Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15990; 30 Mar 91 4:15 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 00:59 EST Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 23:59:58 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #251 BCC: Message-ID: <9103292359.ab25636@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 29 Mar 91 20:35:40 CST Volume 11 : Issue 251 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Brian Crawford] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Wolfgang R. Schulz] Re: The Early Days of Telephony [Kent Borg] Re: The Great US Telephone Conspiracy [Carl Moore] Re: MCI Around-Town Disappearing [Jonathan White] Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed [Raymond C. Jender] Re: New Hotel Ripoff [John Higdon] Re: New Hotel Ripoff [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: Questions About AT&T Credit Card Calls [Kath Mullholand] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Date: 28 Mar 91 02:32:51 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: > My question: Does there exist a commercial "plug-in-and-play" > converter box between these different signals. What would be the best > for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? There are international VCR's that do what you want. The Akihabara in Tokyo is lousy with them, as they are a big hit with tourists. These VCRs can play PAL, SECAM and NTSC VHS tapes, and also have tuners that can pick up all the formats. They have an internal converter and, I THINK, can drive a PAL, SECAM or NTSC tv or monitor. One I saw recently has a front panel bevel with a map of the world on it, with lots of little flags. You just press the flag of the country you are in to reconfigure the VCR. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ From: Brian Crawford Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Date: 27 Mar 91 13:58:39 GMT Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ In article , steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: > My question: Does there exists a commercial "plug-in-and-play" > converter box between these different signals. What would be the best > for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? Simple answer: No, unless you have a BIG FAT checkbook to purchase this device. This subject has been beaten to death over on rec.video. Brian Crawford INTERNET (current): crawford@enuxha.eas.asu.edu PO Box 804 (permanent): crawford@stjhmc.fidonet.org Tempe, Arizona 85280 FidoNet: 1:114/15.12 USA Amateur: KL7JDQ ------------------------------ From: "Wolfgang R. Schulz" Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Date: 28 Mar 91 14:42:27 GMT steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: > My friend has brought a television and a video with her from England > into Geneva, Switzerland. These are only capable of receiving the > British transmission standard: GB-I (PAL). Now in Geneva she would > like to be able to receive the Swiss and the French television (or at > least one of them). In Switzerland the standard is CCIR (PAL-SECAM) > and in France it is FR-L (SECAM). > My question: Does there exists a commercial "plug-in-and-play" > converter box between these different signals. What would be the best > for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? Although I think that this matter is permanently discussed in rec.video, I wish to point out, that really the British gear is rather useless in the Swiss/French continental corner. Two major handicaps are the reason: a. The PAL standard and the FRENCH version of SECAM will only work in one set (VCR or TV) when they are specially designed for it, mostly because SECAM video is beeing broadcast NEGATIVE, while PAL is POSITIVE (compare with a slide, you get almost the same negative results when looking at them). b. The audio/ video separation in a TV channel is different. So a tuner made for the UK can only "listen" to British audio. CCIR has a different separation and French TV another even. c. UK equipment usually only has a tuner for UHF frequencies, while on the continent you get the most channels on VHF. Really, re-export it, and get something locally that is designed for reception in that area. All dealers there will have sets which do well on both systems. Happy holidays! Wolfgang R. Schulz, Hamburg, Germany ***BTX (and phone): 0405521878 Bang: ...unido!mcshh!wrs *** UUCP: wrs@mcshh.UUCP Internet: wrs@mcshh.hanse.de *** MCI: 241-2526 ------------------------------ From: Kent Borg Subject: Re: The Early Days of Telephony Date: 27 Mar 91 22:25:19 GMT Organization: Camex Inc., Boston MA In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Al L Varney) writes: > at least parts were). ANI was added around 1973, before that you > dialed a toll call as 1+ ..., but the operator had to ask "Number, > please?"; you KNEW she meant the number you were calling from! I never knew. I always had to ask what she meant. I had assumed that they knew where I was calling from (you mean I could have lied and gotten away with it? -- never occured to me), yet I had just dialed the number I wanted, so why would she ask that? Kent Borg internet: kent@camex.com AOL: