanted signals frustrate the authorities, and endager the public by taking up valuable time of dispatchers, officers, and response vehicles. Most dept's will respond to any event as a matter of course, but will enforce false alarm ordinances, and other applicable rules strictly. In some areas, the fines are quite stiff. It's very likely that this notice was published as part of some type of false alarm ordinance or pending rulemaking. There is much more to this discussion, its an complex topic and the subject of much debate. I've tried to provide the best short explaination I could. Disclaimer: I own an alarm company. My father-in-law is a retired police chief. I've seen both sides of this issue, and I have my own opinions. I've also helped write a couple of false alarm ordinances. (BTW, the alarm industry has its own false alarm problems, as do many alarm users.) Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG +1.216.723.3030 macy@telemax.com macy@fms.com Telemax, Inc. - F M Systems, Inc. 152 Highland Drive Medina, OH 44256 USA ------------------------------ From: fmsystm!fmsys!macy@wariat.org Date: Wed, 23 Dec 93 20:12 EST Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Reply-To: macy@telemax.com Organization: F M Systems/Telemax Medina, Ohio USA In article fico!fico0!tjo@apple.com writes: > Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem > with our voice mail system. She will be leaving a message in > someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To > Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she > hadn't. The problem has been re-occurring. I've seen a couple variations of this: 1. Caller has a "soft" voice and the Voice Processing System (VPS) has a fairly high "threshold" level detect. The VPS treats the call as short or truncated. 2. Caller has a voice that does not fall within a frequency passband used for voice detection. Same result as 1. 3. Caller's voice has a component that is interpreted as a Touch Tone digit by the VPS. The VPS discards, truncates or branches depending on the interpreted digit's action. 4. Caller is calling via a circuit that has low audio levels (often in one direction only, toward the VPS). Same result as 1. 5. Caller has noisy circuit, inducing erratic operation. Comments: I've seen several problems with systems that seen to have difficulty with high pitched, soft voices. There is a known charateristic in the telephone network know as high frequency rolloff that attenuates frequencies above 1800 hz or so. With some callers, usually found to be certain type of high pitched, soft and often female voice, the VPS has trouble determining that the caller is really not there. That's because the amplitude of the human voice is usually found in the 800 hz to 1500 hz portion of the audio spectrum, and VPS boards are programmed to look at that area for voice detection. No doubt there are others on the net more capable than I in describing the details of this. Disclaimer: I sell and service, among other things, voice processing systems. This information is from my observations, not from what the manufacturers tell me. I have my own opinions. YMMV, no doubt. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG +1.216.723.3030 macy@telemax.com macy@fms.com Telemax, Inc. - F M Systems, Inc. 152 Highland Drive Medina, OH 44256 USA ------------------------------ From: cambler@cymbal.aix.calpoly.edu (Chris Ambler - Fubar) Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Organization: The Phishtank Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 01:56:16 GMT fico!fico0!tjo@apple.com says: > Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem > with our voice mail system. She will be leaving a message in > someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To > Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she > hadn't. The problem has been re-occurring. > Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens > when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones > generated by the keypad. The system interprets the voice as a key > being punched. > This seems odd, but I have HEARD of it on other systems. Has this > happened to anyone else? Anyone come up with a solution to this > problem? (Other than HORMONE PILLS?) Oh, I was going to suggest hormone pills, but since you've tried those ... :-) Actually, I design voice mail systems, and so I'm intimately familliar with this problem. The solution I have found works best is to increase the touch tone(tm) threshold, if you can. Most systems include a way to force the hardware to wait longer before registering the tone. Since a human voice will waver quite a bit (relative to the steady tone of a phone), this usually does the trick. If your hardware doesn't support this, first bug your vendor to put it in the next revision, and then good luck. ++Christopher(); // All original text is strictly the opinion of the poster Christopher J. Ambler, Author, FSUUCP 1.41, FSVMP 1.0, chris@toys.fubarsys.com ------------------------------ From: STEVE BAUER Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 18:28:31 CST When a female voice triggers a Voice Mail system, I have two suggestions: 1. Ask the person to talk a little slower. This will naturally lower the voice a bit, hopefully just enough to eliminate the problem. 2. Hold the phone a little further away from her lips. This might reduce the offending frequency so it won't trigger things. Steve ------------------------------ From: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk (Richard Cox) Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 23:56:28 +0000 David Leibold writes ... > The +44 956 I have listed as a PCN phone system +44 956 is shared between a PCN system (Mercury One-2-One) and a new service, "FLEXTEL", which is the UK's first personal numbering service. A bit like the 700 codes in the USA - but not, you'll be glad to hear, carrier specific! > Can anyone confirm or deny whether UK was really running out of area > codes The UK is not running out of area codes. Never has been. The proposed changes are, essentially, political. Have you ever tried to get a civil servant to admit they were wrong? Then you'll understand the problem. There is a *lot* of area-code wastage in the UK (The worst case is Foula, a tiny island with 25 or so telephones, which has its own area code +44 393. That code, like most other area codes, has capacity for a million numbers. If some of these under-used area codes were combined, over 200 new codes could be made available very easily and at a low cost (say, under five million UK pounds total). Also different providers are being given "branded" codes for special services, which means there are so many premium codes that most users cannot remember which is premium and which isn't. That suits telco! (Americans are lucky to have a single 900 code for this sort of thing, even though there are some "local" codes as well). The main worry is that there are a number of cities (Brighton, Belfast, Coventry, Bournemouth etc) which have a growing population, and are likely to need to move from six digits to seven in the next few years. London is also likely to exhaust its supply of numbers before the year 2000, even though it is already on seven digit schemes, and has recently had one area code split. So yes, the change will be happening (but at Easter 1995, not 1994). The problem is that it won't actually solve any of the problems that were used to justify the need for it in the first place !!! Merry Christmas everybody - Nadolig Llawen i chi gyd ! Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 956 700111 Fax: +44 956 700110 VoiceMail: +44 941 151515 E-mail address: richard@mandarin.com - PGP2.3 public key available on request ------------------------------ From: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk (George Zmijewski) Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? Organization: MGZ Computer Services Reply-To: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:39:52 +0000 >From Oftel Consultative Document June 93: (...) .. details of the codes that were to change in 1995 - addition of a "1" to all fixed network area codes after the trunk dialling prefix "0"; - a change of code in five major cities introducting seven digit subscriber numbers - a change in the international dialling prefix from "010" to "00" The codes that will *not* change at NCC are the existing codes for non-geographic services, ie: - frephone services; - premium rate services; - services where national calls are charges at local call rate; - mobile (cellular and PCN ) services; - certain paging services; ... followed by 23 pages of discussion on the subject. The date for NCC is 16 April 95 but new codes will begin to be accepted by some switches in March 94, around August 94 all exchanges should be able to recognise new codes. George Zmijewski ------------------------------ From: serviss@tazdevil.cig.mot.com (Gerald Serviss) Subject: Re: Wireless Local Loop in India Date: 22 Dec 1993 15:09:07 GMT Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola The system that you refer to is built by Motorola. It is based on analog signalling standards (AMPS/TACS). The India system was probably TACS as India is a GSM country. This system is designed to hook up to a Class 5 office. For more information contact Larry Svec at svec@rtsg.mot.com Jerry Serviss Mororola Inc. ------------------------------ From: mgriffin@access.digex.net (Michael D. Griffin) Subject: Re: Standards and Where to Get Them? Date: 22 Dec 1993 20:20:30 GMT Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Mike Storke (storkus@netcom.com) wrote: > CCITT v.* standards and the Bellcore DS* (aka T*) standards? For CCITT (now ITU) try gopher at ties.itu.ch I don't know of any site that has Bellcore or old ATT (T1) specs online ... the EIA/TIA will sell the ANSI T1 spec. but not online either. ------------------------------ From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) Subject: Re: Calling a PBX and Billing Date: 22 Dec 1993 20:48:48 GMT Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com Not necessarily. Our AT&T Definity system supervises an incoming call immediately. When asked why, our telecom support group mumbled something about compatiblity with our voice-mail provider. I complained that, when I use my cell phone to call in, I'm charged air time for unanswered calls. They investigated, and learned that GTE Mobilnet in Portland OR doesn't pay attention to supervision. Their avowed policy, "you never pay for an unanswered call," is implemented by charging nothing for calls lasting less than a minute. Andrew Klossner (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Dec 93 01:18 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Cellphones With RJ-11 Connectors Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > I'm looking for information on cellular phone the either have, or > can be adapted (with a dongle, whatever), to provide, an RJ-11 phone > jack. Lots of phones now come with the jack. The Audiovox CTX-3200E that NYNEX sold me (for $0, requires 24 months of service) has an RJ-11 in the cradle. I haven't tried to use it, but it appears that it's easy to set the phone so the RJ-11 device answers incoming calls, but you have to place outgoing calls yourself and then switch to the jack. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk (George Zmijewski) Subject: Re: International Calls via Cable or Satellite Organization: MGZ Computer Services Reply-To: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:10:08 +0000 In article cmoore@BRL.MIL writes: > This refers to calls originating in the UK: >> To get a guaranteed non-satellite circuit to the USA, useful for >> certain data transmission requirements which involve a lot of >> handshaking, dial 0101 83 + area code + number. >> The code 84 allows you to obtain a satellite link, if you really want >> one for any reason. > 010 is international access code in the UK, and 1 is the country code > which includes the U.S. Now you're telling me that EXTRA digits are > inserted for non-satellite/satellite links? The equipment at the UK > end can handle these extra digits and would not be confused by the > coming of the NNX area codes? I don't know what the future holds but 83/84 prefix works without any problems from UK right now. Does anybody know about plans for area codes 83X 84X? I think this range may remain reserved for some time -- the 83/84 prefix was in use for several years and I'm sure a lot of automatic dialers use it. It will become redundant with time when ISDN will take over all data calls -- when you request international call with guaranteed 64k channel it selects cable route. (Its an extra zero I think and it costs you more.) BTW I use 83 for all calls to US since I have noticed that echo created by satelite connections caused MF4 bleeps to be heard twice on the other end. (ie 70ms mark, 70 ms space while the delay was 300ms long enough for the bleep to go from my switch to the remote switch come back , loop through my handset and go back again loud anough to be recognised). I only noticed this problem few times on one particular US switchboard. Apparently there should be some echo cancelling eqpt. on the way but I don't know why it didnt work. George Zmijewski ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 07:22:15 EST From: jkimbro@hercii.lasc.lockheed.com (Jon Kimbrough) Subject: Re: Why Was 334 Picked For Alabama? In article 18@eecs.nwu.edu, Carl Moore () writes: > I don't know why the first NNX area code won't be of the form AB0, > unless there was concern over people getting confused and trying to > "correct" it to A0B. If this is the case, the concern seems unwarranted to me. It's been my experience that the average Joe doesn't have any idea that area codes can only be made up of certain limited combinations of numbers and isn't likely to think twice about dialing 520 or 330 as an area code. Jon Kimbrough jkimbro@lasc.lockheed.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein, either stated or implied, are solely my own and do not reflect Lockheed's views in any manner. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #835 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13527; 23 Dec 93 8:28 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18301 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 05:04:27 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11742 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Dec 1993 05:04:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 05:04:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312231104.AA11742@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #836 TELECOM Digest Thu, 23 Dec 93 05:04:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 836 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Mike Lanza) Re: Info Highway - 28 Companies (Jim Burkitt) Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity (weberdd@clover.macc.wisc.edu) Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Andrew C. Green) Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number (Bud Couch) Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Jay Hennigan) Re: Mobilink Service (Mark Bryan) Modem Monitoring Question (Mark Case) ISDN in 513? (Paul Joslin) Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? (Vamsee Lakamsani) X.25 to Mexico (Laurence Chiu) Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted (Jeff Sokolov) Free E-Newsletter on Advanced Computing and Communications (David S. Lewis) Panasonic EKT2105 Information Wanted (Leonard Erickson) Chaos Digest Finished For the Year; Happy Holidays From Editor (J-B Condat) Administrivia: A Break For Christmas (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 14:14:28 GMT From: Mike Lanza Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos >> What we really need is a new packet-switched network [with faster dialups] > ... >> In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number access, ... >> How about a new 950 service (950 is better than 800 since it avoids >> local access charges) ... > Holy modem tax, Batman! > There's a good reason you don't see one number access: it costs more. > When a long-distance company connects to the local phone network, it pays, > by modem standards, a stiff price, four or five cents per minute, or > roughly $3/hr at each end of the connection. If you call a 950 or 800 > number, whoever the carrier is pays that, even if you don't directly see > it on the bill. AT&T has one-number 950-1288 service, but it's only used > for on-line services that are already so expensive that an extra $3/hr > isn't a big deal. Yes, but only one local access charge -- for the user's side of the call -- need be paid if a packet-switched network takes that call and delivers it to the server (by X.25 or frame relay). Sprint's pricing for a service that does this, their "Data Call 800" service, is actually a fair amount more than their pricing for T1-delivered 800 service (i.e. Sprint delivers calls to their customer by T1, thus bypassing one local access charge). It's hard to compare these directly, but when I looked at it it seemed to come out to about $10 or $11 per hour for Data Call 800 versus about $8 or so for T1-delivered 800 service. I think Sprint could eliminate that differential if they really wanted to (and they should want to). Besides, the rep I spoke with about Data Call 800 was very unfamiliar with it and didn't seem to be interested in selling it. AT&T's 950-1288 goes for around $11 to $13 per hour as I recall. Again, that's way too high, when the packet networks start at about $6, and drop to as little as $2 with the highest volumes. > The 'modem tax' brouhaha from 1987 was about these connection costs. > The FCC, not totally unreasonably, said that packet networks look a lot > like long-distance phone companies, so they should connect to the phone > network in the same way. This would allow all sorts of swell features not > now available, e.g. Sprintnet could assign each of their providers a 700 > number so you could dial directly to the service you want, using the same > number regardless of where you're caling from, instead of having to dial a > local Sprintnet number, then go through a second dialing dialog to tell it > who you really want to talk to. But along with a real phone connection > comes real phone pricing, and nobody wanted to pay that extra $3/hr. So > the FCC backed off and left us with the current situation where packet > nets have a special rule that lets them connect to the phone network like > ordinary business customers, without paying any per-minute charge. I wonder if a packet network could push this "special rule" even further by using a 950 number and getting around the local access charges. The answer to this is probably no, but what are the local access charges for 950? Are they identical to 800, or are they cheaper? If they are identical, what's the advantage over 800? (Is dialing three fewer numbers really that big a deal?) > I suspect the main reason you don't see 9600 bps dial-up packet network > connections is that there's not much demand for them. By the time you > factor in the slowdowns due to network connection, and consider how much > cheaper normal long distance is compared to 10 years ago when the packet > nets were getting giong, it's about as fast to dial direct at 14.4K. C'mon! There *certainly* is demand for 9.6K as well as 14.4K connections. As I noted in my original message, most modems being sold these days are 14.4K. It's been a long time since 2400 bps modems were among the biggest sellers. As for dialing direct vs. packet, I agree that direct is almost as cheap, but that's only because the packet networks still have their heads up their butts with regard to high speed capacity. A caveat with respect to dialing direct -- I understand that the long distance carriers, Sprint and MCI in particular, are known to use compression schemes and echo cancellation schemes that make modem communication at 9.6 or 14.4Kbps very difficult or impossible. I'm not home now (away for the holidays), but I can dig up a message I pulled from CompuServe on this issue when I return on 12/29, if anyone is interested. > If you want to complain about slow data connections, complain about the > local telcos who have been slow to introduce ISDN, which provides dual 64K > bps connections, and have done so at prices that make it unattractive. > There's also a chicken and egg problem here: ISDN per-minute prices are, > by and large, the same as toll rates, but ISDN connections can be set up > and taken down very fast, so a connection of a few seconds makes sense. > If Compuserve, say, were set up so you called in via ISDN, it blatted a > few hundred K of screens and hung up, then you pondered off-line for a few > seconds, then reconnected, it blatted a few more hundred K and hung up, > you could actually be connected for only five minutes out of each hour, > and even at regular phone rates, the phone bill would be on the order of > 75 cents/hr. But since there isn't much ISDN, there's not much incentive > to make things work that way. Yeah, I've thought about this one a lot. Lightning-fast call setup, as well as a 64K data pipe, would be aweswome for online services. The problem here, though, does not lie just with the telcos. It also lies with the ISDN primary rate (2B+D) spec. It's basically one voice channel (which the customer already has today) and one 64K data pipe. That promises very little advantage over what he has now. On the other hand, in order to adopt ISDN the customer has to trash all his phones in favor of ISDN phones at $100 a piece at least. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Dec 1993 14:28:14 GMT From: JIM BURKITT Subject: Info Highway - 28 Companies Bob Rosenberg asked about 28 companies supporting a Info Super Highway. The December 20, 1993 issue of {Telephony} on page eight talks about the Cross Industry Working Team (XIWT). This group plans to issue a white paper early next year on architectural and technical requirements for the super highway. The members of the team are: Apple, AT&T, Bellcore, BellSouth, Cable Television Laboratories, Citicorp, DEC, GTE Labs, H-P, IBM, Intel, MCI, McCaw, Motorola, NYNEX, Pac Bell, Silicon Graphics, Sun, Southwestern Bell, CBEMA, Cisco, Financial Services Consortium, Hughes Network Systems, Science Applications International, Sprint, 3Com,West Publishing and Xerox. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 15:53:59 CDT From: weberdd@clover.macc.wisc.edu Reply-To: weberdd@macc.wisc.edu Subject: Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity In TELECOM Digest V13 #833, Will Martin wrote: > When I make an outside-line call on our NEC NEAX 2400 system here at > work (dialing 9 and then the local seven-digit number), the system has > the annoying habit of giving me a ring-sound (in the handset or the > speaker, depending which is turned on) and then a click that sounds ? *exactly* like the far end picking up on the call. However, it is not > -- the ring sounds then continue until the called party answers or I > hang up. What is going on that causes this initial ring-tone that I > hear followed by that click? Is it the process of the unit selecting > an outside trunk? If so, why does it give me a ring first? I used to help in operating a 2400. It is difficult to offer an answer without knowing more about how that particular 2400 is set up. It's possible that the system is using "least cost routing", in which case the 2400 simulates second dial tone (after you dial 9) and looks at the entire dialed number before it decides which outgoing trunk to use. However, if that were the case, the system would not simulate ring tone. If you hear ring, it would be from the outgoing line. The 2400 uses a register card to actually recieve and decode the touch tones. After the 2400 has determined the correct trunk to use, connected the call to the trunk and signalled the destination number out, it doesn't need the register card anymore, so it drops the card out of the circuit. That may be the click you are hearing. On the other hand, any number of other things could be happening. The call could be being forwarded by some other switching equipment. The best way to find out is to ask the people who maintain the system. David Devereaux-Weber, P.E. weberdd@macc.wisc.edu (Internet) The University of Wisconsin - Madison (608)262-3584 (voice) DoIT - MACC Communications; B263 (608)262-4679 (FAX) 1210 W Dayton St. Madison, WI 53706 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 16:46:00 -0600 (CST) From: Andrew C. Green Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) Kriston J. Rehberg (krehberg@vnet.IBM.COM) writes: > The rest of the 300 or so "channels" [...] are used for things > such as Direct-To-Home viewing of Request or Pay-Per-View events, > [...] INTERACTIVE television, [...] and (in the case of our local > cable company) a fully monitored home security system that won't > depend on the telephone company anymore. Well, this was roughly the point where I spewed my coffee all over the keyboard. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I distinctly prefer my fully-monitored home security system to be dependent on our local telephone company than our local cable company, thankyouverymuch. It's just a question of reliability: in the darkness of our occasional blackouts I can always pick up the phone, hear the dialtone and see the nice backlit green keypad light up. Whereas the cable service seems to be routinely knocked out by everything but Rising Tensions in the Middle East. I honestly cannot remember any time when our home phone service was out of order, and upon reflection I can think of many everyday applications that rely on telephone lines being up and running 24 hours a day. While I do not doubt the technical ability of the cable companies to produce this promised _level_ of service, I have serious reservations about the ability (of _our_ current outfit, anyway) to provide any reasonable _quality_ of same. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610-3498 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: bud@kentrox.com (Bud Couch) Subject: Re: Being Paged by Mystery 800 Number Organization: ADC Kentrox Industries, Inc. Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 23:57:38 GMT In article dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) writes: > Dave Niebuhr (dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov) wrote: >> storpis@kaiwan.com (Console Cowboy) writes: >>> I was paged five times in five minute intervals today by an 800 >>> number. Dialing the 800 number reveals a modem. It doesn't respond to >>> any prompts and drops carrier after approximatly five seconds. The >>> number is 8008841111. Who's doing this and why? > I don't know if this is an option, but some unscrupulous people were > billing back calls to 800 numbers with telco look-alike bills a few > years ago. This may be a scam to get you to call them. In this way, > they have proof that you did indeed call their number. Sounds fishy, > I know, but this scam was being done. Well, if a large charge shows up on our company bill, I'm sure that they will track it back to my extension, and I'll report on it here. In the meantime, let me offer my own WAG. I tried the number from my PC and found that it connected at *1200* bps, although my modem is a V.22bis (2400). This means that the machine at the other end is forcing the speed to be that low. Why? I suspect that the modem on the other end is an older (in modem terms more than two years is *old*) ZOOM modem, for their 1200 units had an interesting security feature: the entry password to the modem was not an ascii string, but a four number *touchtone* sequence.If the correct code wasn't entered within a few seconds of answer, the unit hung up. We may have just stumbled into someone's database "server" that has this security feature. Bud Couch - ADC Kentrox bud@kentrox.com (192.228.59.2) insert legalistic bs disclaimer here ------------------------------ From: ue554@freenet.victoria.bc.ca (Steven H. Lichter) Subject: Re: FCC: No! GTE!!! Organization: Camosun College, Victoria, B.C. Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 20:51:05 GMT All the pending cases maybe moot since Clinton/Gore are moving towards allowing the companies to offer just about any service they want to including LD service. Can you just see Pacific Bell Screen Door/Cable and Telephone company? The above maybe my own ideas and not my employer. ------------------------------ From: jay@coyote.rain.org (Jay Hennigan) Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:05:22 -0800 Organization: Regional Access Information Network (RAIN) In article winnie@flagstaff.princeton. edu (Jon Edelson) writes: > In the first message of this thread, a question was asked about > blocking Caller ID in a situation where a social worker was calling > from home. Rather then getting into the whole 'right to Caller ID > discussion' it seems to me that calls from someone representing the > social agency should be identified as calling from the social agency. > The social agency is 'responsible' for the call, and while I think > that people have the right to know who 'made' a call, I don't see why > a home number needs to be made known for a business call, as long as > the business is identified. Sounds like a perfect application for DISA via the government agency's telephone system to me. > > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I quite agree. An 'alternate ID message' should be provided for people in that category of employment who do some or all of their work from home. That should resolve many of the complaints about privacy we hear now. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 01:45:22 -0600 From: MARK.BRYAN@gte.sprint.com Subject: Re: Mobilink Service Pat and company, Mobilink is made up of several cell providers nationwide, Mobilnet being only one of the companies. Their goal is to provide a complete network for roaming and service 24 hours a day. Also to obtain service on your phone in a distance city if necessary. I have been told you can reach Mobilink at 800-877-5665. I was told the number in the ad is sent to this group for handling. However, in the event you cannot dial that 800 number from your calling are the same group is reachable at 813-282-6000 and ask for customer service. Mark Bryan GTE Data Services ------------------------------ From: mcase@wes.army.mil (Mark Case) Subject: Modem Monitoring Question Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:43:46 GMT Organization: USACE Waterways Experiment Station Hi folks, I am posting a question for a friend. Granted, it is a very vague question, but here goes anyway. Suppose there is a remote location at which there is a microwave transmitter and a modem, and suppose this location goes down. The question is: how can the location be monitored so that it may be determined whether the problem is with the modem or with the transmitter? Thanks in advance for any information. Mark Case ------------------------------ From: pjoslin@mbvlab.wpafb.af.mil (Paul Joslin (Sverdrup)) Subject: ISDN in 513? Date: 22 Dec 1993 19:41:08 GMT Organization: Model Based Vision Lab, Wright Laboratory Does it exist? It must, since bbs.combinet.com tells me it's been available at my home exchange (513 42X) since September. I called the local phone company business office, and was referred to a special ISDN number: +1 800 821 4919. I've tried this number several times a day for the last week, and it is always busy. Is this number not dialable from 513/ 25x? Is anyone out there? Paul R. Joslin +1 513 255 1115 ------------------------------ From: vamsee@softint.com (Vamsee Lakamsani) Subject: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 18:06:36 CST Organization: Software Interfaces, Inc. It is very convenient to have the yellow pages accessible on-line. Do any US cities have this facility? Is there any reason not to make yellow pages accessible on-line? Vamsee Lakamsani vamsee@softint.com ------------------------------ From: lchiu@crl.com (Laurence Chiu) Subject: X.25 to Mexico Date: 22 Dec 1993 18:42:32 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access Our company has a requirement to connect to a company in Mexico so that we are able to logon to their IBM mainframe from here. We would normally use the IBM Advantis network to achieve this but apparently IBM is not approved to provide SNA connections to Mexico yet. The customer is getting anxious and now wants to go X.25 via GE Net (Genesis?). This is okay except we would now have to get a leased line from the local Telco (Pacific Bell) and the company in Mexico would need to get a leased line from their premises to the nearest GE office. Thoughts around here are that the delays in making this connect will be the leased lines in Mexico followed by the leased lines in California! Does anybody have any thoughts on this? How good is the PT&T in Mexico (City) in providing comms? Laurence Chiu Walnut Creek, California Tel: 510-215-3730 (work) Internet: lchiu@crl.com ------------------------------ From: jsokolov@gte.com (Jeff Sokolov) Subject: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted Organization: GTE Laboratories, Incorporated Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:24:29 GMT I am looking for recommendations for introductory books on telecommunications. I'm familiar with Pierce's "Signals" but would like something more recent. Thanks in advance. Jeff Sokolov GTE Laboratories, Incorporated 40 Sylvan Road Waltham, MA 02254 (617) 466-4042 ------------------------------ From: callewis@netcom.com (David Scott Lewis) Subject: Free E-Newsletter on Advanced Computing and Communications Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 07:12:02 GMT HOTT -- Hot Off The Tree -- is a FREE monthly electronic newsletter featuring the latest advances in computer, communications, and electronics technologies. Each issue provides article summaries on new and emerging technologies, including VR (virtual reality), neural networks, PDAs (personal digital assistants), GUIs (graphical user interfaces), intelligent agents, ubiquitous computing, genetic & evolutionary programming, wireless networks, smart cards, video phones, set-top boxes, nanotechnology, and massively parallel processing. Summaries are provided from the following sources: {Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, San Jose Mercury News, Boston Globe, Financial Times (London), Daily Telegraph} (the largest circulation daily in the U.K.) ... {Time, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report} ... {Business Week, Forbes, Fortune, The Economist (London), Nikkei Weekly (Tokyo), Asian Wall Street Journal} (Hong Kong) ... Over 50 trade magazines, including {Computerworld, InfoWorld, Datamation, PC Week, Dr. Dobb's Journal, LAN Times, Communications Week, Electronic Engineering Times, New Media, VAR Business, Midrange Systems, Byte} ... Over 50 research journals, including ALL publications of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, plus technical journals published by AT&T, IBM, Hewlett Packard, Fujitsu, Sharp, NTT, Siemens, Philips, GEC ... Over 100 Internet mailing lists and USENET discussion groups ... plus ... Listings of forthcoming and recently published technical books and forthcoming trade shows and technical conferences. BONUS: Exclusive interviews with technology pioneers ... the next issue features an interview with Mark Weiser, head of Xerox PARC's Computer Science Lab. Send subscription requests to: listserv@ucsd.edu Leave the "Subject" line blank In the body of message input: SUBSCRIBE HOTT-LIST Do *not* include first or last names following "SUBSCRIBE HOTT-LIST" The next issue of the revived HOTT e-newsletter is scheduled for transmission in late January/early February. Please forward this announcement to friends and colleagues, and post to your favorite bulletin boards (especially university BBS). Our objective is to provide a high quality newsletter for over 1,000,000 subscribers. Thank you. David Scott Lewis Editor-in-Chief and Book & Video Review Editor IEEE Engineering Management Review (the world's largest circulation "high tech" management journal) Internet address: d.s.lewis@ieee.org Tel: +1 714 662 7037 USPS mailing address: POB 18438 / IRVINE CA 92713-8438 USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 17:06:00 PST From: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Panasonic EKT2105 Information Wanted I've got a friend who has one of these, still in the box, but with no documentation. It looks to me like it's a digital phone for use with a PBX. Can anybody give me any info on it, including what it's worth, and what the minimum system it'll run with is? Thanks, uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson Internet: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: cccf@altern.com Subject: Chaos Digest Finished For the Year; Happy Holidays From Editor Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 10:27:28 EST With the issue #1.73, ChaosD is down for '93 for the holidays. We'll be back with #2.01 about Jan. 3, '94. We will, however, continue to answer mail during the break. Thank for your support and assistance during the past year, and we look forward to the coming year. The French translation of Mark A. Ludwig's book, "Naissance d'un Virus" is now available at the editor address: Addison-Wesley France, 41 rue de Turbigo, 75003 Paris, France (Phone: +33 1 48879797 fax: +33 1 48879799) Don't hesitate to order it directly (circa 198 FF + porto). Bonne et heureuse annee a tous ... et le paradis a la fin de votre vie. Jean-Bernard Condat General Secretary Chaos Computer Club France [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And greetings to all of you from us here in the USA at this holiday season. Like yourself, this Digest is now winding down for the Christmas holiday, except I'll be back next week (maybe over the weekend) with at least a couple more issues to wind up the year. I hope the New Year is a happy one for you. PAT] ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Administrivia: A Break For Christmas Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 04:45:00 CST This is the last you'll see of the Digest for a couple days while my family and I spend the holiday together. I might have an issue or two of the Digest for you sometime Sunday evening or else Monday morning; then there will be a few issues during the week ahead as I try to clean out all my files here to end the year. Have a happy holiday, and remember, let's put the 'X' back in Xmas! :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #836 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26585; 26 Dec 93 0:00 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09646 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:29:35 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15118 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:29:08 -0600 Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:29:08 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312260229.AA15118@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #837 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:29:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 837 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review Index (Rob Slade) Fax Machine as Scanner? (Hiro Sugawara) V.35 to RS-232 Conversions (Brad Walker) Questions About CSU/DSU Link Speeds (Brad Walker) Notice to AT&T Customnet and Pro Wats Customers (Paul Robinson) Indiana NPA 317 Dialing Change Breaks Many COCOTS (George Goble) ATM and Multimedia (Xavier Garcia) ATM (Donald Army) ISDN Clarification (Mike D. Schomburg) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 25 Dec 93 11:53 -0600 From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review Index [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although as Rob points out he is unable to send back issues, most of the books listed in the index below have been reviewed by Mr. Slade here in the Digest during the past year. If you are interested in seeing reviews you missed earlier, what you can do is grep the index to the Digest for the past year using the keyword 'Book Review:' You'll get the issue numbers involved and can obtain those copies from the Archives. Generally Mr. Slade's reviews have appeared here two or three times per week for the past several months. If you like seeing his book reviews in the Digest, drop him a note and let him know, asking him to continue them in 1994. Thanks. PAT] ------------------ Pre-scriptum: No, I can't send you back issues. No, there is no ftp or mail-sever site -- yet. Two outfits have expressed interest, but neither have gotten their ASCII together yet. REVIEW.LST 931114 Book review index This is a listing of (mostly technical) book reviews. The initial coding is the review file name (and approximate size of the file): this is followed by the name of the book and author(s) and a very brief description. (Some versions of this file may also contain listings of software reviews.) BK2NDCNT RVW 2832 "Second Contact", Resnick - fiction about hacking for data, some reasonable database security stuff BKABCLAN RVW 5439 "The ABC's of Local Area Networks", Dortch - practical, but somewhat limited in detail, good intro for small LAN BKAMGTMN RVW 2012 "A manager's guide to multivendor networks", Enck - like it says BKBBS4BS RVW 6728 "Bulletin Board Systems for Business", Wood/Blankenhorn - very PC oriented (COM932) BKBSECCS RVW 4880 "Building a Secure Computer System", Gasser - heavy on technical, particularly secure hardware BKBURGER RVW 11277 "Computer Viruses and Data Protection", Burger - poorly written with little solid information, some viral programs in source code BKCMCOOP RVW 3668 "Communications for Cooperating Systems", Cypser - IBM biased view of OSI and TCP/IP BKCMPSEC RVW 5779 "Computer Security Basics", Russell/Gangemi - good overview, but some problems (SEC931) BKCMVRCR RVW 3662 "Computer Virus Crisis", Fites/Johnston/Kratz - somewhat sloppy and a number of errors BKCONINT RVW 4132 "Connecting to the Internet", Estrada - good reference for contact with Internet providers, hopefully to be improved in future versions BKCURRY RVW 3171 "Unix System Security - A Guide for Users and System Administrators", Curry - not as good as Spafford/Garfinkel (SEC932) BKDEDMAC RVW 3614 "The Dead Mac Scrolls", Pina - diagnosis guide for Mac hardware BKDEMAN RVW 2784 "!%@:: A Directory of Electronic Mail Addressing and Networks", Frey/Adams - valuable reference on email details between networks BKDENING RVW 8118 "Computers Under Attack", Denning, ed. - collection of essays roughly related to security, also "the net" BKDMGTOU RVW 8012 Dr. Macintosh's Guide to the On-Line Universe, LeVitus/Ihnatko - somewhat flippant but very thorough introduction to computer communications regardless of system BKDTCMDC RVW 2912 "Data Communications & Networking Dictionary", Pardoe/Wenig - a basic glossary, not overly biased, not overly complete BKEMAIL RVW 4066 "E-Mail", Caswell - good business proposal, but limited and dated BKETHICS RVW 4331 "Computers, ethics and society", Ermann/Williams/Gutierrez - textbook for computer ethics course: not great BKETHPKT RVW 2529 "Ethernet Pocket Guide", Byron Spinney - big on cabling and stuff BKETWOOS RVW 6481 "Exploring the World of Online Services", Resnick - looks at Compuserve and Prodigy, very rah, rah, not much info BKEYESTM RVW 2465 "Eye of the Storm", Gold Eagle/Worldwide - fiction, virus is minor subplot BKFANLAN RVW 2782 "Fantastic LANtastic", Talbott/Raker - good one stop reference for users, managers and installers BKFARROW RVW 3556 "Unix System Security", Farrow - basic BKFEUDO RVW 4414 "Computer Virus Desk Reference", Feudo - collects basic virus reference sources for those without online access BKGIGNET RVW 3564 "Gigabit Networking", Partridge - good overview of some of the latest hot topics in comms BKGLBTCH RVW 7883 "Globalization, Technology and Competition", Bradley/Hausman/Nolan - what business thinks about technology and communications - not much BKHGHLND RVW 5286 "Computer Virus Handbook", Highland - good overview, unfortunately somewhat dated BKHGTWFW RVW 4648 "Hacker's Guide to Word For Windows", Leonhard/Chen - necessary information to augment Word for Windows with its bugs and documentation BKHODGE RVW 2393 "Rid Me of This Virus!", Hodge - short, uneven material, perhaps a good pamphlet BKHOFMAN RVW 5768 "Rogue Programs", Hoffman, ed. - good collection of essays BKINTCMP RVW 5422 "The Internet Companion", LaQuey/Ryer - short and quick, not many helps and sometimes too many details, passable intro BKINTDCM RVW 7280 "Introduction to data communications", Gelber - bad start, good contents later BKINTSYS RVW 3175 "Internet System Handbook", Lynch/Rose - essays by people involved with the Internet, strong on protocols, weak on direction BKINTTCP RVW 3105 "Internetworking with TCP/IP", Comer/Stevens - good overview, also good basic network comm concepts BKKROL RVW 4616 "The Whole Internet User's Guide and Catalog", Ed Krol - excellent introduction to the Internet as well as resource for experienced users (COM931) BKLEVIN RVW 3793 "Computer Virus Handbook", Levin - vague and undisciplined BKLRNUNX RVW 1941 "Learning the UNIX Operating System", Todino/Strang - like it says. Short. BKLUDWIG RVW 6838 "Little Black Book of Computer Viruses", Ludwig - MS-DOS specific, not very accurate, viral source code BKLUNDEL RVW 4304 "Virus!", Lundell - a lot of research, but a lot of errors as well BKMANUCP RVW 2114 "Managing uucp and Usenet", O'Reilly/Todino - clear and complete overview BKMATRIX RVW 7009 "The Matrix: Computer Networks and Conferencing Systems Worldwide", Quarterman - almost everything you ever wanted to know about "inter" networks BKMCAFEE RVW 5668 "Computer Viruses, Worms, Data Diddlers, Killer Programs and Other Threats to Your System", McAfee/Haynes - some interesting speculations buried in a mass of undisciplined garbage BKMDMREF RVW 4939 "The Modem Reference", Banks - fairly complete overview, but with errors and without much organization BKMGENIE RVW 5560 "Glossbrenner's Master Guide to GEnie", Glossbrenner - somewhat dated with the changes in the system, but still very useful BKMSTNVL RVW 4432 "Mastering Novell Netware", Currid/Gillett - a very *basic* intro to Novell BKMSUNCM RVW 4464 "Mastering UNIX Serial Communications", Gofton - good, but very brief, intro to serial comm and some UNIX programs BKNTINTG RVW 1458 "Network Interface Technical Guide" - lists important data for any and all network cards, invaluable for LAN admins BKOPSYNT RVW 3366 "Open Systems Networking", Piscitello/Chapin - Solid management and technical review of the "hot topic" BKPCVIRS RVW 6620 "PC Viruses: Detection, Analysis and Cure", Solomon - very accurate, slightly dated, somewhat demanding technically BKPICKGD RVW 2333 "A Guide to the Pick System", Dale Dougherty - like it says, intro BKPRTCOM RVW 4160 "Portable Communications", Banks - very little portable, but some reasonable communications background BKPRUNSC RVW 3705 "Practical UNIX Security", Garfinkel and Spafford - very practical, very secure, very UNIX (SEC932) BKPTHWRK RVW 1992 "The Complete Guide to Pathworks", Spencer - DOS and VMS only, but a reasonably good overview BKRDDBSC RVW 3796 "Research Directions in Database Security", Lunt (ed.) - rather generic, but a good intro to the various problems in a very complex area BKSCNCMP RVW 2839 "Security in Computing", Pfleeger - reasonable textbook, but some shortcomings BKSGTCVR RVW 6052 "Survivor's Guide to Computer Viruses" - relatively good, but disappointing coming from the Virus Bulletin BKSHKWAV RVW 2582 "Shockwave Rider", John Brunner - fiction, "tapeworm" is a minor but important aspect of the plot BKSMILEY RVW 2704 "Smileys", David W. Sanderson/Dale Dougherty, 1993 - short, mostly listing, some discussion (COM931) BKSMLDCT RVW 1444 "The Smiley Dictionary", Seth Godin - not as complete as Sanderson and Dougherty, but nicer format BKSNDMAL.RVW 3201 "sendmail", Costales/Allman/Rickert - complete overview and reference on sendmail BKSYSLAW RVW 3685 "Syslaw", Rose/Wallace, 1992 - legal aspects of BBSes and online systems (COM932) (SEC932) BKTCHDCM RVW 4029 "Technical Aspects of Data Communications", McNamara - an intro to data comm course between covers BKTERMCP RVW 3666 "termcap and terminfo", Strang/Mui/O'Reilly - good overview and tutorial BKTRMCMP RVW 12846 "Terminal Compromise", Schwartau - fiction, some good security ideas buried in a lot of bad writing BKUNICOD RVW 4962 "The Unicode Standard" - just like it says BKUMASSC RVW 4709 "Using McAfee Associates Software for Safe Computing", Jacobsen - printed docs for SCAN et al BKUMSKMT RVW 5143 "Using MS-DOS Kermit", Gianone - excellent documentation for MS-Kermit, excellent overview of terminal emulation and file transfer in general BKUPOS RVW 4625 Unix, Posix, and Open Systems, Quarterman/Wilhelm - good intro to one of the current "buzz phrases" BKUSUUCP RVW 1548 "Using UUCP and Usenet", Todino/Dougherty - short BKWNPROG RVW 2471 "Windows Network Programming", Ralph Davis - good programming reference MVSNEAKR RVW 4726 "Sneakers", Universal Pictures - fictional, but reasonably good portrayal of a "tiger team" Publishers or authors wishing to have their books reviewed and added to the list should have copies sent to Rob Slade at 3118 Baird Road, North Vancouver, BC, Canada, V7K 2G6. Please note that all shipments from outside of Canada should state very clearly that the material is for evaluation and has no commercial value. In addition, it is advisable to declare a media cost of $1 per disk and an "intellectual property" value of $1 per item such that the total does not exceed $15. Rob Slade does not take any responsibility for shipments delayed or refused at Customs for failure to follow these directions. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993 REVIEW.LST 931114 Permission granted to distribute with unedited copies of the TELECOM Digest and affiliated newgroups/mailing lists. DECUS Canada Communications, Desktop, Education and Security group newsletters Editor and/or reviewer ROBERTS@decus.ca, RSlade@sfu.ca, Rob Slade at 1:153/733 DECUS Symposium '94, Vancouver, BC, Mar 1-3, 1994, contact: rulag@decus.ca ------------------------------ From: hiro@lynx.com (Hiro Sugawara) Subject: Fax Machine as Scanner? Organization: Lynx Real-Time Systems, Inc., Los Gatos, CA Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 22:20:01 GMT Does anyone know a good way to use a fax machine as a scanner to send image data to a fax modem through a local connection? I would be very possible and easy if I had two telephone lines, but I do not. I use a Mac IISi and a LineLink modem with MaxFax. Here are what I have done so far: 1. FaxScanner I bought a device called FaxScanner from a small Florida company for some $70. They sent me a sub-cigarette box size device with a 9V battery and a "BitFax" program. I followed the instruction and installl BitFax with MaxFax termporarily removed. My fax machine transferred image to BitFax successfully. Here are the problems with this: - BitFax is *very* slow handling image data. - BitFax's user interface is much poorer than other fax programs I have used (MaxFax and GlobalFax), so I don't want to use BitFax as my resident fax program. - Believe or not, this configuration transferred image *without* the black hardware device. It's a kind of scam! I didn't need to buy it! Another company in San Diego is selling a similar product called FaxScan for some $100. I would recommend keeping away from these. 2. MaxFax Having discovered that the black box is unnecessary, I tried to make MaxFax do the same thing, manual transmission from the fax machine and manual receiption to MaxFax, but no success. MaxFax somehow recognizes the fax machine and fax machine displays MaxFax's station ID, but the negotiation eventually fails and no data is transferred. Listening to the negotiation signals carefully, I noticed that MaxFax makes different tones from what it makes when it answers to regular incoming calls with ringing. So, I think if there's any way to simulate ringing, MaxFax can make it. I checked with some telephony books and found that the central office uses 90Vrms ringing signal and ringing has to be removed within 200ms after detection of an off-hook. Does anyone know more about this or any *cheap* commercial product? hiro@lynx.com ------------------------------ From: oilean!bwalker@sgi.com (Brad Walker) Subject: V.35 to RS-232 Conversions Organization: Island Software Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 08:44:12 GMT I'm curious to know where to look for information on the v.35 spec. In addition I'm curious to know if anyone has done v.35 to rs-232 conversions. I've done several device drivers for SBus serial cards that had the capability to do up to 256Kb/port. And I noticed that on most datacom equipment like routers they have a v.35 connection that hooks into a CSU port. What I would like to do is build a Point to Point link using Cisco routers. But, would like to plug the Cisco directly into my SBus board. The only problem is that the Cisco speaks v.35 and the SBus board speaks rs-232. Hence my question. Thanks for any and all info. brad w. ------------------------------ From: oilean!bwalker@sgi.com (Brad Walker) Subject: Questions About CSU/DSU Link Speeds Organization: Island Software Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 08:36:58 GMT I'm curious to know if you can concatenate two 56Kb links from a local service provider to get 128Kb through put. What I'm interested in is what is the next increment up from 56Kb. Is it fractional T1 or what? And if it is fractional T1 then what kind of CSU/DSU does one need. Thanks, brad w. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 02:12:13 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Notice to AT&T Customnet & Pro Wats Customers Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA December 25, {New York Times}, Page A23 NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMNET[TM] AND AT&T PRO(R) WATS SERVICE CUSTOMERS A tariff was filed with the Federal Communications Commission on December 21, 1993, pursuant to which AT&T will substantially restructure the AT&T CustomNet[TM] Service Type 2 rate schedule for direct dialed international calls from locations on the United States mainland and Hawaii. As part of the restructure, rates will be divided into two rate periods, called "Standard" and "Economy". Also, the timing interval for additional periods will be reduced from six seconds to one second. Based on existing calling patterns, CustomNet Service Type 2 users will experience rate changes ranging from a 39% decrease to a 34% increase. On average, these changes will result in a 3.1% decrease across all such users. In addition, AT&T filed tariff changes that reduced the timing interval for additional periods on domestic AT&T CustomNet Service calls from six seconds to one second, and increased usage rates for such service by 1%. Further, AT&T increased PRO(R) WATS schedule (b) usage rates by 1%. AT&T CustomNet Service and PRO WATS schedule (b) will also be simplifying the rate periods on domestic calls to peak/off-peak periods. The latter change will have no effect on rates. The tariff changes are scheduled to become effective January 4, 1994. For information on International Services contact an International Sales Representative at 1 800 222-0900. For information on Domestic Services contact a Domestic Sales Representative at 1 800 222-0400. ------------------------------ From: ghg@ecn.purdue.edu (George Goble) Subject: Indiana NPA 317 Dialing Change Breaks Many COCOTS Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 13:39:47 GMT Nov 1, GTE (Lafayette, IN), and Indiana Bell (Indianapolis) announced, that Dec 1 all non-local area calls in NPA 317 (i.e 1+ and I assume 0+ ) would be REQUIRED to include the NPA. The reason stated was the shortage of NPAs and this change would free some up. Prior to November 1, many 1 + NPA + NXX + YYYY reached an intercept saying "not necessary to dial the NPA". 1 + NPA + ... (where NPA wasn't needed) has caused all sorts of various behaviors over the last 20 years. After November 1, 1 + NPA dialing would work, with mandatory being 12/1/93. On 12/1/93, 1 + NXX + YYYY still worked, but sometime around the middle of December 1 + NXX + YYYY just started getting a fast busy, but no message. My Cellular ONE phone, still works for 1 + NXX dialing (switch based in Indy). This change appears to have broken piles of software in PBXs, Voicemail outcalls, etc, etc, and most importantly COCOTS! I have seen numerous signs on COCOTS in the Lafayette Area "Long distance does not work". I know one of the business owners, the Levee Coin OP Laundry. I have been lecturing him for years on the Evils of COCOTS/AOS's and gave him telecom printouts. Now their COCOT/AOS SCREWED them. The provider wants a whole bunch of money, and a signed new contract (via mail, you know over XMAS), before they will think about reprogramming the phone. I think they have been down approximatly two weeks. My Cellular One voice mail has pager outcall. THe Voice mail switch is in Indy, my pager in Lafayette, not in "local area", but both in NPA 317. When setting up my voicemail to pager outcall in the past (about a year ago) I set it to 1-317-423-YYYY, but it did not work. Their switch/software/routing ONLY would work if set to 1-423-YYYY. I remembered that, and told Cellular one around Dec 1. They didn't do anything and around December 7 it all quit, but the voice mail would not accept 1-317- ... All pagers were broke for approximatly two weeks before they got somebody to reprogram things to take 1+317+NXX+ ... I would imagine that there are tons of PBXs, which try "least cost" routing, etc, which are totally hosed by this change. The public only had 30 days notice. Has this sort of thing happened in recent times before without major havoc? This all coincides with the holidays, with many of the important players on vacation. ghg ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 14:48:53 +0100 From: Xavier Garcia Subject: ATM and Multimedia Organization: EPFL Does anyone know how can I contact the Multimedia Forum or tell me what are they working on (e.g video compression standards AAL2 definition.)? Thanks, Xavier Garcia research engineer Telecommunications laboratory Swiss federal Institute of technology, Lausanne 1015 Lausanne Switzerland Internet: garcia@tcomhp20.epfl.ch Phone: +4121 6935258 Fax: +4121 693 4660 ------------------------------ From: darmy@symantec.com (Donald Army) Subject: ATM News Groups Wanted Date: 25 Dec 1993 15:41:48 GMT Organization: Symantec Corporation Are there any news groups on ATM?? Thanks, darmy@symantec.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 09:07:57 CST From: mschomburg@ltec.com (Mike D. Schomburg) Subject: ISDN Clarification Concerning Mike Lanza's remarks about ISDN on 12-22-93, it should be noted that the 2B+D spec is the Basic Rate Interface, or BRI. The Primary Rate Interface, or PRI, contains 23B+D, and fits within a conventional T-1 bit stream. While the BRI and PRI are commonly lumped together as narrowband ISDN, they play very different roles in the network. PRIs are becoming quite common as high (relatively) capacity delivery vehicles from IXCs to customer premises, with at least two advantages over vanila T-1. The call control is message-oriented -- over the D channel -- and caller ID is delivered over the D channel, making it much easier to manipulate. The purpose of the BRI is to bridge the analog gap between the customer premise and the (virtually) all-digital LEC-IXC network. ISDN specs define the B and D channels generically, meaning there is no arbitrary constraint on the use of the channels. Either or both B channels (64kbps) can be used for voice or data (but Mike is correct that there is no advantage to digital voice). Particular LECs may choose to offer only one B channel, or any combination of the possibilities. One last point -- personal computer cards are available that provide 64kbps connectivity for the computer, and also have an RJ-11 jack for your plain old phone. You do not necessarily have to junk your phones. My appologies if this is redundant. Opinions expressed are my own and are not to be confused with my employer's. Mike D. Schomburg mschomburg@ltec.com Lincoln Telephone Co. 402 476 5351 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #837 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26843; 26 Dec 93 0:53 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03989 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 21:34:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12447 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Dec 1993 21:34:02 -0600 Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 21:34:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312260334.AA12447@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #838 TELECOM Digest Sat, 25 Dec 93 21:34:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 838 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Another Prepaid Calling Card (John R. Levine) Area Codes 'n' Public Acceptance (David A. Kaye) Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ (devalla@astra.tamu.edu) Calling a PBX and Billing (Richard Cox) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (John R. Levine) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Mike Lanza) Re: Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce (Yechezkal-Shimon Gutfreund) Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? (Carl Oppedahl) Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? (Mark Edwards) Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity (William (Bill) Brownlow) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Robert Virzi) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Jon Sreekanth) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (David A. Kaye) Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (Carl Moore) Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters (David A. Kaye) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Another Prepaid Calling Card Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:30:11 EST The current {Consumer Reports Travel Letter} mentions the Liberty Card from Quest Telecommunications. It works much like the Orange Card: you dial an 800 number, punch in your account number, then the number to call. Rates are 33 cents/min within the US, 69 cents to Canada, higher to other countries. Like the Orange Card, it's quite competitive for short calls from payphones, less so for longer calls where the lower per-minute rate for conventional calling cards dominates. They're for sale direct from Quest at 800-277-7682, charged to a major credit card. They're also supposed to be for sale over the counter at campus-area retailers, and I've seen them at a truck stop. When the card runs low, you can recharge it over the phone, again charged to a major credit card. I've also seen prepaid Sprint cards at convenience stores. Their per-minute rate depends on what size card you get (the higher value ones get you more minutes per dollar) but also seem to be in the range of 33 cents/min. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Area Codes 'n' Public Acceptance Date: 25 Dec 1993 17:53:03 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Jon Kimbrough (jkimbro@hercii.lasc.lockheed.com) wrote: > my experience that the average Joe doesn't have any idea that area > codes can only be made up of certain limited combinations of numbers > and isn't likely to think twice about dialing 520 or 330 as an area > code. When the SF Bay Area was divided again for the 510 area code I remember people saying "What does 510 mean?" They didn't quite grasp the area code thing. When I see number like 415-206-9999 it even gets confusing for me. I'm always reluctant to dial that kind of number because it looks like I'm calling Seattle. And to think they could have just solved it by adding an extra digit to the phone numbers thereby increasing capacity ten-fold. Sheesh. ------------------------------ From: devalla@astra.tamu.edu (Badari) Subject: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ - Ten Years Hence Date: 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT Organization: Texas A&M University. Howdy, It is ten years since Ma Bell was dismantled. Lots of talk now about how this has helped the Telephone Industry and the consumers. While I know sketchy details about the creation of baby Bells, I'd like to know, in detail, what lead to the divestiture in the first place and how this has affected the organisation of AT&T, its effects on the Telco industry as a whole. I request folks out there to please let me know either by posting on this group or via personal mail. I'd appreciate any references (books,articles) that talk about the same. Happy holidays, Badari PS: I have read the December, 1993 issue of {IEEE Commns Mag} - Special report on Divestiture. [Moderator's Note: You might also want to check out back issues of this Digest you are reading now. TELECOM Digest published a number of articles during 1983 and 1984 on divestiture and the pros/cons of same. What I may do to wind up this year or start out 1994 here is reprint some of those articles. A feature I used to do occassionally was called "Ten Years Ago in the Digest" and perhaps a few readers would enjoy some of the comments from the readers who were on our list back then during the final days of the old Bell System and the first few days of the 'new way' of doing things. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk (Richard Cox) Subject: Calling a PBX and Billing Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 00:58:38 GMT andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) wrote: >> Our AT&T Definity system supervises an incoming call immediately. This is bad news. The Definity switches that AT&T are trying to sell over here, also supervise before the call is actually answered. I had to explain to their Sales reps recently, that this was the reason when selecting a PABX for a client, that we didn't buy from AT&T. Sadly, he still didn't seem to understand. In a competitive market, the supplier who meets the needs of the customer is the one who will get the orders. Of course, I so accept that the fact that AT&T is a major LD carrier in the USA (and may be one here, before long) has nothing to do with this policy! Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 956 700111 Fax: +44 956 700110 VoiceMail: +44 941 151515 E-mail address: richard@mandarin.com - PGP2.3 public key available on request ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:21 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > What we really need is a new packet-switched network [with faster dialups] ... > In addition, the market is crying out for ubiquitous one-number access, ... Technically, there's nothing standing in the way of 14.4K dialups. Sprintnet has evolved into Sprintlink, a fast multiprotocol net, and is one of the larger pieces of the Internet. They certainly have the bandwidth and the technology. As mentioned elsewhere, 950 access is easy enough, but you have to pay the same rates to the local telco as any other 950 user, about $3/hr, and few data users want that. So I have to believe is that the reason that Sprintnet et al. don't have faster dialups is because there's not much of a market for them. The primary use of packet dialups these days is to access commercial on-line services. (I occasionally call the OAG that way.) The typical pattern of use is that the user types a command or two, the system sends back a screen, the user pages from screen to screen until done. The difference between repainting a screen at 2400 bps and at 9600 bps is noticable, but hardly compelling since even at 2400 it's much faster than you can read. 9600 bps modems are cheaper than they used to be, but they're still four times as much as 2400 bps modems, so 9600 bps will cost more. I wouldn't pay extra for OAG at 9600, I doubt if many others would, either. The main advantage of 9600 and up is for bulk data transfer, uploading, downloading, mountains of fidonet or usenet news, stuff like that, and dialup packet nets are a lousy technology for that. With the delays in packet nets and the ten cent/min nighttime long distance rates that are common, one might as well dial direct and use the full modem throughput. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 20:28:14 From: Mike Lanza Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos John Levine writes: > So I have to believe is that the reason that Sprintnet et al. don't have > faster dialups is because there's not much of a market for them. The > primary use of packet dialups these days is to access commercial on-line > services. (I occasionally call the OAG that way.) The typical pattern of > use is that the user types a command or two, the system sends back a > screen, the user pages from screen to screen until done. The difference > between repainting a screen at 2400 bps and at 9600 bps is noticable, but > hardly compelling since even at 2400 it's much faster than you can read. > 9600 bps modems are cheaper than they used to be, but they're still four > times as much as 2400 bps modems, so 9600 bps will cost more. I wouldn't > pay extra for OAG at 9600, I doubt if many others would, either. The description above assumes an old online service model -- basically command-line and interactive. Three new factors are enabling new online service models which can actually exploit bandwidth greater than 2400 bps: 1) High speed modems have become very inexpensive, and thus they have come into wide use. I've looked at the distribution of modem sales by speed, as well as the distribution of installed base. Over 50% of all sales of modems are currently high speed, and this percentage is constantly increasing. The installed base of high speed modems will approach 50% of all modems in the not too distant future (a year or two). 2) Graphical user interfaces have become the norm on PCs and workstations. Online services with command line interfaces look pretty darned stupid on machines with GUIs. Most online services have realized this and are becoming graphical. (I'm sure Delphi realizes this and is working to change things. If it doesn't, ol' Rupert might be looking real foolish before too long.) In a couple of years we'll be amazed that we ever put up with command-line interfaces to online services. 3) Due to tremendous price drops in mips, a startup can get an online service off the ground with less than $20K in equipment costs (perhaps even less). Thus, it is economically feasible to start an online service whose content is focused rather narrowly, relative to most of today's online services (e.g. Prodigy, CompuServe, AOL, Delphi, Dow Jones News Retrieval etc.). Because of this focus, the user interface to these services can be so easy that the user interaction needed to use it is minimal. At the extreme, no user interaction is needed at all -- the service's sessions consist completely of automated (i.e. programmatic) transactions between a client application (on the customer's machine) and the server application (on the online service's machine). An example of a service such as this is Reality Technology's Smart Investor Network. Users of Reality's investment management application, Wealth Builder, instruct their computer to run a session with the Smart Investor Network, and then Wealth Builder completely takes over. A couple of minutes later, the user has current security prices for the securities in his portfolio, some relevant analysts reports, and some news articles. > dialup packet nets are a lousy technology for that. With the delays in > packet nets and the 10 cent/min nighttime long distance rates that are > common, one might as well dial direct and use the full modem throughput. Not everyone can wait until nighttime. Think about business users! Daytime long distance rates are 20 to 25 cents per minute. ------------------------------ From: sg04@gte.com (Yechezkal-Shimon Gutfreund) Subject: Re: Info Highway: 21 Companies Don't Announce Reply-To: sg04@gte.com Organization: GTE Laboratories, Inc. Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 15:40:34 GMT In article 12@eecs.nwu.edu, Bob Rosenberg writes: > An article that ran in the 13 December {Wall Street Journal} said that > 28 companies were to about to announce their support for the Info > Super Highway. We know that IBM, Apple, BellSouth, AT&T, CitiCorp, > H-P, and Cable Labs were to take part in the announcement, but the > other shoe hasn't dropped yet. > Does anyone know the names of the 21 other companies that are/were > going to take part in this PR fest? Or when/if this announcement will > be made? Most of this stuff is viewed as way to sell current services and hardware. That is, Telcos, etc. announce that they already have the NII in place, and you can buy the stuff from them today. They view things like NII as a marketing ploy and are glad the administration is helping with the advertizing. Sorry, to say this, but that is the way a lot of the entrenched beauracracy sees things. Come the revolution, things will be different :-). Yechezkal-Shimon Gutfreund sgutfreund@gte.com [MIME] GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA http://www.gte.com/circus/home/home.html ------------------------------ From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) Subject: Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? Date: 25 Dec 1993 21:23:00 -0500 Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC In vamsee@softint.com (Vamsee Lakamsani) writes: > It is very convenient to have the yellow pages accessible on-line. Do > any US cities have this facility? Is there any reason not to make > yellow pages accessible on-line? Yes, yellow pages are online. Just telnet to Compu$erve and log in, then type GO YEL-4. Carl Oppedahl AA2KW Oppedahl & Larson (patent lawyers) Yorktown Heights, NY voice 212-777-1330 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: However Carl, it should be mentioned that one does not routinely 'telnet to Compuserve'. It *can* be done through a couple of somewhat obscure connections not to widely publicized -- but discussed here in the past -- and in any event the login at CIS is subject to normal customer requirements and billing. In other words, it is not your traditional 'ftp and use/get it for free' arrangments so common om the net. It is, as you point out available on Compuserve if one is a member there and willing to pay for it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: markedwa@news.delphi.com (MARKEDWARDS@DELPHI.COM) Subject: Re: Yellow Pages On-Line Anywhere? Date: 25 Dec 1993 13:32:42 -0500 Organization: General Videotex Corporation vamsee@softint.com (Vamsee Lakamsani) writes: > It is very convenient to have the yellow pages accessible on-line. Do > any US cities have this facility? Is there any reason not to make > yellow pages accessible on-line? Well, the AT&T Yellow Pages are online at CompuServe -- not free, but availible ... Mark Edwards ------------------------------ From: wkb@WHQ.usbm.gov (William Brownlow) Subject: Re: NEC NEAX 2400 Peculiarity Date: 25 Dec 1993 15:54:36 GMT Organization: U. S. Bureau of Mines Will Martin (wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL) wrote: > When I make an outside-line call on our NEC NEAX 2400 system here at > work (dialing 9 and then the local seven-digit number), the system has > the annoying habit of giving me a ring-sound (in the handset or the > speaker, depending which is turned on) and then a click that sounds > *exactly* like the far end picking up on the call. However, it is not > -- the ring sounds then continue until the called party answers or I > hang up. What is going on that causes this initial ring-tone that I > hear followed by that click? Is it the process of the unit selecting > an outside trunk? If so, why does it give me a ring first? It has been a few years since I worked on a NEAX 2400, but it is beginning to sound as if you have a hardware problem in the switch. Your instrument is connected to a particular line card in the switch which may have an option set wrong, or be improperly configured in the switch's software. Have you reported the problem to your local (in-house) telephone people? > Can anyone tell me just what is going on when I call out? When I dial > the initial "9", am I handed off to a telco trunk then, or does the > NEC just suck up all my dialled digits and only emit them to the telco > switch after I finish? Or am I "talking" to the telco switch right > after I dial the initial 9? I suspect the NEC waits until it detects a > complete and valid-by-its-standards number before it passes it to the > telco. That makes detecting and forbidding 976- and 900- calls easy. > If the NEC holds the numbers and then passes them on later, how fast > can it do this? Are the trunks it has to the telco higher-speed or > special lines, or the same as any generic business-type phone line? > Does it spit out DTMF at some far-higher-than-normal speed, or try to > emulate human-dialling speed? (It would seem there isn't all that much > time between the end of my dialling and that magical click ...) The NEC buffers the digits until it detects the end of your dialing. It uses the digits you input to determine the path it should take out of the switch (least cost routing and call blocking). The system dials the digits you hit, after stripping your access codes, in less than one second. After dialing the digits, your internal trunk is "cut over" to the CO trunk, this may be the 'click' that you are hearing. The telco trunks are not special in that they are high speed, DTMF signaling only needs around 100 msec of tone, but they may be special in the type of electrical handshaking they do with the PBX. In reviewing this, two other possibilities creep to mind. Is the telephone you are using one provided by NEC, or is it a third party phone? The second is that you may be experiencing a polarity reversal on one of the lines which is not guarded. (You could have had your extension wired with tip/ring reversed or a miswired cord between the phone jack and your phone.) If the phone is not a NEC, have a technician measure your on-hook voltage at the phone. If it is higher than a nominal 48v, have them turn off the message waiting lamp from the console and then disable it through software. William Brownlow, Senior Telecommunications Analyst WKB@WHQ.USBM.GOV ------------------------------ From: rv01@harvey.gte.com (Robert Virzi) Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 15:24:12 GMT In article , wrote: > Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem > with our voice mail system. She will be leaving a message in > someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To > Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she > hadn't. The problem has been re-occurring. > Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens > when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones > generated by the keypad. The system interprets the voice as a key > being punched. This problem is not at all uncommon, and it is true that it is more problematic for some people than it is for others. I'll bet that this woman has a particularly clean voice, by which I mean it sounds "musical." BTW -- I have heard this refered to as "Talk off," not "Prompt interruption." Anyway, many systems have a parameter or two that can be tuned to help avoid this situation. I think you want to look for a parameter that controls how long DTMF must be present before a signal is considered valid. Lengthen this by, say, 20 milliseconds, if it is really a big problem. Of course, this will mean you miss some valid keypresses (one's that are too quick). It is basically a signal detection problem and you can reduce the number of false positives if you are willing to accept a higher number of incorrect rejections. On the other hand, if it is just one user on a many person system, you may not want to inconvenience everyone else by slowing down the system. So, how high up the ladder is she, anyway? Bob virzi@gte.com +1 (617) 466-2881 ------------------------------ From: jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 20:30:54 GMT In article cambler@cymbal.aix.calpoly. edu (Chris Ambler - Fubar) writes: > fico!fico0!tjo@apple.com says: >> Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens >> when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones >> generated by the keypad. The system interprets the voice as a key >> being punched. > Actually, I design voice mail systems, and so I'm intimately familliar > with this problem. The solution I have found works best is to increase > the touch tone(tm) threshold, if you can. Most systems include a way > to force the hardware to wait longer before registering the tone. > Since a human voice will waver quite a bit (relative to the steady > tone of a phone), this usually does the trick. If your hardware Might this run into problems with phones like many AT&T models, which generate a fairly short (50ms ?) burst of dtmf when a key is pressed, instead of sending dtmf continuously as long as the key is held down? What threshold time have you found works best? 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: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Date: 25 Dec 1993 17:59:46 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] fico!fico0!tjo@apple.com wrote: > Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens > when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones > generated by the keypad. The system interprets the voice as a key > being punched. > This seems odd, but I have HEARD of it on other systems. Has this Yes. Octel has had problems with it, so has Centigram in both its Voice Memo and Memo II systems. Seems to happen only with women's voices. Another problem may be the talk threshold may be set too low -- many women speak in quieter voices than men do. I don't know much about the tone processing technology, but it seems a little primative -- on both companies' products the response is very quick for touch tones, meaning that the accident rate will also be a little higher. STEVE BAUER (fnbw1100@ink.org) wrote: > 2. Hold the phone a little further away from her lips. This might > reduce the offending frequency so it won't trigger things. I always recommend people to speak slower and closer to the phone, not further away. A couple reasons -- the slowness does enhance the lower tones as you said, but phone mouthpieces are designed to be used closely. Get too far away and it's just too hard to hear the person. Also, the silence sensor tends to kick in. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 93 9:53:17 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters Bishop Ranch is not even a postal name, nor does anything appear in old notes for the 415 area (long before the 510 splitoff). Was it broken out of some other exchange's service area? Mailing address for Bishop Ranch should have a zipcode of the form 945xx. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1993 12:27:44 PST From: David A. Kaye Subject: Re: San Ramon, CA and PacBell Headquarters Carl Moore wrote in the previous message: > Bishop Ranch is not even a postal name, nor does anything appear in > old notes for the 415 area (long before the 510 splitoff). Was it > broken out of some other exchange's service area? Mailing address > for Bishop Ranch should have a zipcode of the form 945xx. Nope. Bishop Ranch is totally synthetic and did not come out of any other exchange. It is in San Ramon. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #838 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03987; 27 Dec 93 6:24 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16545 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Mon, 27 Dec 1993 02:51:09 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22859 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Dec 1993 02:50:42 -0600 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 02:50:42 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312270850.AA22859@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #839 TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 Dec 93 02:50:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 839 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Phil D. Howard) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (John R. Levine) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Dennis G. Rears) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Alan Boritz) Re: Caller ID in Software? (Phil D. Howard) Re: Caller ID in Software? (Ralph Becker) Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (David Devereaux-Weber) Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) (Michael Hui) Re: Calling a PBX and Billing (Macy Hallock) Re: Calling Card Databases (Lee Sweet) Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (Robb Topolski) Re: 911 Changes in Toronto; Auto-Dial Alarm Devices (Greg Abbott) Re: TDD Software Wanted (Steve Peltz) Re: Modem Monitoring Question (David A. Kaye) Re: How Are Telephone Cal (Chris Farrar) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Dave Levenson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pdh@netcom.com (P D H) Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 16:17:26 GMT berg@disney.donnelley.com (Erik Berg) writes: > Problem is, my wife works with DCFS, a government agency that looks > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Caller-ID and Auto Callback information > are both passed to the called-party's central office and there is no > real way to avoid having that information available if making a direct > call to someone. You can do *67 to ask the CO not to give out your > number but you can't defeat the call-return part of the process. There > is a service which operates on a 900 number at a premium fee which > allows you to call through it and out to wherever causing the called > party to get no usable ID/return call information. Even that guy won't > cover for you in the event of legal action against you, but for all > intents and purposes, it provides an effective shield. I think the > number is 1-900-BLOCKER. PAT] One possible solution is a number to call in to DCFS to make outgoing calls from. Obviously you need to identify what number to make the calls look like they come from in addition to an access code. It could be a lot of digits to dial, but you could stick the codes in a memory that most phones now have these days. I don't know if equipment that could make calls look like they come from your extension is avail- able. Phil Howard, KA9WGN ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 19:20 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. >> it seems to me that calls from someone representing the ... >> I don't see why a home number needs to be made known for a business >> call, as long as the business is identified. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I quite agree. An 'alternate ID message' > should be provided for people in that category of employment who do > some or all of their work from home. Hey, that's a fine idea. I do consulting work, some at clients' offices, and it will be a pain when CL-ID arrives here because then I'll no longer be able to call client B from client A's office without telling B that I work for A. Same problem for doctors who return after-hours calls from home or friends' houses. So can we please make 'alternate ID message' standard everywhere? Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'd make 'alternate-ID' available on a 'need-to-have-it' basis where the applicant for the service had to give specific, valid (from a list of a few) reasons for needing the service. Permission for same would be renewed (or denied) annually, and any defalcation, phreaking, failure to pay the bill when due, etc. would be grounds for immediate removal of the privilege. The alternate message would have to include some published, working phone number somewhere, and the subscriber owning the number used as someone else's 'alternate' would need to give permission as part of the annuual permit process. For example, a police officer's phone might alternately identify as the police department switchboard, ditto the social worker's phone might identify as the agency's main number. The person (or company or agency) allowing their number to be used as an alternate would sign off agreeing to accept responsibility for the content of the transmissions made when their ID was being used. In other words, 'improper' use of the phone via your alternate (probably employer's) ID in order to deflect attention away from yourself would be a serious matter if you got caught at it. You'd lose the privilege of course, but you might lose your job as well if your employer found out that *their phone service* had been jeopardized by your behavior. Fair enough? I think it is a good compromise. A star code (i.e. *63 or similar) would be prepended to the dialing string meaning to use the alternate-ID for the call being presently made. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 14:48:49 EST From: Dennis G. Rears Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? > In article winnie@flagstaff.princeton. > edu (Jon Edelson) writes: >> In the first message of this thread, a question was asked about >> blocking Caller ID in a situation where a social worker was calling >> from home. Rather then getting into the whole 'right to Caller ID >> discussion' it seems to me that calls from someone representing the >> social agency should be identified as calling from the social agency. >> The social agency is 'responsible' for the call, and while I think >> that people have the right to know who 'made' a call, I don't see why >> a home number needs to be made known for a business call, as long as >> the business is identified. > Sounds like a perfect application for DISA via the government agency's > telephone system to me. > > > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I quite agree. An 'alternate ID message' > should be provided for people in that category of employment who do > some or all of their work from home. That should resolve many of the > complaints about privacy we hear now. PAT] No. Caller-ID should be the number of the phone that called you. If you start allowing an 'alternate ID message' you start preverting the idea of Caller-ID to where it is worthless. dennis [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I personally would opt to have it the way you suggest, Dennis. I have no patience for example with attornies who insist on getting my home number while refusing to give theirs to me. Whenever an attorney asks for my home number, my immediate response is to ask for his. When he says he does not give it out and that he takes calls at his office, my response is I do the same. Touche, and all that. For that matter, attornies have had Caller-ID for years, long before telco invented it; they use their secretaries to find out who is calling and screen out the calls they don't want / are afraid to deal with. So now the rest of us have Caller-ID as well. My heart is really bleeding. But as a compromise to the many fine people who really are in a bind as a result of working at home, etc, I would make the 'alternate-ID' service a tariffed, but relatively restricted offering. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? From: drharry!aboritz@uunet.UU.NET (Alan Boritz) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 06:56:35 EST Organization: Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - +1 201 934 0861 I think that supposedly intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, social workers, and their employers) should find their OWN solution to that issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-network, and the rest of us, with their problems. If an employee has a legitimate need to routinely make telephone calls from their residences for their employer, the employer should provide a phone line for their exclusive use. The City of New York has done that for certain Mayoral employees for years. aboritz%drharry@uunet.uu.net or uunet!drharry!aboritz Harry's Place BBS (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - +1-201-934-0861 ------------------------------ From: pdh@netcom.com (P D H) Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software? Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 15:46:21 GMT > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The cheapest and most effecient way is > to purchase a Caller-ID Display box from telco or some other supplier > of same. Seriously. Don't bother re-inventing the whole process. In > addition, there are modems which display Caller-ID messages in the > process of otherwise doing their thing. PAT] I take it that a lot of people are interested in which modems do include the hardware feature and have cooresponding firmware to deal with it. I would suspect one reasonable way to deal with it is when the "RING" message comes from the modem, the second one can include the caller-id info. Then your host software can choose to do with it as it wants. Phil Howard, KA9WGN [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, the 'RING(ING)' message on the screen is not synchronized with the incoming ring very much. On my modem it runs a second or two late so probably the message could be delayed long enough to pick up the data which is always sent at the very instant the first ring finishes, and it could come with the first RING announcement. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 11:48:44 EST Reply-To: rgbecker@xap.xyplex.com (Ralph Becker) From: rgbecker@xap.xyplex.com (Ralph Becker) Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software? > Are there any tools that do Caller ID in software? I really do not > want to buy a box when I have all these nice computers sitting here > ready to do some work for me. I think the question here is "Is there any software out there that will exploit the existing Caller ID capability of my modem and make it act like one of the add-on Caller ID boxes that are available?". This is a good question. I also have such a modem, and I've been looking for a utility like this ever since I got Caller ID (New England Telephone calls it PhoneSmart). It would be even better if it had an automatic logging capability. Anyone seen something like this? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 10:48:14 CDT From: weberdd@clover.macc.wisc.edu Reply-To: weberdd@macc.wisc.edu Subject: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) In Quantum Economics (TELECOM Digest V13 #834), Kriston J. Rehberg writes: > ...Why NYNEX isn't replacing its ancient copper street pole wire with fiber > optics TODAY is beyond me... NYNEX is still regulated. The state Public Utilities Commission must approve all capital projects, and if there is functional copper in place, the regulatory paradigm says that replacement would add unnecessary cost to the ratepayers. It is likely that NYNEX can see the handwriting on the wall but is working with regulatory constraints. If telecom regulation were to be totally removed, it is likely that there would problems with providing service to low revenue and low density subscribers. The problem we all face is how to let the regulated companies move into new technology without loosing service to some market segments. David Devereaux-Weber, P.E. weberdd@macc.wisc.edu (Internet) The University of Wisconsin - Madison (608)262-3584 (voice) DoIT - MACC Communications; B263 (608)262-4679 (FAX) 1210 W Dayton St. Madison, WI 53706 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 15:24:00 +0000 From: michael (m.m.y.) hui Subject: Re: Quantum Economics (was Union Losing Telco Jobs) 500 channels is only overwhelming when you do not have an efficient means to find out what you want to watch, and when it's on. Given that many channels, you would need a nice database, possibly downloaded into your home computer via the same cable that feeds digital compressed video into your set top converter. Then, some powerful and at the same time easy to use database program will let you efficiently find what you want to watch, schedule everything, including programming your VCR automatically to tape those shows you can't watch in real time, and your week will be all set. The only debate right now concerns where the database software will run. One school thinks that the set top box should run everything, hence it'll at least have to be a moderately powerful computer. That's an expensive, but ultimately the best solution. The stop gap solution is to require that you have a popular brand of personal computer available at home, which you then run the program supplied to you by the cablevision company along with the supplied hardware connections. Tastes always diverge, and always multiply. In order to cater to a more diverse taste, you need more channels. How can you argue with that? ------------------------------ From: fmsystm!fmsys!macy@wariat.org Date: Sun, 26 Dec 93 09:32 EST Subject: Re: Calling a PBX and Billing Reply-To: macy@telemax.com Organization: F M Systems/Telemax Medina, Ohio USA In article andrew@frip.wv.tek.com writes: > Not necessarily. Our AT&T Definity system supervises an incoming call > immediately. When asked why, our telecom support group mumbled > something about compatiblity with our voice-mail provider. This has affected the way we set up ACD groups. At one time, we could offer the initial "all agents are busy, please hold" message without giving answer supervision, and be within the rules. Now, we give answer supervision on the first message and start paying for the calls immediately. This has induced clients to use automated attendants and voice mail to route and answer calls more quickly. Here's how things changed: Several of the types and mfr PBX systems I work with have software flags to control answer supervision on TIE, DID and CCSA trunks. About two years ago two of the manufacturers came out with software patches to disable control of answer supervision. The effect of these patches was to "hard code" supervision on answer or announcement. Only ringback, busy tone and reorder tone now do not give answer supervision on DID and CCSA trunks. The field service bulletin that accompanied these patches stated that the FCC had ruled that answer supervision must be provided if anything other than a standard call progress tone was given to the incoming trunk. There is a provision for an intercept recorder, but it is very strictly controlled. Upon inquiry, I was told that AT&T had asked for this change in the FCC CPE requirements due to fraud and revenue loss. These changes are now part of the FCC part 94 telephone equipment rules, and are mandatory. (Hmmm, I think thats the correct part number.) Since I have heard this from two different manufacturers, in basically the same words, I'm inclined to beleive it. I haven't taken the time to locate and reread the FCC paperwork. Comments: I know that AT&T modified their No. 4 ESS machines to give only one way transmission on incoming calls until answer supervision in response to toll fraud situations. I also know of one site that deliberatly set up part of their incoming T1 trunks not to give answer supervision to avoid billing (they were using another IXC, not AT&T, at the time). When I installed my first T1 from an IXC directly into a customer PBX some years ago, I experimented with answer supervision flags and network behavior. The IXC was giving me a complete transmission path, regardless of the answer supervision I provided. This matched my experiences in working with CO to CO trunking back when I worked for the telephone co. At the time, I figured someone would use this to defraud an IXC at some point, and even wondered why ROLM could get away with the way their auto-hold feature (or auto-camp on) worked. BTW, I always set up my systems to operate the way I knew the network was supposed to work. Not only because I was honest, but because I know that someday someone would be testing, notice the behavior and turn down the trunks for service ... and I'd get the repair call from a very unhappy customer. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG +1.216.723.3030 macy@telemax.com macy@fms.com Telemax, Inc. - F M Systems, Inc. 152 Highland Drive Medina, OH 44256 USA ------------------------------ From: decrsc!leesweet@uunet.UU.NET (Lee Sweet) Subject: Re: Calling Card Databases Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 13:01:42 EST We recently had to have a local POTS line (for a modem, of all things!) disconnected because, in the recent past (few years?), someone had an AT&T Calling Card hooked to this number. The number appears to have been stolen/posted on Phreaker BBS/who knows what, and we regularly got bills for hundreds of $ monthly for calls from/to Peru (billed to the Calling Card). Point is, C&P Telephone/AT&T LD both said that *nothing* could be done to invalidate the number in whatever (international?) database it lived on in as a valid Calling Card number. What?! There's no way to have these things drop dead when the number is disconnected?! Comments, anyone? BTW, we finally said, the heck with it, killed the number, got a new one, and all's fine. Two positive notes. AT&T *never* had a problem crediting for the bogus calls, once the facts were explained, and C&P swapped the line at no charge, also. I still find the 'can't kill it' very hard to believe/understand! Lee Sweet Internet *lists* - leesweet@datatel.com Chief Systems Consultant Internet *e-mail* - lee@datatel.com Datatel, Inc. Phone - 703-968-4661 4375 Fair Lakes Court FAX - 703-968-4625 Fairfax, VA 22033 (Opinions are my own, and only my own!) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T/telco cannot directly control the input into the database of the PTT's involved, but they can and do regularly ask the PTT's to remove bad numbers. And, when they have charged back enough of it to the PTT involved, the number usually gets blacklisted, but when reaching directory assistance or an inward oper- ator in certain third world countries takes fifteen minutes for that function alone, you can imagine how speedy their business office people operate. Ever try to reach directory assistance or the operator in Nigeria when they don't feel like responding (their lunch break or whatever)? And when they do answer, they ask you five times how to spell the name of the person you want, then they put the phone down to go away somewhere to look up the number and come back in maybe five or ten minutes only to give you a wrong number. That is unless someone else over there does not walk past, see the phone laying there off hook and 'helpfully' hang it up without asking if anyone is on the other end, forcing the AT&T operator to dial back a second time and start it all from the beginning. How fast do you suppose they work on fraud stuff in their 'database', if you want to be generous and call it that? PAT] ------------------------------ From: topolski@kaiwan.com (Robb Topolski) Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto Organization: KAIWAN Internet Access (310-527-4279, 714-539-0829) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 21:08:34 GMT Tony Harminc (EL406045@BROWNVM.brown.edu) wrote: > For these reasons, effective January 1, 1994, the Emergency Services > of Metropolitan Toronto will not respond to, or act upon any alarm > transmitted directly to the 9-1-1 system, from any auto-dial alarm > device. (Speaking for myself only, as a 911 operator) It is a good policy. One thing a 9-1-1 operator does not want is a couple hundred constituents with these dialers -- ESPECIALLY during a power failure, earthquake, or other source for false alarms. Auto-alarm systems also have a tendency to rarely but occasionally "run away" -- dial over and over and over despite the proper receipt of the call. The ones I have heard have a pre-recording that says by voice "There is an emergency at 123 Elm." We don't know if they need police, fire, or paramedics. Even if these devices got smart and actually relayed some information, the false alarm thing would clog the 9-1-1 system in the moments following a storm or power failure. Here's what I would like: a "Help, I've fallen and can't get up" panic button with two-way communication that dials 9-1-1 ... that absolutely would not react to power failures/surges/fluxes or spurient RF. Robert M. Topolski ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1993 13:34:24 CST From: Greg Abbott Reply-To: gabbott@uiuc.edu Subject: 911 Changes in Toronto; Auto-Dial Alarm Devices > NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC > RE: 9-1-1, Auto-dial Alarm Devices > In order to provide the citizens of Metropolitan Toronto with an > effective, efficient emergency response service, the Metropolitan > Toronto ambulance, fire and police service providers utilize the 9-1-1 > emergency telephone system. [rest deleted] Illinois State Statutes prohibit the connection of *any* type of automatic dialer alarm/emergency dialer to dial a the 9-1-1 emergency number. ------------------------------ From: peltz@cerl.uiuc.edu (Steve Peltz) Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted Date: 26 Dec 1993 20:58:24 GMT Organization: CERL - University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign In article , wrote: > Mike, the phone company is right -- you can't get ASCII to Baudot > (code used by TYs) communication by software alone. You're going to > need a hybrid ASCII/Baudot modem. There are several on the market, > including the MIC300i, and they have a version for the Mac too. Baudot is just a 5-bit code, right? Any synchronous-capable serial chip can do that (such as a Mac). Is the modem encoding itself also different, possibly different carrier frequencies or such? It can't be just Baudot coding that causes the problem. Why don't they start releasing dual-mode TDD machines, that can handle ASCII and "standard" modem standards, and eventually phase out Baudot- only machines? ------------------------------ From: dk@crl.com (David A. Kaye) Subject: Re: Modem Monitoring Question Date: 26 Dec 1993 18:13:48 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [login: guest] Mark Case (mcase@wes.army.mil) wrote: > location goes down. The question is: how can the location be > monitored so that it may be determined whether the problem is with the > modem or with the transmitter? Have some area of the transmitter's failure trip a dialer or an answerback on the modem. When I ran a voicemail company I set up dialers with a bunch of relays in series detecting things such as power outage, high temperature, etc. If any relay in the series opened up, the dialer would seize a trunk and dial out. (I *am* available for consultations.) ------------------------------ Reply-To: comp.dcom.telecom@cld9.com Subject: Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? From: chris.farrar@cld9.com (Chris Farrar) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 93 12:43:00 -0600 Organization: C-9 Communications Ge710012@brownvm.brown.e said something along the lines of the following: > number, like first three digits are 510, so talk to PacBell, but what > to do about people like ATT who are issuing calling cards but don't > have local phone numbers? If there's a central clearing house, how big Bell Canada will issue calling cards to businesses (or replacement personal cards if yours is lost or stolen) with numbers that do not match your actual phone number. When I last had a 416 area code number, my card was 416-234-XXXX-PPPP, when my wallet was stolen, the new card that was issued to me was 476-176-0187-PPPP. For my current calling card, with a 519 area code number, running the card number through software (on a PC) that will tell if a Visa or MasterCard number is valid, has the card number come back as being a valid MasterCard, even though it is several digits too short to be a MC. Chris ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 01:43:56 GMT In article , fico!fico0!tjo@apple.com writes: > Someone in our firm is currently experiencing a "different" problem > with our voice mail system. She will be leaving a message in > someone's voice mailbox and the system will interrupt her, saying "To > Send this Message, Press..."- as if she had punched a key, but she > hadn't. The problem has been re-occurring. > Our vendor (Octel) calls it "PROMPT INTERRUPTION", and says it happens > when some individual's voice frequencies are very close to the tones > generated by the keypad. The system interprets the voice as a key > being punched. This is usually called 'talk-off'. Your vendor's explanation is probably correct. The voice mail system thinks it hears a DTMF (touch-tone) character somewhere in the sound of a user's voice. A human voice typically generates only one frequency at a time, and the components of the touch-tone signals are pairs of non-harmonically- related frequencies, so this problem does not occur very often. It takes an unusual combination of vocal characteristics and distortion to make it happen. Voice mail equipment vendors attempt to reduce talk-off in several ways. The touch-tone detector is usually programmed to require some minimum duration of tone, often in the absence of energy at other frequencies, before recognition. But making the minimum duration too long, while reducing talk-off, makes the system insensitive to real touch-tones sent by people who punch keys very quickly, or by tele- phone sets that generated short tones whose duration is not related to dial button dwell time. Most anti-talk-off techniques result in some compromise of the ability to detect valid tones. Does the user experience talk-off only from one telephone set? Try replacing its handset or transmitter element. Can the minimum tone duration on your voice mail system be administered? Try increasing it a few tens of milliseconds. We have found that 50 - 75 msec. work well. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Stirling, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #839 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11659; 28 Dec 93 17:09 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24072 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:37:56 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12411 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:37:31 -0600 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:37:31 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312281937.AA12411@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #840 TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 Dec 93 13:37:30 CST Volume 13 : Issue 840 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Monopoly For Hong Kong Telecom is Threatened, Cable is Merging (Dan Chun) Information Wanted on European E1/ISDN Standards (Doug A. Chan) FTP Site For EIA Standards (Rob McConnell) FCC Jurisdiction Over 500-Channel TV (Justin Fidler) Communication Speeds and Distances (jemli@iastate.edu) Telix and Busy Signals (Eric Walrod) Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love (James Salsman) Dialing in Area 601 (Mississippi) (Carl Moore) Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ (Michael Jacobs) 500 Channel Cable Television (A. Padgett Peterson) Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS? (Michael G. Capuano) Re: The Superhighway and Telcos (Fred R. Goldstein) Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts (Martin McCormick) Re: TDD Software Wanted (Todd D. Hale) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 28 Dec 93 17:52 GMT From: "chun d."@infomail.infonet.com Subject: Monopoly For Hong Kong Telecom is Threatened, Cable is Merging Hi everyone, There are many stories covered on mergers and acquisitions for cable operators, online information services and home shopping operators, telcos, etc in the news. Everybody talks about multimedia and interactive services and information superhighway with ISDN, fibre-optics and the idea of anywhere-anytime computing concepts. Are there any interests from the western part of the world to learn more of the development in Asia and in particular Hong Kong. I have checked some newswire and some newsgroup but very few are aware of the development in this part of the world. In HK, where the local PTT -- Hong Kong Telecom HKT (a C&W plc's subsidiary) has recently been threatened on its monopoly by the OFTA (Office of the Telecommunication Authority) which has prepared to grant three fixed telecom licenses to three conglormerates. HKT stills enjoy the monopoly of providing local voice services until June 1995. The three conglormerates are namely: - New T&T Hong Kong ( backed by Wharf Holdings which also holds first exclusive Cable TV license for three years, NYNEX is the technology partner in this case); - Hutchison Communications ( joined by Telstra, formerly Telecom Australia and backed by Hutchison Whampoa empire of the richest man in HK, K.S. Li.); - New World Communications ( backed by New World Development, another conglormerate interested in property, infrastructure developments and to a lesser extent, paging services is also backed by US West, Infa Telecom, and Shanghai Long-Distance); In Hong Kong, the facts are that: 1. HKT holds all monopoly for international traffic in voice and data circuits until 2006; 2. HKT holds monopoly for providing local voice and data service until 1995; 3. HKT has fully digitised all exchanges and had spent major PR efforts in running up to the last minute including inviting the Governor to initiate the ceremony; 4. There is no charge for making any local calls in both voice/fax/data except for a monthly subscription rate; 5. HKT made about 60% of the revenue from enjoying the international monopoly; 6. The regulatory is begining to prove that it exists now that the appointed director who used to help deregulate the Australia market seeing Optus challenging Telecom Australia - now Telstra has announce the plan for deregulation; 7. In HK, the fax machines are very popular and is only second to Japan in the penetration of fax.(since fax supports funny images that are known as chinese or japanese chacracters.) It also supports a primitive workgroup concept before Lotus notes became a hit; 8. Online information services, BBSs, mobile data, PDAs, value-added networks, commercial internet gateways, enhanced fax store-forward services, fax-on-demand, and other advance services are all available and had made their presenece felt; Now, my question is do *you*, as a researcher or professional think the market in HK can substain three fixed telecom license? Debates and questions are welcomed. I am happy to continue this discussion based on the assumption that there are sufficient interests from all of you in the telecom market in HK and secondly I would like to learn from the deregulating environment experienced by AT&T some years ago and also the UK Mercury cutting into BT, etc. from you folks. I am online in CompuServe at 100267.712@compuserve.com and also here in Infonet but will be departing before end of year. I am also obtaining a full internet access via one of the local commercial gateways soon. So I will be in touch with you folks someway. Best regards and Happy 94!!! Daniel J Y Chun The Extrategic Wizard [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something else to be considered are the changes coming in 1997 with the change in 'ownership' as the UK pulls out and China takes over. Will all the deals make prior still be honored? Will the economy in HK change to the extent that if three are supportable now, they will all remain viable after the change in the government? PAT] ------------------------------ From: apollo1@netcom.com (Doug A. Chan =-) Subject: Information Wanted on European E1/ISDN Standards Message-Id: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 18:27:31 GMT 1) Where can I find out more info about E1 for telephony use? I'm looking for very specific details (line coding format, signalling format, etc...) for different countries (Germany, France, UK). Also, call progress information/tones for each of the countries would be very helpful... 2) I'm also looking for ISDN standards in Europe (EEC's NET 5 vs. current country specific implementation vs. CCITT specs?) I know this is quite a bit of information but I'll be quite happy if someone can point me in the right direction. I'll post a summary if I get sufficient info ... Thanks, Doug apollo1@netcom.com apollo@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: rob@ubitrex.mb.ca (Rob McConnell) Subject: FTP Site For EIA Standards Date: 28 Dec 1993 15:52:27 GMT Organization: UBITREX Corporation, Winnipeg, MB Canada Reply-To: rob@ubitrex.mb.ca Does anyone know the whereabouts of an FTP site for EIA standards, specifically EIA IS-60? Thanks, Rob McConnell Ubitrex Corporation | Voice: 204-942-2992 ext 223 1900-155 Carlton St | FAX: 204-942-3001 Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3C 3H8 | Email: rob@ubitrex.mb.ca ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 00:03:54 EST From: Justin Fidler Subject: FCC Jurisdiction Over 500-Channel TV With all this talk of 500-channel television, the medium of delivery will change as well. If this medium is carried on private company equipment, will the FCC still have a right to control/censor the programming like they do broadcast television (which travels over airwaves)? Justin Fidler jfidler@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ From: jemli@iastate.edu Subject: Communication Speeds and Distances Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 00:23:52 GMT The latest draft of the `Communications Speeds and Distances' chart is on: 129.186.149.1 vincent1.iastate.edu (login: anonymous.jemli) as either comspeed.eps or comspeed.gif. The circles represent some protocol (like ethernet or local talk) positioned at their transmission speed (ethernet = 10Mbps) and as high as their range (ethernet = .5km). The ovals (like frame relay and DBDQ) represent their transmission speed range (frame relay goes from 64Kbps to 37.5Mbps), and their height is, again, their range. The colors are arbitrary. For most thingies I don't know their range (without repeaters) and just guess. If you can help with this info send a note. I was thinking that perhaps I should color them all according to their OSI layer. If this makes sense and anyone can classify all these thingies into their OSI layers I would welcome the feedback. Thanks, Jeremy |-) ------------------------------ From: ericw@seanews.akita.com (Eric Walrod) Subject: Telix and Busy signals Organization: SEANEWS - Seattle Public Access News + Mail Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 03:15:24 GMT Okay, I just set up a new PC Logic 14.4kbps Internal Fax/Modem for a friend, and set-up deltaComm's Telix v3.21 for it. I CANNOT get Telix to recognize a busy signal. I am already using ATX4V1 to no avail (sp?). Any suggestions (besides TRY x PROGRAM and BUY x BRAND MODEM) e-mailed to me would be most appreciated. Eric Walrod [] SEANEWS [] Seattle Public Access Usenet News + Mail [] +1 206 747 NEWS [] ericw@seanews.akita.com ------------------------------ From: bovik@eecs.nwu.edu (James Salsman) Subject: Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love Organization: BRI Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 09:11:38 GMT The {Los Angeles Times} reports that in the past few months, Guatemalan callers have placed 70,000 calls to Canadian phone-sex lines at $2.95 per minute. Basic phone service in Guatemala can be under $1/month. That is one call per every 2.8 telephones, according to my statistics. (Guatemala has about 800,000 people and 2% have telephones.) There was no disclosure of fees as is required by law in the U.S.A. The calls made so far are over one million U.S. dollars. I hope the $2.95/minute was an international tariff fee and not a Dial-IT/900 style fee. In a country already troubled by civil unrest and strife left over from the 1982 collapse of the Central American Market, that a big, wealthy country like Canada was trying to make money off of the overactive coffee-fed libidos of an impovrished people would be disgusting. James Salsman Bovik Research [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, the same story as it appeared in the {Chicago Tribune} said that the people in Guatemala making the calls were finding out too late that the cost (of the call) was rather high and that many people were protesting the charges when they saw them on their phone bill. Apparently it is not entirely clear to people what they will be paying for the service. But the thing to remember is that it is not a 'big weathy country like Canada' which is making money off the people in Guatemala, it is whoever is running the service who made the arrangements with the (Canadian and Guatemalan) telcos who is making the money. What about here in the USA where some numbers in the 201 (New Jersey) area code which connect with horoscopes, astrologists and practioners of Tarot are being heavily promoted in advertisements in newspapers in Spain, Haiti, Jamaica and other similar countries? The people in Spain/Haiti/Jamaica are getting the same message delivered to them that the Guatemalans are getting from Canada and that the gay guys in the USA are getting from the Netherland Antilles: **call for a good time**. No premium fees; just toll charges apply. We've covered here before how the payments get divided up among the folks responsible; making lots of money by taking advantage of the human frailties of others is nothing new: just the technology has changed. Years ago people went out to some certain place in their community where they knew they could find what they wanted for a price. Now they use the modern international phone network instead. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 12:36:09 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Dialing in Area 601 (Mississippi) I received the following on 23 December): ... we currently do not have to dial the area code within Mississippi. However, this will change this month (December) when we will be required to enter the whole 1 + 601 + seven digits. ------------------------------ From: rlm@helen.surfcty.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ - Ten Years Hence In-Reply-To: devalla@astra.tamu.edu's message of 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT Organization: Surf City Software/TBFW Project Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 06:21:41 GMT On 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT, TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > A feature I used to do occassionally was called "Ten Years Ago in > the Digest" and perhaps a few readers would enjoy some of the > comments from the readers who were on our list back then during the > final days of the old Bell System and the first few days of the 'new > way' of doing things. PAT] Yes, it can be interesting to go back in the archives. I remember seeing a note from the Moderator at the time, Jon Solomon, saying something to the effect that now that AT&T's breaking up, we can't have any political commentary in the Digest because of the AUP for the various nets. He also said the Net was about to convert from NP to the newfangled TCP/IP ... amazing how much technical progress there's been in the Internet in such a short period of time. Robert L. McMillin | rlm@helen.surfcty.com | Netcom: rlm@netcom.com 13442 Wilson St. | Garden Grove, CA | 92644 voice: 714-638-2459 | fax: 714-638-2384 I'm only a guest at surfcty.com; THEY certainly wouldn't have these opinions! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Acceptable Use Policy has changed quite a bit over the years also, and I think Jon Solomon was somewhat mistaken in wanting to totally rule out 'political commentary'. He later changed his mind on this when I pointed out to him that so much of what is available today in telecommunications, and the way the industry implements what is available is due to politics. How can you therefore separate the 'political commentary' at times from a pure technology discussion? The classic example of this is Caller-ID. Yes, the changes in network technology have been occurring at a expotential rate. It took how many thousands of years to invent the telephone and learn to control electricity for our convenience? Then in the next hundred years ... wow! Computers were 'invented' in the late 1940's and early 1950's ... 25-30 years later 'home computers' first began to make an appearance in the late 1970's. Now 15 years later, more computational resources sit on the desk in my office than existed at Harvard University in 1960. Several years passed between the 110/300 baud modem and the 1200 baud modem. After a couple years 2400 baud became available, and then 9600 and 14.4 came through almost immediatly thereafter. The {Chicago Tribune} in an editorial comment in 1900 commenting on 'all the tremendous inventions of the past century' (meaning 1801-1900) asked, "how long will it be before we run out of things to invent ...". It boggles my mind to think of what kinds of things we will have at our disposal twenty years from now. That is, unless we 'run out of things to invent'... :) PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 19:37:50 EDT From: Michael Jacobs Subject: Re: Details of AT&T's Divestiture and the MFJ - Ten Years Hence Regarding the question about why the divestiture and how the terms of the Modified Final Judgement came to be, the best source I have seen is a book titled "The Deal of the Century," which should be available in any larger library. It includes relevant historical data, analysis, and interviews with all the major players. Contrary to popular belief, top AT&T executives got exactly what they wanted from the MFJ, namely a lifting of information services and other restrictions from AT&T. For more information regarding technical consequences of the MFJ terms, see "The Rape of Ma Bell" by Kraus and Duerig, who give an insider's perspective (with some emotional bias) to the subject. Many of the technical problems have been worked out since 1984, and a lot of the horror stories are exaggerated, but the book does point out some areas still of concern ten years later. Personal Opinions Only, Mike Jacobs, JMT0@lafibm.lafayette.edu, Service Technician, Bell Atlantic-Pennsylvania ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 09:39:29 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: 500 Channel Cable Television Several people have written: > A. Padgett Peterson writes that he thinks that there is not much of a > logical reason for a 500 channel system. Specifically: and they have all missed my real point - not that there is not a *logical* reason but there is not a *logistical* structure to support it and this would be necessary. There have been several good suggestions. Personally I favor a built-in computer that could accept a [weekly|daily|hourly] listing in the background that would be stored in the home. Several people have suggested that they might be able to edit out everrything except what is wanted. I doubt that the companies will offer this since they are interested in selling *more* so will have to tell you about things you did not select. Personally, I *want* everything I can get. Just this week some people overseas mentioned some nuances and it was nice to be able to tune into "HOBOCTH" on channel 43 and see what was being released publically. The real stumbling block is liable to be the old NTSC/PAL/SECAM one (why foreign shows often are "boxed"). Hippo Hoppidays, Padgett PS: I wonder how the Brits licence PC-television boards and multi-channel displays. ------------------------------ From: mgcapuano@delphi.com (Michael G. Capuano) Subject: Re: TDMA vs. CDMA = Betamax vs. VHS? Date: 28 Dec 1993 03:42:01 GMT Organization: General Videotex Corporation Brendan, What is up with E-TDMA. Has that been thrown in the toilette. This posting is after reading your analysis of the San Diego "ideal" CDMA trial. Mike Capuaon ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) Subject: Re: The Superhighway and Telcos Date: 28 Dec 1993 05:47:20 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article darmy@symantec.com (Donald Army) writes: > Are there any news groups on ATM?? comp.dcom.cell-relay That should do it. Fred R. Goldstein k1io goldstein@carafe.tay2.dec.com Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission ------------------------------ From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu (Martin McCormick) Subject: Re: Unique(?) Problem With Voicemail Prompts Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:28:41 GMT In article dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > A human voice typically generates only one frequency at a time, and > the components of the touch-tone signals are pairs of non-harmonically- > related frequencies, so this problem does not occur very often. The human voice may produce only one fundamental at any given time, but it also produces lots of harmonics which contain all of the intelligence in speech. It can happen that certain Howell sounds may produce a harmonic pattern that contains two frequencies which just happen to produce a valid duel-tone signal. The question is not whether this will happen, but how often. Male and female voices both produce lots of harmonic output and the possibility for a false trigger is always there. The first amateur radio automatic telephone patches used resonant tuned circuits and phase locked loops to "listen" for tones and frequently heard them in the harmonic content of voices. This caused the systems to frequently malfunction and either drop calls or randomly do other control sequences at inappropriate times. Now, we have digital signal processors which can be programmed to run more tests on a suspected DTMF signal to see if it is really a DTMF tone or just somebody's musical voice. A good source of basic information plus a lot of very interesting reading can be found in the "Benchmark Papers on Acoustics" series by Bell Laboratories. These research papers describe the quest to understand how human speech is generated so as to design machines which could artificially produce it and even understand spoken words. Some of the pre-computer era hardware was truly cleaver and did wonders to aid in understanding even if it didn't ever have any practical use. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ From: thale@Novell.COM (Todd D. Hale) Subject: Re: TDD Software Wanted Organization: Novell, Inc., Provo, UT, USA Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:35:54 GMT In article peltz@cerl.uiuc.edu (Steve Peltz) writes: > Why don't they start releasing dual-mode TDD machines, that can handle > ASCII and "standard" modem standards, and eventually phase out Baudot- > only machines? I know that ASCII/BAUDOT TDDs are available, and have been for several years. But, the transition has been very slow. Todd D. Hale thale@novell.com halet@ernie.cs.byu.edu Unofficially speaking, of course. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #840 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16365; 29 Dec 93 14:06 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00547 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:15:27 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06653 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:15:02 -0600 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 10:15:02 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312291615.AA06653@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #841 TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 Dec 93 10:15:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 841 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: How are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? (Chris Labatt-Simon) Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Brad Hicks) Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Mitch Wagner) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Charles Reichley) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Mitch Wagner) Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted (Russell E. Sorber) Re: Telix and Busy Signals (Jeffery Foy) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (David Woolley) NPA Questions (Bill Hofmann) International Dedicated Connections (Patrick Nta) Argentine Phone Companies (Telecomm,Telephonic) (Charles Reichley) Re: Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love (Carl Moore) Digital Cordless Phones Question (mike%jim@wupost.wustl.edu) Editor's Comments on Communications/Computer Progress (H.A. Kippenhan Jr.) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: pribik@rpi.edu (Chris Labatt-Simon) Subject: Re: How Are Telephone Calling Cards Verified? Date: 29 Dec 1993 15:13:55 GMT Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY, USA chris.farrar@cld9.com (Chris Farrar) writes: > For my current calling card, with a 519 area code number, running the > card number through software (on a PC) that will tell if a Visa or > MasterCard number is valid, has the card number come back as being a > valid MasterCard, even though it is several digits too short to be a > MC. Credit cards use the last digit of the full number as a check digit. I don't have the specs in front of me, but if I recall, they use a mod 10 translation with the summation equalling the check digit. I'm not sure if it's mod 10 or something else though. It's a fairly common practice for a lot of types of plastic. If the first digit of your calling card is a 5, and you ran it through a credit card authorization program, it would usually recognize it as a Mastercard. Hence, if the last digit uses the same checksum, then it would appear as a valid Mastercard, regardless of its length. Chris Labatt-Simon Internet: pribik@rpi.edu Design & Disaster Recovery Consulting CIS: 73542,2601 Albany, New York PHONE: (518) 495-5474 FAX: (518) 786-6539 Subscribe to the Lotus Notes Mailing List - e-mail me for info.... ------------------------------ From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU1=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 28 Dec 93 21:17:28 GMT Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television Several people have mentioned, in discussing the topic "500 Channel Cable Television," that what's wrong with this is the sheer difficulty of finding anything interesting. Most of them called for some kind of set-top computer that downloads listings and offers you multiple ways to search them. Whether you ever thought about it or not, those of us with satellite TV systems =already= have, in theory, roughly 400 to 500 channels of video available to us, of which maybe 190 or so carry free video (* see footnote), another 30 or so carry cable-TV type subscription-only channels, and the rest of which is either part-time rental ("feeds" for various purposes), private data channels, or just unused yet. In any case, at just about any time you turn on even a cheap C-band only system like mine, there's at least 150 channels available to "surf." Since this has been around for a while, you might think that the problem had been addressed. And it has: exactly that set-top computer and downloading service already exists, and it's called SuperGuide. Before you try to reinvent the wheel, go down to your local satellite TV dealer and ask to see a SuperGuide in use; it's not bad for current state of the art. That is to say, it'll show you what's on now, or let you search for programs alphabetically by name, or show you the schedule for a particular "channel." It also connects to the infrared port on your VCR to let you record events directly off of the on-screen menus of the SuperGuide. In other words, I've seen the 500-channel future with interactive on-line real-time "TV Guide" computer services that y'all are looking for ... and it's =old= technology. Unless there's good upstream communications, and maybe the "everybody's a publisher" open platform model that the EFF is pushing for, all that the telco and cable TV "information superhighway" types are bringing to the table is a new transmission medium, and =maybe= (if we're lucky) higher video resolution. * Footnote: of the 190 or so channels of "free" video on the satellites, probably 50 of them are religious, probably another 50 are shop-at-home not counting the 10 or so that are non-stop infomercials, probably another 25 are used part-time for minor sports broadcasts, and probably another 25 or so are some form or other of (subsidized) educational channel. There's a "free" "adult variety" channel that is, in effect, a non-stop ad for the owners' 900 "hot chat" lines, a "free" music video channel where they constantly run across the bottom the 900 number for requesting the video of your choice, and another "free" music video channel that at least once during each video shrinks it down about 66% and uses the rest of the screen to advertise that you can buy the music and/or the video from them by calling their 800 number. The rest are merely "regular" programming -- that is to say, advertiser supported. Even with 500+ channels of video bandwidth, There (still) Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. I Have Seen The Future ... and it's mostly televangelism, sports, infomercials, and 900 numbers. (*sigh* *grin*) I brought all of this up not to divert TELECOM Digest into a discussion of satellite TV, just to give you a glimpse of what the 500-channel future might (does) look like. For further discussion of the satellite TV angle on all of this, see rec.video.satellite or it's unmoderated mailing list equivalent, homesat at listserv@vm1.nodak.edu, or see section 8 of forum CEFORUM on Compu$erve. J. Brad Hicks Internet: mc!Brad_Hicks@mhs.attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTMail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The televangelism aspect is a very interesting one. I can remember years and years ago -- the 1950's in particular -- when there were no specifically 'religious' radio stations with the exception of WMBI out of Chicago at Moody Bible and maybe one or two others; HCJB in Quito, Ecuador comes to mind if you include shortwave stuff. In that era, FM was very new and not that many people had FM radios so everything was on AM. But the AM stations were absolutely loaded with radio preachers every Sunday all day and all night. WLS (890 AM in Chicago) in those days 40 years ago carried nothing but pre-recorded religious programs from about 5 AM Sunday morning through 1 AM Monday morning when they signed off the air. One after the other, usually thirty minutes in length but a few of 15 minutes; now and again one had a full hour. The old WCFL (1000 AM back then) was the same way. I guess those preachers, some of whom are familiar names today paid big dollars for WLS' clear channel and 50,000 watts of power. A woman evangelist by the name of Aimee Semple McPherson used to be on WLS every day of the week along with quite a few other radio stations in the 1930's and 1940's. She'd preach day after day against the evils of hard drink, the use of tobacco and marijuana and other things. WLS loved her; so did KOA in Denver and WWL out of Cincinnati. She brought them huge listening audiences all night long and she paid them top dollar from her own collection basket which was always running over. She never hesitated to remind the audience to send those love offerings to her (" ... send your letters and gifts to me, Aimee Semple McPherson, Pasadena, California, the United States of America ... that's all the address you need ..." and if you were listening to her in Canada, well, there was a post office box in Toronto for you to write to. Her main 'competitor' was a fellow named Father Coughlin. He was on every radio station day after day also with the message that whatever was wrong in the world was the fault of 'the communists'. He had books and pamphlets that he had written which would explain it all in detail if you would write him and request your free copy. Of course your free-will gift had better be enclosed when you wrote him. Like Aimee, the good Father got his mail via Pasadena, California (where his name on the envelope was the only address you needed) and he also had a box in Toronto. Apparently people ordered his pamphlets and books; he was the Rush Limbaugh of his time; Aimee even quoted him occassionally in her broadcasts. How the technology has changed! But alas, even though the speakers have changed and the level of sophis- tication on the part of the producers of religious shows has increased greatly, the hucksterism is still there. WLS changed formats to hard rock music in 1961 and all the preachers were dropped at one time; WLS bought out their contracts as part of the format change. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 1:44:48 EST From: wagner@ost.com (Mitch Wagner) Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television Organization: Open Systems Today padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) writes: > Several people have suggested that they might be able to edit out > everything except what is wanted. I doubt that the companies will > offer this since they are interested in selling *more* so will have to > tell you about things you did not select. The carriers will not have an inducement to sell you those editors, but I'm sure that third parties will do so. mitch w. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 14:07:48 EST From: Charles Reichley I think that supposedly intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, social > workers, and their employers) should find their OWN solution to that > issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-network, and the > rest of us, with their problems ... I don't have a problem with that in the case of doctors and lawyers, who often make scads of money -- or at least a sufficient amount to foot the bill for a second phone line. What is the cost of a second phone line, anyway? -- $50/mo. and maybe a few hundred dollars install charge, right? However, social workers make teeny-tiny little salaries, and that $50/mo. is a big deal for them. Clearly, if we as a nation decide we need CallerID, then we also need to provide for exceptions where the public might be better served by NOT having it. mitch w. ------------------------------ From: sorbrrse@rtsg.mot.com (Russell E. Sorber) Subject: Re: Automatic Call Distributor Information Wanted Date: 28 Dec 93 23:01:28 GMT Organization: Motorola Cellulsr Infrastructure Group Alex Cena writes: > On Wed, 08 Dec 1993 15:47:43 EST Jason Demarte > wrote: >> I have recently been reading about the sytem called Automatic Call >> Distributor (ACD) and am wondering who are the major dealers for each >> version of ACD: integrated ACD and stand-alone ACD. If anyone has >> some any information on this please post me a response, thanks. > You should call Aspect Telecom for some information. Rockwell Switching Systems is also very big in ACD equipment. Rockwell has much (if not most) of the airline reservation system market as well as ACD equipment in several large Wall Street brokerage houses. Rockwell Switching has a office in Downers Grove Il. and does at least some sales/marketing out of that office also. Call Directory Assistance for the number (area 708) Russ Sorber Software Contractor - Opinions are mine, Not Motorolas! Motorola, Cellular Division Arlington Hts., IL (708) 632-4047 ------------------------------ From: jfoy@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Jeffery Foy) Subject: Telix and Busy Signals Date: 28 Dec 1993 23:50:44 GMT Organization: University of Washington In a message on 12-28-93, ericw@seanews.akita.com wrote the following: > Okay, I just set up a new PC Logic 14.4kbps Internal Fax/Modem for a > friend, and set-up deltaComm's Telix v3.21 for it. PC Logic? Doesn't ring a bell here ... > I CANNOT get Telix to recognize a busy signal. I am already using > ATX4V1 to no avail (sp?). You sure it's Telix that isn't recognizing the busy? Go into terminal mode in Telix and dial a number that's busy. If you don't get any response (i.e. the word BUSY) then it's the modem not Telix. If, OTOH, the BUSY is displayed, check Telix's modem response strings. You might have to manually put the word BUSY in one of the fields. > Any suggestions (besides TRY x PROGRAM and BUY x BRAND MODEM) e-mailed to > me would be most appreciated. Well, you SHOULD try other stuff just as a matter of course. But I don't think I'll tell you which other stuff to try. 's best to try on your own. :) Jeffery Foy -- jfoy@glia.biostr.washington.edu mantis@racer.eskimo.com or jeffery.foy@racer.eskimo.com ------------------------------ From: david@djwhome.demon.co.uk (David Woolley) Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 17:34:46 GMT In article mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk writes: > From Oftel Consultative Document June 93: > The codes that will *not* change at NCC are the existing codes for > non-geographic services, ie: My understanding (from {BT Engineering Journal}) is that the only reason that the non-geographic numbers are not changing is that they would conflict with the old geographic numbers. The intention is that, once a quarantine period has expired on the old numbers, the non-geographic numbers will be rationalised. This does not necessarily mean that firm decisions have been made about these numbers. (The first digit will be used to classify numbers (one for geographic land based numbers).) David Woolley, London, England david@djwhome.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ From: wdh@netcom.com (Bill Hofmann) Subject: NPA Questions Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:30:19 PST In reviewing the various sources (telecom postings, discussions with LECs, etc), I'm left with a few questions that folks out there may be able to help with: 1. Does any state publish 1 + NPA+ 7d AND 0 + 7d instructions? I have here that Delaware still does (302). Carl Moore's note in "history" yhat 213 does is incorrect. 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns in that corridor, are there any other localities which REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll calls, I guess)? FYI, 510 allows 1+510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area area codes. Bill Hofmann wdh@netcom.COM Fresh Software and Instructional Design +1 510 524 0852 ------------------------------ From: pnta@warren.med (Patrick Nta) Subject: International Dedicated Connections Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:58:20 -0400 Organization: Harvard Medical School I am looking for telecom companies that offer 56kbs/64kbs or X.25 data connections to Nigeria. Or cheap satellite links. AT&T, Sprint and MCI only offer Analog (voice grade) connections. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 15:03:36 EST From: Charles Reichley Subject: Argentine Phone Companies (Telecomm, Telephonic) Reply-To: CREICHLEY@vnet.IBM.COM Organization: IBM Federal Systems Company (for now)- Manassas, VA USA Does anybody have any interesting information about the two Argentine phone companies? Like how they decided how to break the country into two parts, what state of modernization have they achieved, etc.? Charles W. Reichley, Loral/FSC???, Manassas, Va. Reminder: This post has nothing to do with IBM or its subsidiaries ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 93 15:30:04 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Guatemala Calls Canada Looking For Love Actually, wasn't that Hightstown, NJ which had the numbers (advertised overseas) for horoscopes etc.? That is in the 609 area, not 201. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You could be right. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mike%jim@wupost.wustl.edu (Mike S.) Subject: Digital Cordless Phones Question Organization: BITS, St. Louis, MO Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 21:24:05 GMT Message-ID: <1993Dec28.212405.24529%jim@wupost.wustl.edu> I am doing a bit of late Christmas shopping for myself, and have decided on a 900Mhz digital cordless phone. The models I have heard about and seen locally are the usual Tropez/Vtech ($200-$250) models, the AT&T 9100 ($250), and Uniden EXP9100 ($350). The Uniden claims to use spread spectrum transmission so I picked one up under a 30 day trial period. Sound is, as usual, "almost corded quality", and uniform throughout my house. I haven't had time to any serious range tests yet and I have never hit the almost-out-of-range beeps around the house. The manual says they are using MSK modulation. I did search the 903-925 MHz band with the trusty scanner and as expected couldn't find anything intelligble. The scanner did however seem to lock up on a few frequencies that seemed to be dependant on the phone being active, which I wouldn't think possible if they were really using what I think of as spread spectrum. Has anyone had the opportunity to do any testing on this model, even a comparison of the above models and the Cobra/RS/CM units? The Uniden and AT&T to my ears are roughly comparable in sound quality, the Uniden has a few additional features and a lighted keypad. Mike mike%jim@wupost.wustl.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:10:18 CST From: H.A. Kippenhan Jr. Subject: Your Comments on Communications/Computer Progress Hi: On 25 Dec 1993 18:26:24 GMT, Robert McMillan wrote: >> A feature I used to do occassionally was called "Ten Years Ago in >> the Digest" and perhaps a few readers would enjoy some of the >> comments from the readers who were on our list back then during the >> final days of the old Bell System and the first few days of the 'new >> way' of doing things. PAT] > Yes, it can be interesting to go back in the archives. I remember > seeing a note from the Moderator at the time, Jon Solomon, saying > something to the effect that now that AT&T's breaking up, we can't > have any political commentary in the Digest because of the AUP for the > various nets. He also said the Net was about to convert from NP to > the newfangled TCP/IP ... amazing how much technical progress there's > been in the Internet in such a short period of time. TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > Yes, the changes in network technology have been occurring at a > exponential rate. It took how many thousands of years to invent the > telephone and learn to control electricity for our convenience? Then > in the next hundred years ... wow! Computers were 'invented' in the > late 1940's and early 1950's ... 25-30 years later 'home computers' > first began to make an appearance in the late 1970's. Now 15 years > later, more computational resources sit on the desk in my office than > existed at Harvard University in 1960. Several years passed between > the 110/300 baud modem and the 1200 baud modem. After a couple years > 2400 baud became available, and then 9600 and 14.4 came through almost > immediately thereafter. The {Chicago Tribune} in an editorial comment > in 1900 commenting on 'all the tremendous inventions of the past > century' (meaning 1801-1900) asked, "how long will it be before we > run out of things to invent ...". It boggles my mind to think of what > kinds of things we will have at our disposal twenty years from now. > That is, unless we 'run out of things to invent'... :) PAT] It's probably safe to say that technology is advancing at a greater than exponential rate. One of the things that is often overlooked is that there are more scientists alive [and hopefully working - 8-)] today than the total in mankind's history to date. It's no wonder that things are changing so fast. We want to be careful about 'run(ning) out of things to invent'. There was a proposal just shortly after the Civil War to close the U.S. Patent Office because everything that could possibly be invented had been thought of. No criticism here (I assume that 'run(ning) out of things to invent' was a -in-cheek remark). Just my $0.02 worth. Best regards, H.A. Kippenhan Jr. Internet: Kippenhan@FNDCD.FNAL.GOV National HEPnet Management HEPnet/NSI DECnet: FNDCD::KIPPENHAN Fermi National Accelerator Lab. BITnet: Kippenhan@FNDCD.BITNET P.O. Box 500 MS: FCC-3E/368 Telephone: (708) 840-8068 Batavia, Illinois 60510 FAX: (708) 840-8463 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #841 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19844; 30 Dec 93 3:18 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10840 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 23:35:28 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01296 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Dec 1993 23:35:01 -0600 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 23:35:01 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312300535.AA01296@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #842 TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 Dec 93 23:35:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 842 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Motorola CMT Programming (Mark W. Earle) Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers (Paul Robinson) Direct Broadcast Satelites (Jason M. Githeko) ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers (Anthony D. Vullo) Who and What is Tecnet? (Edward van Egmond) CLID and PA (Wallace Colyer) The PUC(s) And So-Called Tariffs (Al Cohan) Super Long Range Cordless Phones (Michael Dimitrov) Caller ID/911 Seattle and Article Recommendation (M. Hedlund) Swedish Caller ID Hardware? (Claes Gussing) Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phone (Tony Barnecut) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 15:55 EST From: Mark W. Earle <0006127039@mcimail.com> Subject: Motorola CMT Programming Here are some notes I found regarding programming Motorola cellular products. I have an 8000H portable phone. Some comments: From the keyboard, you must know the security code to get to programming mode. You may enter programming mode a total of three times. After three times, the phone must be returned to the dealer to have a counter reset. However, at least on the 8000H and Ultra Classic portables, one can fabricate a jumper, and reset the counter easily. Before changing anything, I'd use * to step through and record your present values. Note that if you install the jumper, you would enter 55# and then follow the notes for entering the customer/system information. You can also first do a 32# to clear all timers and restore features to standard. THIS ERASES ALL STORED PARAMATERS! What I found most useful was to step through, record all paramaters entering programming mode from the keypad without the jumper. Then, power up with the jumper, use 32# to clear evertying power off remove jumper power up reset params entering programming mode from keyboard, using 000000 as the security code This technique let me have two phone numbers in two markets, even though the phone is single NAM. I'd get to a particular spot on the road, with a convenient rest area, and reprogram my phone for service (as contracted for!) in the second city. This was to have a local number and not pay roaming rates in the second city. On the return trip, I'd stop and reprogram for my "home" market. Disclaimers: You can put the phone in several modes intended for alignment and testing "on the bench". Don't do it. You could also set the phone up such that the contracted for service won't work properly. Don't program paramaters to other than those provided by your carrier. There is no way (as far as I know) to alter the ESN on these phones. Well, I'm sure it's possible if you're the vendor but there is no magic keypad code to do it. You can also make the phone a cellular receiver: power up with jumper 353# Select Handset audio path 08# RX Audio ON 11xxx# Three digit number, i.e. 11362# 474# Set to mid level audio 11xxx# Change to another channel Power off, remove jumper, power up to restore normal phone operations. Dec 29, 1993 Motorola Cellular Mobile Telephone programming notes: Part 1: From the manual included with the 8000H portable phone. Items to be programmed: System ID Code 5 digits Cellular Telephone Number 10 digits Station Class Code 2 digits Access Overload Class 2 digits Group ID Mark 2 digits Security Code 6 digits Unlock Code 3 digits Initial Paging Channel 4 digits (Use Leading 0) Option Bits 6 digits *Internal Speaker 0 for internal *Local Use normally 1 *Min Mark Normally 0, 0=disabled when enabled, unit sends area code on all calls *Auto REcall Always set to 1 *Second PHone number 0 *Diversity 0=off Option Bits *Long Tone DTMF 1 (0 to disable) *FUTURE USE 0 *Eight hour timeout 0 to enable Programming your telephone: If you have: Menu and Fcn keys Sequence 6 FCN key but no Menu key Sequence 1 No Fcn key Sequence 2 Model Handset Type Sequence 3000SCN 2007 A 6 6000SCN 2023 A 2 6000XSL N2020 A 1 6800XLT LN2659 A 1 6800XLT LN2733 A 6 Alpha Hndset SCN2083 A 6 Sequence 1 FCN, Security Code entered twice, RCL 2 STO, #, Security Code entered twice, RCL 3 Ctl, 0 + SC twice, RCL 4 Ctl, 0 + SC twice, * 5 FCN, 0 + SC twice, MEM 6 FDN, 0 + SC twice, RCL Security code is programmed 000000 at the factory After successfully entering program mode, 01 appears on the display * steps thorugh SND stores information Step 1 SID Step 2 Area Code Step 3 Phone Number Step 4 Station Class Mark Step 5 Access Overload Class Step 6 Group ID Step 7 Security Code Step 8 Unlock Code Step 9 Initial Paging Channel Step 10 Options (6 digits) Step 11 Options (3 digits) Part 2: From a programming Cheat Sheet, not normally included with the phone: Assumes one has fabricated a jumper or has a test jig. These functions available only if you start the phone with one pin jumpered to ground as below. CHAN \/ PWR LVL x x x x x x <--Rx Sig Strength, 00-99 SAT -->x x x x x x x <--1=TX Audio OFF ^ ^ ^ ^ 1=TX on <-- : : : : 1=RX AUdio OFf 1=SigTone ON : : 1=Control Channel 01# Restart (Turns unit off and back on) 02# Display current radio stuatus (non-scrolling version of above display) 04# Initiales Unit to Standard Default Settings Carrier OFF RF Attenuator to max power Receiver Audio Muted Transmit Audio Muted Signalling Tone Off Resetting of Watchdog Timer Enabled DTMF and Audio Tones off Audio path set to speaker 05# TX Carrier ON 06# TX Carrier OFF 07# RX OFF (Mute RX audio) 08# RX Audio ON (Unmuted) 09# TX Audio OFF 10# TX Audio ON 11(CH No)# Sets to desired channel 12# Set power to x; 0=max 7 = min 14# 10 Khz sig tone on 15# 10 Khz Sig tone off 19# Display software version number (4 digits) 25x# SAT Tone on when x=0, SAT = 5970 Hz x=1, SAT = 6000 Hz x=2, SAT = 6030 Hz 26# SAT Tone off 27# Transmit Data 28# 1150 Hz Tone on 29# 1150 Hz Tone off 30# 770 Hz Tone on 31# 770 Hz Tone off 32# Clears all timers and resets User's programmable features to standard, also clears user stored memory. 33x# Turn on DTMF Tone for X, X = 0-9, * or # 34# DTMF Tone(s) off 35# Display RSSI ("D" Series portable only) 35x# Set Audio path to xx = 0, VSP mike (mobile only)x = 1, speaker x = 2, Alert x = 3, Handset 38# Display ESN in Hex, 2 char at a time use * to step (Compandor OFF (D series portable only)) 39# Compandor on (D series portableonly) 41# Enables Diversity (on f19cta series only) 42# Disables Diversity) 43# Disable Diversity 44# Disable Diversity 45# Display current rssi 46# Display cumulative call timer 47x# Set Rx audio level, 0-7 i.e. 474# is mid level 48# Set side tone on 49# Side Tone off 53# Enable Scrambler option when equiped 54# Disable scrambler 55# Programming customer/system information Enter 55#, display shows U5 ' Enter 55# again, proceed as if you've followed the sheet included with the phone. This allows one to change the phone params an infinite number of times. However, some of the info is not in sequence with the sheet provided with the phone. 58# Compandor on 59# Compandor off) 61# Serial number transfer (for dmt / minitac only) (See Esn transfer procedure elsewhere) 62# Turn on ringer audio path 63# Turn off ringer audio path 70# Abbreviated field transmitter audio deviation command 71# Abbreviated field power adjustment command 72# Field audio phasing commands 73# Field power adjustment command (dmt/minitac only) Fabrication of jumper in lieu of test jig: 8000H and Ultra Classic To enter diag/self test mode: 1.Remove battery. 2.Looking at rear of radio, ground pin x 3.Re install battery and apply power Rear Connector: I I I ** I I X I I I ** I I I ** * Is the antenna. I is the pins. Note: the case screws are NOT at ground. The outer silver part of the antenna connector is. I soldered a piece of stiff resistor lead at the X, and made it just the proper length. I can then move it to touch the ground to read sig strength, and then move it to touch nothing for normal operations. Note that soldering to these pads is tricky, and probably voids the warranty. A more elegant way would be to use a DC adaptor (Ora and Celldyne sell them) and drill two small holes to use to connect with an external jumper. No soldering. Note that the phone is not in power save mode when in self test/diag mode and the battery will go down quickly! The inital display is channel and receive sig strength indicator, useful for determing how close you are to a tower, or for aiming a yagi in the desired direction. Mark Earle mwearle@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your documentation above is remarkably similar to the way Motorola has programmed their phones for the past several years. Your documentation would work easily on many old phones from Motorola I suspect. My old 600 channel Motorola phone also went into 'local' or 'test/programming mode' with the same grounding of a pin as you describe it above, enabling one to reset the counter which supposedly restricted programming the phone number to three times. Since my Motorola had a 25-pin thing on it which connected to the battery pack, the way I handled the grounding of the pin was to get a 25-pin connector from Radio Shack. I opened it up, shorted the desired lead in there to another lead coming from the pin on the back of the phone known to be a floating ground. Then when I wanted to go into local or test mode, I'd just slide the battery pack a little back out of the way, insert the little connector in there which had the changes I had made, then slide the battery forward again reconnecting it all. Quite simple and quick; snap in, reprogram quickly, snap out and restart the phone. Of course I caution anyone doing re-programming of this sort to have made prior arrangements with all involved carriers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 19:43:36 EST From: Paul Robinson Reply-To: Paul Robinson Subject: Notice to AT&T Long Distance Customers From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA {Washington Post} 12/29 Pg B3: NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS AT&T filed tariff revisions with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on December 27, 1993 to increase its interstate calling card and operator assisted (except coin) per-minute rates. Service charges per call in the following classes will also be increased. Operator Dialed Calling From To Card Station $2.05 $2.12 Operator Station: -Collect $2.05 $2.12 -Billed to Third Party $2.11 $2.18 -Sent Paid--Non-Coin $2.05 $2.12 These revisions are scheduled to become effective on January 10, 1994. The average increase for all interstate, operator-assisted and calling card calls is 3.35% On December 27, 1993, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the FCC to increase LDMTS dial station day rates by 7.74%, evening rates by 8.93%, and night/weekend rates by 4.74% for interstate calls within the U.S. Dial station rates apply when the person originating the call has not subscribed to any optional calling plans or volume discount plans and dials the telephone number desired, completes the call without the assistance of a company operator and the call is billed to the calling station. These rates are scheduled to become effective on January 10, 1994 and will apply to the general long distance schedule applicable to non-commercial customers. On December 27, 1993, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the FCC to increase rates on international card and operator handled long distance calls. These rates will become effective on January 10, 1994. These revisions will affect international operator handled and card standard period rates on international card and operator handled long distance calls. These rates become effective on January 10, 1994. These revisions will affect international operator handled and card standard period rates to 20 countries/areas, with an average price increase of 8% for a ten-minute call to these countries/areas. The increase in transport prices applies to calls to and from the U.S. Mainland. The affected countries are: Algeria, Bangladesh, Burma, China, El Salvador, Hong Kong, Iran, Jamaica, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mexico (applies to schedule 1 rate bands only), Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Republic of South Africa, Syrian Arab Republic, Taiwan, Thailand. Effective February 10, 1994, AT&T USADirect* (R) Optional Calling Plan - Option A, institutes a 30-call restriction on the number of Plan calls eligible for discounted rates in a one month period. Also effective on January 10, AT&T USADirect will institute an average rate increase of 4.3%. The revision will affect calls from: Argentina, Columbia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Japan. USADirect In-Language will institute a 6% rate increase on calls from Columbia. On December 27, 1993 AT&T filed tariff revisions with the FCC to increase rates on general residential International Long Distance Calls to specific countries. The rates will become effective on January 10, 1994, pending tariff effectiveness. These revisions will affect direct-dial rates to 123 countries/areas with and average price increase on a ten minute call to these countries/areas being 3.75%. The affected countries are: American Samoa, Andorra, Anguilla, Antigua (incl. Barbuda), Argentina, Armenia, Ascension Island, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bolivia, Brazil, British Virgin Islands, Bulgaria, Burma, Cameroon, Canada, Chad Republic, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Arab Republic of Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji Islands, French Polynesia, Gabon Republic, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada (incl. Carriacou), Guantanamo Bay, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Republic of Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Krygyztan, Laos, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Democratic Republic of Matagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolian People's Republic, Montserrat, Kingdom of Morocco, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherland Antilles, Nevis, Nicaragua, Federal Republic of Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Phillipines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal Republic, Slovakia, Republic of South Africa, Spain, Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadines, Republic of Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Republic of Togo, Tonga Islands, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela, Republic of Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zimbabwe. AT&T also filed tariff revisions on December 27, 1993 to separate its ReachOut Overseas calling plans into separate schedules for Residence and Business long distance users. Business users are those customers who pay a rate described as a business or commercial rate in the applicable local exchange service tariff for switched services. As a result of these revisions, the 15% (special country) additional discount will no longer be available to business users, who subscribe to the ReachOut World Calling plan. These changes will become effective on February 10, 1994, pending tariff effectiveness. --- * USADirect and ReachOut appear in bold everywhere they appear in the text, with the (R) register mark following. ------------------------------ From: j-githeko@uiuc.edu (Jason M. Githeko) Subject: Direct Broadcast Satelites Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:01:41 GMT Organization: University of Illinois I am trying to find out whether: 1. Any of the existing DBSs (especially European) have a footprint that covers Kenya, East Africa. 2. What specific equipement one needs to receive DBS signal I would appreciate any one with details of this. Thanks Jason M. Githeko University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1310 S. 6th, #345, Champaign IL 61820 e-mail: j-githeko@uiuc.edu Phone: 217-244-3573 Fax: 217-244-5632 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 11:18 EST From: Anthony D. Vullo <0003250251@mcimail.com> Subject: ITU Method For Writing Telephone Numbers What is the ITU reference for the standard method of writing telephone numbers? I've noticed the following: (plus symbol) (country code) (city/area code) (number) eg: For a US telephone number; +1 NPA NXX XXXX eg: For Manhattan directory assistance; +1 212 555 1212 Thanks and Happy New Year! Tony ------------------------------ From: edwarde@htsa.aha.nl (Edward van Egmond) Subject: Who and What is Tecnet? Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 20:45:37 GMT Organization: Hogeschool van Amsterdam, The Netherlands, E.E. & C.S. Dept. We have a school asignment in which we have to make a connection between a X-25 network and a Tecnet machine. The only problem is, we never heard of Tecnet. What is it? What sort protocol does it use? And most of all, how can we connect those two? Thanks in advance, Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I. Edward van Egmond edwarde@bausch.htsa.aha.nl ------------------------------ From: Wallace Colyer Subject: CLID and PA Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 13:33:03 -0500 Organization: Systems Group 82, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA I heard an unsubstantiated rumor that Gov. Casey as one of his first acts after taking the reigns of leadership back signed a Caller-ID bill for PA which includes blocking provisions. Can anyone substantiate that and give more information about how and when it will be available? Wallace [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Have you considered asking the Governor's press relations or public information department for details? I'd think if this is true, the telcos in PA would all be rushing gleefully to tell their subscribers the news. I might be wrong. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 15:19 EST From: The Network Group <0004526627@mcimail.com> Subject: The PUC(s) and So-Called Tariffs For all the years that I have been in the telecom business, the various LEC's when they don't want or know how to deliver a particular service or request tell you something like: "Well, it's not available because it isn't in our tariffs, so therefore ..." Being a long time Contel subscriber and having enjoyed a very close relationship with Contel, I see General Telephone's creeping influence and attitude getting into Contel's policies. Has anyone else -- in particular in California -- noticed this? Especially little things like "Assumed 9 Centrex" no longer being offered because "We're not tariffed for that" ... Has anyone even considered that a telephone utility as part of their monopoly on local service has not only a duty but a right to offer anyting that the C.O. switch is capable of delivering. My position is that if there is to be a charge for this delivery it is up to the LEC to then go to the PUC and prove to them that a charge should be made. I don't think that it is correct and may possibly be illegal to withold service based on the old "historic" position if it's not in the tariff it doesn't exit. I am not speaking of any major custom designs like four wire delivery on POTS lines or some such request for custom circuits, but rather for simple adjustments like on the DMS-100 C.O.D. Cutoff on disconnect for lop and ground start lines to allow fro fine tuning of PBX to customer equipment. Any thoughts, experiences and comments would be appreciated. Al Cohan The Network Group Mammoth Lakes, CA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In the past, Illinois Bell always had a miscellaneous tariff on file covering 'special customer applications and requirements'. I'm not sure if that was the exact name of it or not. What it did was allow them to custom design the service as needed and then file a 'tariff amendment' covering what they had done. For example, during the early to middle 1970's, I operated a telephone recorded announcement service here in Chicago. I gave a three minute daily message of news and events going on in the Chicago area which was paid for by various sponsors each day who were announced in the course of the recorded message. Incoming calls to my main listed number, HARrison 7-1234 were distributed to about 35 lines which were in a hunt group. So far so good; hunt groups are tariffed. The recordings were on equipment rented from IBT -- large, bulky, *very* heavy things normally used for intercept service in central offices ("the number you have dialed is not in service") -- with round, spinning drums inside them coated with what appeared to be mylar tape. A ringing line would activate one of the 35 or so such machines (each one handled one line) and as the drum inside would spin around and around a 'finger' would drop down onto the drum to read it, just like a phonograph needle touches a record when the arm is mechanically lowered. Again, so far so good, these were tariffed even if not in common use. What was *not* tariffed orginally however was having the machines all wired so that one was a master and the others were all slaves to it for the purpose of recording the messages. Originally, IBT suggested to me I should record my message 35 times in a row, once on each machine. We discussed the feasability of that -- none whatsoever -- and the phone guy showed up at my office one day with a boxful of odds and ends, various little wires and things, and after diddling around for about three hours informed me of his improvements: a little toggle switch mounted on the wall was to be used first to 'busy out' all 35 lines when it was time to record a new message. New calls would not be accepted but calls in progress would be allowed to finish playing out or until the caller disconnected, whichever came first. Then I was to use the telephone associated with machine one to record my message in the usual way, but it would be simultaneously recorded on all machines. Following that, if satisfied with my recording, I was to flip the little toggle switch on the wall back to its normal position and all lines would go back in service with the 'busy out' condition removed. I asked him what was his tariff authority for this. His answer was that a miscellaneous tariff covers special situations and allows Bell to report after the fact any 'special constructions' done for subscribers and that the Commission would always approve it at Bell's 'suggested' pricing for the service. I had no arguments with that; I was thrilled they had done this. The phone guy was one of these old men who had been with the company for decades and he told me in all his years with the company he had never seen anything quite like what I had there. He said I was the first subscriber of Illinois Bell to 'do recorded messages' that were not religious, most of which were just on one line, never a hunt group of 35 lines. He also put in call registers for me. Each line had a register which inc- remented by one whenever a call came on that line. In addition there was a register which showed a grand total for all lines and a register which incremented by one each time all positions were engaged (thus causing a new caller to get a busy signal) although this was not evidence that a call had been turned away, merely that *if* there had been a call it would have gotten a busy signal. All the registers could be reset by hand whenever desired. They also put an 'annunciator board' on the wall with 35 beehive lamps to illuminate when the line was in use or a new call was ringing in. They were apparently quite proud of their work and for about a year afterward every visiting executive of a telco somewhere in the USA who came to IBT headquarters was always brought over to my office to see this unusual system the old guy had developed for me. Some exec from IBT would come in, bringing one or two people with him who he'd introduce as vice-president of whatever from Ohio Bell, Michigan Bell or wherever. They'd poke and prod at my machines, say they had never seen anything like it before, and have it all explained to them. About six months after it was installed I got a formal letter from the Illinois Commerce Commission stating that IBT had petitioned them for a 'single subscriber miscellaneous tariff' with the monthly fee requested. I had to sign off and return it to the ICC stating I had no objections to Bell's petition and found the arrangements and tariff to be satisfactory. Oh, I almost forgot: I had automatic reverse toll service on it also; 'Enterprise 5748' would connect from anywhere in northern Indiana, northern Illinois or southern Wisconsin. Call volume was typically seven to eight thousand calls per 24 hours with my busiest times each day logging five to six hundred calls per hour. My sponsor/patrons paid me money to talk about them and their services to whoever called 427-1234 eight thousand times each day. PAT] ------------------------------ From: octela!!mikedi@uunet.UU.NET (Michael Dimitrov) Subject: Super Long Range Cordless Phones Organization: Octel Communications Corporation Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:53:45 GMT A few months ago I saw an ad for a long range radio telephone -- it works like cordless, but it's range is about 100 miles (right, one hundred miles). Of course, it said "Not for sale in the US". A friend of mine from Eastern Europe would like to buy one of these, but I've lost the ad since then. Could anyone provide information about similar telephone systems -- manufacturers, reteilers, technical details etc. Thanks, Mike ------------------------------ From: hedlund@reed.edu (M. Hedlund) Subject: Caller ID/911 Seattle and Article Recommendation Date: 29 Dec 1993 18:27:04 GMT Organization: Reed College, Portland, Oregon I recently read a law review article covering legal/privacy issues of Caller ID, cordless and cellular phones, and automated dialer and recorded message players; it was the best review of current and upcoming issues I have read. "'Sorry, Wrong Number," The Effect of Telephone Technology on Privacy Rights," 26 Wake Forest L. Rev. 669 (1991), by Robert Asa Crook. I also saw a news piece about 911 technology and cellular phones, saying that Caller-ID/Signalling System Seven had speeded response to home calls (as discussed) but that only _some_ systems could ID cellular phones -- Seattle was mentioned as considering cellular- Caller ID to improve 911. Apologies if this overlaps a thread I missed, but anyone in Seattle with info? hedlund@reed.edu : M. Hedlund : : Ourselves Alone // S.F. ------------------------------ From: ebcguss@ebc.ericsson.se (Claes Gussing) Subject: Swedish Caller ID Hardware? Reply-To: ebcguss@ebc.ericsson.se Organization: Ericsson Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 16:25:32 GMT In Sweden and maybe also Germany, the public phone-operators are planning to provide CID in a different style than the American. According to the specifications, the public exchange will deliver the calling party's number as a sequence of DTMF-signals before the first ring-signal. Is there any providers of consumer electronics out there who are planning to support this? Please respond to ebcguss@ebc.ericsson.se. Claes The opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: tony@cmhcsys.com (Tony Barnecut) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 10:33:28 EST From: tony@cmhcsys.cmhcsys.com (Tony Barnecut) Subject: Information Wanted on Simon Cellular Phones Organization: CMHC Systems Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 15:33:15 GMT I am looking for information on a cellular phone called SIMON. I saw a picture of it in a recent issue of {InfoWorld} but it did not say who the manufacturer is or where it could be purchased. From the short description that was included I found that it has an LCD panel where the keypad would be with interchangable cards that make it act as a phone, pager and other things. With different cards, different icons appear on the LCD panel for the functions for that particular card. Any information anyone could give me on this this product would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, tony@cmhcsys.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #842 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20297; 30 Dec 93 4:34 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17108 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 01:04:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32199 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 01:04:08 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 01:04:08 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312300704.AA32199@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #843 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Dec 93 01:04:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 843 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Service From NY Tel - 'Reverse Directory' (Danny Burstein) "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous (Danny Burstein) Prepaid Phone Pass by Bell Canada (David Leibold) Use a 9600 Baud US Modem in UK? (Mike Carlton) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (Steve Cogorno) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (John R. Levine) Re: NPA Questions (Jean-Marc Fortier) Re: NPA Questions (Carl Moore) Re: NPA Questions (Brian Nunes) Re: NPA Questions (Mike King) Re: NPA Questions (David Leibold) Re: NPA Questions (Paul Robinson) Re: ATM News Groups Wanted (Harry Schroeder) Re: 500 Channel Cable Television (Todd D. Hale) Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted (Doug Gurich) Re: Caller ID in Software? (David Jones) Re: 911 Changes in Toronto (Robert L. Ullmann) Administrivia - A Few Lost Messages (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: New Service From NY Tel - 'Reverse Directory' Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:03:04 -0500 Just caught the following public notice ad in {Newsday}, Dec 29, 1993 (tore it out without markking down the page number): "Notice of proposed changes in Telephone company regulations" "Notice is hereby given .... to be effective Feb 4, 1993 ... for Reverse Directory Assistance: RDA provides callers with the listed name, listed address, including zip code if available, for a given business or government telephone number. The ad goes on to say that it will be available in the 'Downstate Metropolitan LATA", and explains how useful it will be. Charge is listed at $0.45 "per given telephone number." Note a few points: This is ONLY for business and government listings. Also, it's not clear from the wording what happens if you ask for a residential or an unlisted number. Also unmentioned is what happens if you call NYC directory assistance using a long distance carrier. Take care, danny (10288) 0-700-864-3242 dannyb@panix.com adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability, intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If it works like the same service in Chicago, it won't be reachable through directory assistance. You will dial a seven digit number. That number will carry a toll charge of 45 cents per call/lookup, and on long distance calls, only the regular toll charge (from wherever the person is calling) will apply. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous Date: 29 Dec 1993 23:09:23 -0500 A new service offered in the NYC area by NY Tel (soon to be called Nynex) is called "Anonymous Call Rejection." This tariff allows you (at a fee, of course) to take calls coming from caller-id BLOCKed numbers and reroutte them to a recording saying something like: We're sorry, the person you called does not take calls from anonymous callers. If you want to reach this person, please redial from an unblocked line ... For good measure, this also does -not- ring your phone until the person tries again from an unblocked line. Now, aside from the obvious problems of a friend calling from a line which they don't know is blocked, and not knowing how to unblock it, there's another issue. Many of the COCOTS get their CNID blocked in an attempt to reduce fraud (or, perhaps I should say, other people's fraud ...). So there you are, sitting at the COCOT, trying to make the call, and wasting quarter after quarter ... dannyb@panix.com adds: all the usual disclaimers regarding liability, intelligence, accuracy apply. spelling disclaimer is doubled. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No not really, because the call will not supervise, thus the COCOT will not collect your coin if it is properly programmed to return money for lack of an answer or in the event of a busy signal, etc. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 22:14 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Prepaid Phone Pass by Bell Canada Bell Canada's Hello Phone Pass is the Canadian answer to such long standing services as Talk Tickets and many other prepaid calling schemes worldwide. The idea of the pass is that it gives $20 worth of calling time via a special 800 number. Each pass has a serial number which is used when placing the calls and is entered via touch tones. There are voice prompts to indicate how much time can be had on a call, and when only a minute is left for the call. Another 800 number is used for assistance. The costs of placing calls through Bell Canada's phone pass (CAD$): Calls within a province 50c/min Calls within Canada, outside home province $1.00/min Calls from Canada to U.S.A. $1.50/min Calls from Canada to U.K. $2.00/min Calls from Canada to Europe/Americas $2.50/min Calls from Canada to Pacific/Asia $3.00/min Each 50 cents is set up as a "unit" of calling time; thus a $20 pass will have 40 units. Local calls are considered to be a call within province, so these will cost 50 cents a minute using the pass (whereas a payphone only gobbles up 25 cents for unlimited local time). David Leibold ------------------------------ From: carlton@ISI.EDU (Mike Carlton) Subject: Use a 9600 Baud US Modem in UK? Date: 29 Dec 1993 19:34:14 -0800 Organization: USC Information Sciences Institute I've got a friend who'll soon be moving to the UK (Durham actually). She's got a Hayes compatible 9600 baud modem that she would like to take with her and use there. Can anyone tell me if she can expect it to work with the British phone system? Is there a special initialization necessary for the modem? Do they use the same standard phone jacks as used in the US? Thanks, mike (carlton@isi.edu) ------------------------------ From: cogorno@netcom.com (Steve Cogorno) Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 12:17:28 -0800 (PST) Said by: Mitch Wagner > foot the bill for a second phone line. What is the cost of a second > phone line, anyway? -- $50/mo. and maybe a few hundred dollars install > charge, right? This brings up an interesting point: What DO the various telephone companies charge as their basic rate? Out here in PacBell territory, we pay 8.95 for unmeasured service. What about other areas? Is this low? Steve cogorno@netcom.com #608 Merrill * 200 McLaughlin Drive * Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1015 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 23:26 EST From: johnl@iecc.com (John R Levine) Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass. > I think that supposedly intelligent people (doctors, lawyers, social > workers, and their employers) should find their OWN solution to that > issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone-network, and the > rest of us, with their problems. Funny about that. I think that supposedly intelligent people (computer nerds, telemarketers, etc.) who feel that they want to know who's calling before picking up the phone should find their OWN solution to that issue and not burden the public-switched-telephone- network, and the rest of us, with their problems. CL-ID is a solution looking for a problem. Or maybe the other way around. Pat: we've demonstrated many times in the past that nobody's going to be persuaded by these arguments. Can we cut this thread off here? Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, jlevine@delphi.com, 1037498@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Snip, snip, snip. Thread cut off. How long will it be until it comes back around again? PAT] ------------------------------ From: jeanmarc@Ingres.COM (Jean-Marc Fortier) Subject: Re: NPA Questions Date: 29 Dec 93 17:11:10 GMT Reply-To: jeanmarc@toto.ingres.com (Jean-Marc Fortier) Organization: Ingres Corporation, A subsidiary of The ASK Group, Inc. Bill Hofmann (wdh@netcom.com) wrote: > 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns > in that corridor, are there any other localities which > REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll > calls, I guess)? Toronto with the split 416-905 does the same thing. in 416 to call 905 (local) dial 905 + seven digits; in 905 to call 416 (local) dial 416 + seven digits; in all cases long distance is 1 + areacode + seven digits; if you dial (from 416) a 905 + seven digit number that is not a local call you get an intercept message to dial 1 + area + seven. Jean-Marc Fortier ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 12:18:41 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: NPA Questions wdh@netcom.com (Bill Hofmann) writes: > 1. Does any state publish 1 + NPA+ 7d AND 0 + 7d instructions? I have > here that Delaware still does (302). Carl Moore's note in > "history" yhat 213 does is incorrect. Is the "1 + NPA + 7d" intended to refer to long distance within area code? I have continued to see 1 + 7D for long distance within Delaware (302); how do you arrive at your remark about 302? As for 213 (which has 7D for long distance within it), I did write in the PAST tense about its continuing to publish 0+7D for 0+ within it; because of your apparent confusion, I have added "but for some time" to the next version. > 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns > in that corridor, are there any other localities which > REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll > calls, I guess)? Yes, the NPA + 7D scheme is seen for some other local calls: within the DC area (area codes 301, 202, 703) across the 301/410 border in Md. (and this affects some of the DC area suburbs, such as Silver Spring) across 416/905 border in Ontario. But I think local from 215 area to other area codes (and from New Jersey to out of state) requires 1 + NPA + 7D. FYI, 510 allows 1 + 510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area area codes. 510 does publish 7D, rather than 1+510+7D, for long distance within it. But as I say in the history file, the suggestion exists that any call within +1 be makeable as 1 + NPA + 7D. ------------------------------ From: bnunes@netcom.com (Brian Nunes) Subject: Re: NPA Questions Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:08:12 GMT On Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:30:19 PST Bill Hofmann (wdh@netcom.com) wrote: > In reviewing the various sources (telecom postings, discussions with > LECs, etc), I'm left with a few questions that folks out there may be > able to help with: (material omitted) > 2. BESIDES dialing Fort Worth to Dallas (817 to 214) and other towns > in that corridor, are there any other localities which > REQUIRE 10 digit dialing across NPA boundaries (for non-toll > calls, I guess)? Depending on your locale, the following calls may be non-toll: NPA 310 (East Los Angeles) to/from NPA 714 (Orange County) NPA 310 (East Los Angeles) to/from NPA 213 (Metro L.A.) NPA 818 (L.A. Valleys) to/from NPA 213 (Metro L.A.) NPA 714 (Orange County) to/from NPA 909 (Inland Empire) NPA 818 (L.A. Valleys) to/from NPA 909 (Inland Empire) Brian Nunes=*-*-*-*-*-* bnunes@netcom.com -*-*-1-213-656-9117 7985 Santa Monica Blvd. #109-473, West Hollywood, CA 90046-5112 ------------------------------ From: mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) Subject: Re: NPA Questions Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 14:43:32 PST Virtually all the non-toll inter-NPA calls in the C&P service areas near the District of Columbia (MD, VA, and DC) require the NPA to be dialed. Dialing '1' is optional, though, and if the call is non-toll, dialing '1' won't incur a charge. Toll call, however, DO require the '1'. These calls include 301<->202, 301<->703, 202<->703, 301<->410, and possibly, 410<->202. Mike King (mk@tfs.com) Usual disclaimers... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 18:28 WET From: djcl@io.org (woody) Subject: Re: NPA Questions 416/905 requires NPA+7D for local calls between 416 and 905 (Metro Toronto boundary), mandatory as of March 1994. Washington DC metro area (202/301/703) already does. Rochester Tel now requires 1 + 315 + 7D for local calls from its 716 points to local 315 NPA points. And no doubt there will be more ... David Leibold ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 21:31 EST Subject: Re: NPA Questions From: Paul Robinson Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA In the National Capital area, for interstate local calls between DC and its Maryland and Virginia Suburbs, one must dial the 10 digit number, e.g. 202 Nxx-xxxx, 301 Nxx-xxxx or 703 Nxx-xxxx. The ten digit number will be accepted for all local calls even if it is the same area code, so you don't have to reprogram a speed dialer if you use a phone in a different area code than where you programmed it. In Virginia, dialing 703 before a local number makes the call take longer than dialing the 7 digit number alone. (Dialing the area code on a local call used to not work at all). In Maryland, using 301 does not add any extra time to the call setup, except it provides one useful feature: if the number being dialed is outside the local area you get a recording saying it can't complete your call; if you dial that same call with 301 first, you get a recording telling you to dial 1 before the number. The reason being that many exchanges that are non-local from Maryland and Virginia Suburbs were local exchanges in DC or the other state and before the area code was required on local interstate calls, you could dial a number anywhere in DC or the VA and MD suburbs by dialing the 7 digit number. Callers outside of Washington could call someone in a Maryland suburb by dialing either 301 or 202 and Virginia suburb numbers worked on both 703 and 202. > FYI, 510 allows 1+510 dialing, I haven't checked other Bay Area > area codes. In Maryland, I know that you can dial 1 first even if the call is local. I haven't tried testing the other two areas much, as I don't get to Virginia more than once a month and I try to stay out of the District of Cocaine as much as is humanly possible. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I thought that Our Nation's Capitol was located in the District of Crime, not the District of Cocaine. I know the street violence there is almost as bad as Chicago, maybe even worse. Cocaine or crime, its not surprising considering the Congress of the USA provides local Washington DC government. PAT] ------------------------------ From: has3@cscns.com (Harry Schroeder) Subject: Re: ATM News Groups Wanted Organization: Community_News_Service Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 13:33:50 GMT Donald Army (darmy@symantec.com) wrote: :>>Are there any news groups on ATM?? :>>Thanks, :>>darmy@symantec.com There is the comp.dcom.cell-relay group which has quite a bit of ATM discussions. You might want to check there. Harry Schroeder MCI Mail: HSchroeder Internet: has3@cscns.com or 5999840@mcimail.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks also to Rudof Meyer and several others for providing identical answers not printed here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: thale@Novell.COM (Todd D. Hale) Subject: Re: 500 Channel Cable Television Organization: Novell, Inc., Provo, UT, USA Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 17:51:17 GMT Also, about 500+ channels: they need not all be allocated. We could only dedicate 100 or so, and use the rest for ON DEMAND programming. Sure, that's only 400 or so households being serviced on demand, but that can be overcome by splitting subscription areas into small enough regions (mega mega bit backbones with 500 channel local bandwidth). Perhaps I missed this discussion earlier in the thread?? BTW, when I say on demand programming, I refer to anything from local to world news to sports news to movies to sitcoms to WHATEVER. Can't wait, myself. Imagine sitting down to local news and hitting some NEXT story button when you're ready to move on. Or, select a set of stories from a table of contents and play it through. Etc, etc ... Todd D. Hale thale@novell.com halet@bert.cs.byu.edu Unofficially speaking, of course. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 14:30:34 CST From: Doug_Gurich@fcircus.sat.tx.us (Doug Gurich) Subject: Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted > I am looking for recommendations for introductory books on > telecommunications. I'm familiar with Pierce's "Signals" but would > like something more recent. One such book that I have read recently, and would eagerly recommend, is called, "Guess Who's Listening at the Other End of Your Telephone?" by Barry H. Harrin. It provides an insider's look into the management of the telecommunications industry. Told in a humorous, entertaining manner, the book details Mr. Harrin's true life experiences in the telecommunications industry. The stories provide a good "behind the scenes" look at such companies as AT&T, Southern Bell, Claydesta/Fiberline and NTS Communications. Some chapter titles are: Ma Bell's Indoctrination Management-New York Style Welcome to Southern Fried Bell Attack of the Clay People Bringing Civilization and Fiber Optics to Texas The Texas Dial Tone Massacre Pirates of the Potomac This is a great book for learning how the industry has evolved in recent years. It especially provides a good look at how the decision makers work and the things they will do to get ahead in the business. I very much recommend it. It is available from Commanche Press at 906 Lightstone, San Antonio, TX 78258 and is $19.95 plus $3.00 S&H. ------------------------------ From: dej@eecg.toronto.edu (David Jones) Subject: Re: Caller ID in Software? Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:05:49 -0500 In article pdh@netcom.com (P D H) writes: > I take it that a lot of people are interested in which modems do > include the hardware feature and have cooresponding firmware to deal > with it. I would suspect one reasonable way to deal with it is when > the "RING" message comes from the modem, the second one can include > the caller-id info. Then your host software can choose to do with it > as it wants. Let's get down to specifics: The ZyXEL U-series modems do caller ID. Here's a typical terminal trace: RING TIME: 29-12-93 21:08:26 CALLER ID: 416 555 1212 RING I've tried this out on my ZyXEL, and it works fine for me. I have heard reports of problems with some exchanges, but my modem works fine in 416-463. David Jones, M.A.Sc student, Electronics Group (VLSI), University of Toronto email: dej@eecg.utoronto.ca, finger for more info/PGP public key ------------------------------ From: ariel@world.std.com (Robert L Ullmann) Subject: Re: 911 Changes in Toronto Organization: The World in Boston Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 02:50:17 GMT My opinion: clearly, it is very bad news if the 911 service ignores a call and it turns out to be a real emergency. I'd suggest a city bylaw that states that there is a mandatory $5000 service charge for false alarms generated by automatic devices. (NOT A FINE, note; just an ordinary bill for city services; this makes it much easier to enforce.) I understand that U.S. cities typically have this sort of rule for false fire service alarms, whether automatic or not. Robert Ullmann Ariel@World.STD.COM +1 617 693 1315 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 00:48:55 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Administrivia: A Few Lost Messages Due to a bug in my script here a few of the messages you sent me on Monday and Tuesday were lost in processing. I've finally figured out *why* this happens at irregular intervals; now the trick will be to find the solution, but I think I can. So if you wrote to the Digest on Monday or Tuesday of this week and your message has not yet appeared *as of this issue and what appears above* then it got sent to dev/null in error, and I ask you to submit it again with my sincere apologies. I know, I asked you this same thing a couple weeks ago and part of the growing pains around here involves making some serious modifications to message processing because of the huge volume of stuff arriving which has to be sorted and picked through, etc. So anyway, mostly it was whatever you sent me on Tuesday. Replace it if you can please, as we wind down another year here together. There will be a couple more issues of the Digest this week to wind things up, then publication will resume sometime over the weekend with Volume 14. Sometime over the weekend the Index of Subjects and Authors for volume 13 will be compiled and added to the exist- ing indexes of same in the archives. A new archives roadmap or directory will also be published. In addition, I have a special report on Digicom modems for you to read, and that will be mailed out in the next few days. See you again tomorrow. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #843 ****************************** Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23416; 30 Dec 93 15:55 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10874 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecom-recent@lcs.mit.edu); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 12:09:34 -0600 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13438 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oQ/var/spool/mqueue.big -odi -oi -ftelecom-request telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Dec 1993 12:09:07 -0600 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 12:09:07 -0600 From: TELECOM Digest Message-Id: <199312301809.AA13438@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #844 TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Dec 93 12:09:00 CST Volume 13 : Issue 844 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones (Mark W. Earle) Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous (Dave Niebuhr) Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous (Jack Hamilton) Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? (M.A. Karinen) Re: New Service From NYTel - 'Reverse Directory' (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Direct Broadcast Satelites (Mark Chartrand) Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted (M19249@mwvm.mitre.org) Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? (George Zmijewski) DC Area Calls (was Re: NPA Questions) (Carl Moore) Radio Religion (was 500 channels...) (A. Padgett Peterson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and GEnie. Subscriptions are available at no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates of Skokie, Illinois USA. We provide telecom consultation services and long distance resale services including calling cards and 800 numbers. To reach us: Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or by phone at 708-329-0571 and fax at 708-329-0572. Email: ptownson@townson.com. ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. TELECOM Digest is gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom. It has no connection with the unmoderated Usenet newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom.tech whose mailing list "Telecom-Tech Digest" shares archives resources at lcs.mit.edu for the convenience of users. Please *DO NOT* cross post articles between the groups. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 11:37 EST From: Mark W. Earle <0006127039@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Super Long Range Cordless Phones Michael Dimitrov wrote: > A few months ago I saw an ad for a long range radio telephone -- it > works like cordless, but it's range is about 100 miles (right, one > hundred miles). Of course, it said "Not for sale in the US". A > friend of mine from Eastern Europe would like to buy one of these, but > I've lost the ad since then. Could anyone provide information about > similar telephone systems -- manufacturers, reteilers, technical > details etc. These usually turn out to be nothing more than 1/2 duplex, two way radios (hand held or mobiles) with a telephone interconnect similiar to an amateur radio "autopatch". The reason they are not for sale in the US is that, to use such a device requires a business or other license; the gear must be FCC type accepted. The range stated is usually "optimum", assuming the base station part of the system were atop some high structure or land feature. More typically, the range of such systems is 20 or so miles if installed at 150' above average terrain; less if lower. Such systems typically do not include directions to the user, antennas and coax for the base station, service literature, etc. The stuff not included drives the cost up, of course. While you could conceivably purchase such a system, and get it legally licensed in the US, you'd typically have no support. Such units also tend to be of low quality; the portable radios in particular will not withstand rugged use; and the cost usually is not much less than getting a "first rate" system with quality components from a local two way shop. Note that these things usually include no details of how to license it for legal use "overseas" either! Many of the same problems apply. Usually, most foreign phone companies take a dim view of anything connected that they haven't "approved" or taxed. Same thing with the foreign authority which approves radio transmitting devices. If you simply buy one and put it on the air as equiped, usually you are on a frequency already in use by someone, and you will have your gear siezed, pay a fine, etc. So usually, save your money and ignore these things. Consider cellular, or talk to a local two way communications shoo for options to cellular if you think you need something non-cellular. --- Technical Notes --- Some of these system use a full duplex base station, and half duplex mobile units. These sound "OK" and the caller usually can't tell the difference from a "normal" call, except if the party on the radio is talking, than they can't hear "uh huhs"; the radio only talks or listens. Some systems use a 1/2 duplex base. Typically, it transmits using voice sensing, sampling the callee; these can be problematic if the callee is in a noisy environment. Still others key the transmitter, but very quickly (once/second for xx milliseconds) drop the trransmiter and if the mobile / portable has been switched to transmit, than the base stays in receive mode, and the callee can hear the mobile. >From the mobile side, the callee has little "holes" in their speach. These types of systems are generally used on amateur radio frequencies for a very low cost phone interconnect. These "interconnects" used to be very popular in the U.S. as add ons to two way radio systems. Typically, during the day, an operation would have a "base" station and mobile or portable radios; a dispatcher could talk to their field units. After hours, field units could make calls from their mobiles without anyone having to be at the office. IMTS mobile phones (the fore runner to today's cellular phones) were impossible to get in major markets - there was literally years waiting list. Someone had to die or give up their service before a new customer could be accomodated; so although of less quality, these interconnects became very popular. As cellular became dominant and readily availble, they're not as widely used as in years past. One segment still using these interconnets is the "3rd Network" you hear advertised on Rush Limbaugh and other shows. Usually, the angle is you invest monies and get some % of revenues. These systems are two way conventional or trunked 800 Mhz radios. The user buys/leases a mobile or portable. The "service provider" sets up a base station system and installs a full duplex interconnect. Since on 800 Mhz the mobiles are full duplex, call quality is quite good. The mobile usually keys a mike, pushes *, hears dial tone, and dials; # to disconnect the call. Some systems provide mobiles with telephone - like handsets. Some have fairly sophisticated computer driven billing. Some allow incoming calls; usually, the callee dials a common number, hears a tone, and keys in a "unit number", which the base station computer than translates to a mobile unit, generates a "ring", and the mobile user pushes * to answer the call. Compared to Cellular, there are some advantages: usually lower cost or even flat rate/month unlimited calling. But, these systems work over a smaller geographic area; whereas a cellular phone will generally work no matter where you travel. The "3rd Network" type systems also require a bit more of the callee to reach a mobile. Service quality may be good to medium, or excellent; usually, the base station is one or two sites, and so if you are far away from the site you may get static/noise; cellular usually has more sites in a given market to minimize this problem. There is generally less fraud problem with this type of radio phone. (I.E., no ESN "tumbler" call shop activity) I know of one construction company which uses them for this reason: they get a flat rate, and it only works over a limited area. So they don't care/worry if employees make "personal" calls on the truck phone. So in some cases, these system can be advantageous. Generally, there is no "roam" capability. If you travel beyond the area of your system, the radio/phone cannot receive or place calls. There is some discussion of developing a name/ network similiar to Cellular One for these "3rd Network" users, but there are many more technical issues and regulatory issues; and ultimately, the cost of a true "network" would probably be more than just using a cellular phone. Cellular enjoys volume pricing. Equipment costs to the end user may be higher than cellular; usually the cellural provider pays the agent a subscription fee equal to the cost of the phone, so that the agent can sell the phone for almost $0.00; whereas on the "3rd Network" type systems, the user pays around $500 for a mobile unit. Another consideration is that the cellular providers usually offer extended area dialing, where you pay only air time for calls that are long distance to neighboring cities on a "regular" phone. On a "3rd Network" type phone/radio, such plans are usually not offered. Also, you're dealing with a local, sometimes "small" company, instead of a regional Bell subsidiary or Cellular One agent; this can be a plus or minus, depending on your needs. Oh, the "3rd Network" calls are much easier to intercept with a scanner, and legal to do. A call stays on one channel of a possible 5, 10, or 20 channels of a base station system for the entire call. Cellular calls are illegal to intercept; and on a heavily used cmt system, a call will "jump" from frequency to frequency, making a particular call tough to target or follow for the hobbyist level scanner user. (Note that LE/detectives/those with $$ can purchase "cellular call followers"). Use of such devices is a legal and wire tap grey area, but it does happen, especially in big $ divorce and drug cases. The evidence may never be admitted in court, but it gives the listener pointers at other evidence, or allows the detective to be at the right place and time to snap photographs of afternoon encounters, etc . :-) Another factor may be, in the coming years, Personal Communications System (PCS) low cost, short range portable phones being test marketed in limited areas (one of our Digest correspondants reports once in a while on how his test experiences are going). PCS should not be confused with the above described systems; they're totally different animals. Be especially careful when listening to slick ads asking you to invest :-) Another market that uses interconnects is near off shore oil exploration. Around Texas, several compaines off "RTI" Rig Telephones Inc. At the oil rig, a regular looking phone controls a radio; on a tower near shore, a radio/interconnect are hooked to the regular phone system. The oil exploratoin/service company pays a flat fee to the owner, or leases eqipment, etc. For high call volumes, this is cheaper than cellular. Of course, it only works to about 40 miles our so off shore. Then point to point microwave relay, satellite, or some other method must be used, at higher costs. mwearle@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 06:43:31 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous In TELECOM Digest V13 #843 dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) writes: > A new service offered in the NYC area by NY Tel (soon to be called > Nynex) is called "Anonymous Call Rejection." This tariff allows you > (at a fee, of course) to take calls coming from caller-id BLOCKed > numbers and reroutte them to a recording saying something like: > We're sorry, the person you called does not take calls from anonymous > callers. If you want to reach this person, please redial from an > unblocked line ... > For good measure, this also does -not- ring your phone until the > person tries again from an unblocked line. I caught this about two weeks ago (the same time as the Reverse Directory announcement). I have CLID and receive calls from about three people who have their lines blocked and my feeling is that they are a relative or friend, it is worthless to me. {Newsday}, which Danny refers to usually publishes NYTel and AT&T tariff filings on Wednesday and if I come across one that might affect me, I'll try it. I've had a 95% success ratio so far and this is before the effective date. What I've found is that the tariff announcement is made after the mod is put into place and available and then the public announcement via the bill is about two months later. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) Subject: Re: "Anonymous Call Rejection" - Could be Dangerous Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 16:49:05 GMT dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) wrote: > A new service offered in the NYC area by NY Tel (soon to be called > Nynex) is called "Anonymous Call Rejection." This tariff allows you > (at a fee, of course) to take calls coming from caller-id BLOCKed > numbers and reroutte them to a recording saying something like: > We're sorry, the person you called does not take calls from anonymous > callers. If you want to reach this person, please redial from an > unblocked line ... Do such services offer a way around the blocking in an emergency, either by subscriber (911 and other services could call all numbers without being blocked) or on a per-call basis through the operator? Jack Hamilton POB 281107 SF CA 94128 USA jfh@netcom.com kd6ttl@w6pw.#nocal.ca.us.na [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes they do. The person placing the call need only dial the appropriate 'unblock code' (what is it, typically *67) before dialing his call and it will go through just fine. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 30 Dec 93 02:57:25 EST From: M A Karinen <73270.2240@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Privacy and Caller ID/Auto Callback? What caller ID is provided on Calling Card calls? What should it be: Number of orignating (physical) phone, or originating calling card (phone number part), i.e. the "logical" phone making the call? If the caller ID showed the calling card (phone) number, wouldn't that solve the need for an "alternate calling ID" at the same time. I realise that even this scheme is not necessarily easy to implement: we are seeing more and more calling cards where there is no trace of the home or office number as part of the card number. This could be solved by a database the card operator keeps on each card, that would include the caller-id number to transmit when the card creates a call. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 06:35:20 EST From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: New Service From NYTel - 'Reverse Directory' In TELECOM Digest V13 #843 dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) writes: > Just caught the following public notice ad in {Newsday}, Dec 29, 1993 > (tore it out without markking down the page number): > "Notice of proposed changes in Telephone company regulations" > "Notice is hereby given .... to be effective Feb 4, 1993 ... for Reverse > Directory Assistance: > RDA provides callers with the listed name, listed address, including > zip code if available, for a given business or government telephone > number. Test deleted - dwn The first time I saw that ad was about two weeks ago. I tried it for a NYC number and it worked with no problem. I don't know what the cost was since I did it from work. There was something in there about residence service being available but I think it was left out since calls like these would be to businesses where the exact address is needed. BTW: It took quite awhile (>2 minutes) to find out since the request had to go through two or three levels before I reached someone who could understand what I wanted. I haven't tried it from home to see what happens. Dave Niebuhr Internet: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (preferred) niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Senior Technical Specialist, Scientific Computing Facility Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: mrc@access.digex.net (mark chartrand) Subject: Re: Direct Broadcast Satelites Date: 30 Dec 1993 08:57:46 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA In article , Jason M. Githeko wrote: > I am trying to find out whether: > 1. Any of the existing DBSs (especially European) have a footprint > that covers Kenya, East Africa. No, none of the existing DBS satellites covers East Africa. The closest you can do is some weak coverage of northern Africa by some of the European systems. There are plans for a DAB system for Africa, but none for DBS television (officially known as BSS-TV). The planned DAB system is by Worldspace, Inc., and will be called Afristar. They are saying they plan to be operational in 1996, with a planned 1995 launch. It will have 50 20-watt transponders in L-band and X-band, circular polarization, and a beam-center strength of 33dBW. > 2. What specific equipement one needs to receive > DBS signal. Depends on the system. BSS-TV has requirments for minimum signal strength on the ground at beam center of 51 dBW, so a very small (say 12-inch) antenna can be used. At beam edge it will have to be larger. This information taken from the 1993 Satellite Systems Handbook, published by Phillips Business Information. Hope this helps. Mark Chartrand mrc@access.digex.net 73075.1125@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: M19249@mwvm.mitre.org Subject: Re: Intro Book on Telecommunications Wanted Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 10:55:10 EST Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102 In article jsokolov@gte.com (Jeff Sokolov) writes: > I am looking for recommendations for introductory books on > telecommunications. I'm familiar with Pierce's "Signals" but would > like something more recent. Call the folks at Telecom Library in New York, 1-800-LIBRARY. Ask for a catalog then pick out one of the intro books at the appropriate level. As for general books James Martin has an adequate book. I might also recommend the _Telecommunications Factbook_ published this year by McGraw-Hill. Yes I work with one of the authors but I hope that hasn't biased me too much. Of course your mileage may vary. "standard disclaimer" -DW ------------------------------ From: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk (George Zmijewski) Subject: Re: Is UK IDDD Changing 4/94? Organization: MGZ Computer Services Reply-To: mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 15:53:08 +0000 In article david@djwhome.demon.co.uk writes: > In article mzmijews@mgzcs.demon.co.uk > writes: >> From Oftel Consultative Document June 93: >> The codes that will *not* change at NCC are the existing codes for >> non-geographic services, ie: > My understanding (from {BT Engineering Journal}) is that the only reason > that the non-geographic numbers are not changing is that they would > conflict with the old geographic numbers. The intention is that, once The idea is to be able to distinguish between POTS numbers and other services by loking at the first digit of the STD (the S-digit): 01xxx, 02xxx - for geographic STD codes 03xxx - for mobile phones, 04xxx, 06xxx - reserved for future, 05xxx, 08xxx - for free numbers, 09xxx - reserved for further expansion of numbering scheme It has not been decided yest if the codes with S-digit 2 will overlap current STD areas or a different scheme will be used (ie use of shorter code and 8 digit subscriber number, allocation of STD to operator specific geographic zones) And for the record: On 16 April 1995 UK numbering scheme will change as follows: All geographic STD codes will get 1 added in front ie. 0222 248700 -> 01222 248700 (international: +44222 xxxxxx -> 441222 xxxxxx) In addition, in order to provide sufficient numbering capacity number structure in five cities vill change as follows BRISTOL 0272 XXXXXX becomes 0117 9XXXXXX LEEDS 0532 XXXXXX becomes 0113 2XXXXXX LEICESTER 0533 XXXXXX becomes 0116 2XXXXXX NOTTINGHAM 0602 XXXXXX becomes 0115 9XXXXXX SHEFFIELD 0742 XXXXXX becomes 0114 2XXXXXX Codes that will *NOT* change (non geographic): 0336 0338 0345 0374 0385 0500 0640 0645 0660 0800 0802 0831 0836 0839 0850 0860 0881 0891 0898 0910 0941 0956 0958 0973 0976 George Zmijewski ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 10:38:40 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: DC Area Calls (was Re: NPA Questions) mk@TFS.COM (Mike King) writes about local calls between area codes: > These calls include 301<->202, 301<->703, 202<->703, 301<->410, and > possibly, 410<->202. I do not think 410<->202 can be local. After I learned of the 301/410 split three years ago, I found that, aside from the "strange" case of 301-688 at Fort Meade: if you are local to Washington, you stay in 301, and if you are local to Baltimore, you switch from 301 to 410. If you leave Washington and go northeast toward Baltimore or east toward Annapolis, you enter 410 as soon as you leave the DC calling area. Paul Robinson writes: > In Virginia, dialing 703 before a local number makes the call take > longer than dialing the 7 digit number alone. (Dialing the area code > on a local call used to not work at all). In Maryland, using 301 does > not add any extra time to the call setup... Are you saying there is difference in setting up a call between these cases? 1. use of 703 + 7D for a local call within 703 in the Virginia suburbs; 2. use of 301 + 7D for a local call within 301 in the Maryland suburbs; Paul Robinson writes: > Callers outside of Washington could call someone in a > Maryland suburb by dialing either 301 or 202 and Virginia suburb > numbers worked on both 703 and 202. Formerly, incoming long distance could reach Maryland and Virginia suburbs using area code 202 in lieu of 301 or 703, but this is gone now (as of Oct. 1990) because of the prefix shortage. The NPA + 7D scheme for local calls between area codes in the DC area was working by then, but 202 + 7D was useable only for calls to DC. This shrinkage of 202 is my excuse for writing about this in the history file, even though no new area code was created. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Dec 93 10:17:54 -0500 From: padgett@tccslr.dnet.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson) Subject: Radio Religion (was 500 channels...) > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The televangelism aspect is a very > interesting one. I can remember years and years ago -- the 1950's > in particular -- when there were no specifically 'religious' radio > stations with the exception of WMBI out of Chicago at Moody Bible > and maybe one or two others; HCJB in Quito, Ecuador comes to mind if > you include shortwave stuff. Well I have many fond memories of WLAC (Nashville ? 1510 AM ?) keeping me company during "red-eye" drives in the 60's and '70s from Florida to Texas when most stations had left the air. One in particular sticks in my mind -- a lady testifying how her faith had brought her "a new Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham D'Elegance...". Of course I have no idea what they broadcast during the day, I never tuned in before midnight since the "Big Ape" - WAPE was available then. Seems to me that there was also a "pure religion" station in either Tulsa or Broken Arrow about then. Warmly, Padgett [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well by the middle 1960's all-religious stations were starting to be heard in a few places. WYCA-FM in Hammond, Indiana came on the air I guess about 1963; WMBI in Chicago started their FM affiliate station sometime in the early to middle 1960's. But prior to that, all the evangelists seemed to concentrate on getting air time from the big, fifty-thousand watt clear channel stations across the United States, or else they bought time from small local stations. A mark of success for those guys was when they could afford a half hour or even fifteen minutes on the Mutual Network. The CBS Radio Network also carried quite a bit of religion nationally on Sunday morning, but they did not have it all day long like WLS or a few other 'local' (albeit very large and powerful) stations. Radio station KSL in Salt Lake City, Utah is a CBS affiliate and they originated "Music and the Spoken Word" from the Mormon Tabernacle for about 40 years which CBS sent all over the world; not only did all their affiliates in the USA run the show, but it went to the Armed Forces Network and also shortwave station WINB (World International Broadcasters) in Red Lion, PA. WCBS in New York City fed the Riverside Church and Harry Emerson Fosdick to the network which in turn gave it to Armed Forces and WINB plus affiliates all over in the USA. A station here in Chicago, WJJD (1160 AM) fed the Chicago Sunday Evening Club out to the Mutual Network which in turn gave it to several dozen small local stations everywhere along with Armed Forces and WNIB/Red Lion. Everyone in the USA who wanted it got People's Church from here in Chicago via WLS on Sunday mornings and the ABC Network. Radio religion was a big part of commercial radio here through the early 1960's and as the commercial stations began dropping it, the all-religion stations came into existence to fill a definite need in the marketplace. BTW, a movie which came out in the early 1960's with Burt Lancaster ("Elmer Gantry", based on the novel of the same name) was an excellent and realistic depiction of Aimee Semple McPherson and her organization which in the 1930's was extremely powerful; she was the Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson of that era. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V13 #844 ******************************