kent borg H: (617) 776-6899 W: (617) 426-3577 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 15:46:32 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: The Great US Telephone Conspiracy A case where law enforcement agencies used long distance phone records was a few years ago in Delaware when a couple was killed and their baby kidnapped. Detectives looked over phone records, expanded their search to include the slain couple's relatives, and found a long distance call from the Houston area (using Harrington 302-398 prefix) to a parent of one of the slain couple (this was on the Hartly 302-492 exchange). Even though the prefixes are in the same county, this was a toll call (probably became local recently when Diamond State was ordered to set up "county-wide" local calling); had such call been local, the phone company probably would not have been able to help (according to newspaper article at the time). As it was, however, this discovery put detectives on the road to recovering the baby and making arrests in the case. And in a different matter: Yes, I have also read that overheard credit card numbers are a common source of phone fraud. Touchtone pay phones make it possible to punch in the credit card number instead of having to recite it to a human operator. (Here I do not intend to discuss such things as: COCOT disabling keypad; putting rotary dial back in place of touchtone in drug-infested areas; etc.) John Higdon writes: > Except for collect calls, which are becoming increasingly rare, all > long distance calls are ticketed to an account that can be used to > identify a caller -- even if that caller uses a coin phone. "Cash" calls also? A call billed to a third number does not necessarily point to you; but notice that it leaves a lot of clues: the phones called from and to, and the number the call is charged to. Several years ago, I believe at least in the Wilmington (Del.) newspaper, phone company security pointed out that third-party fraud could be eliminated by getting rid of third-party billing, but that a lot of people want such billing; therefore, there are strict verification rules in use of such billing. ------------------------------ From: jonathan white Subject: Re: MCI Around-Town Disappearing Date: 28 Mar 91 00:30:24 GMT Organization: New York University wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) writes: > As of 1 April, MCI's Around-Town is no more. > This was a GREAT feature, IMHO. Basically, if you used 950-xxxx access > from your local calling area, you did NOT pay the ripoff $0.75/0.80 > charge. You might want to try ITT/Metromedia. They have no surcharge on calling card calls no matter where you call from. I've been using mine for about six months now and have no complaints. Jonathan whitejon@acf5.nyu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 00:23:09 EST From: Raymond C Jender Subject: Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article , drears@pica.army.mil (Dennis G. Rears (FSAC)) writes: > What I'd like to know is what are 2 and 3ESS? What's the difference > between a 1 and a 1A (is it just the processor? Does 1A run Unix?) > And what kind of hardware does a 4ESS have (I've never seen one)? The 2 and 3ESS are smaller rural type switches. Sorry, I don't know much more then that without researching. The 1 and 1A differ in the processor used. The 1E uses an analog processor. The 1A Processor is digital. Both 1E and 1A use the same network, thus when a 1E is being retrofitted to 1A, only the processor is swapped out. That the reason that the calls sound exactly the same on both switches, they only complete quicker. No, the 1A does not run Unix, or any other popular brand of OS. It uses it's own proprietary and unique assembly language. The 4E uses the 1A processor. It's network is digital. It can be used as either a Toll or Tandem switch. I guess you can say there was a completely digital switch being used back in, oh, when did the first 4E cut over, 1975-78 time frame? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 02:12 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: New Hotel Ripoff "David G. Cantor" writes: > I objected and the clerk replied that it wasn't a local > call. After it became clear that I was familiar with the area, etc., > she stated that "Yes, it is a local call from the [PacTel] payphone in > the lobby, but not from our system"! When you step over the threshold of a motel or hotel, you are subject to its tender mercies. It controls the horizontal and the vertical. It can make the image a soft blur or sharpen it ... oops, sorry. Wrong program. But you get the idea. It can charge whatever it likes. A visitor from out of the area stayed at a Day's Inn in Santa Clara. For those not familiar with the area, Santa Clara is completely encompassed by the "San Jose 2" calling area. It includes all of Santa Clara, San Jose, Sunnyvale, Campbell, Los Gatos, Mountain View and Los Altos (in 415), Milpitas, and Cupertino as local. But the sign on the telephone indicated that anything outside of Santa Clara was "long distance". So a perfectly local call to my house from the lobby pay phone ended up being a rather costly "long distance" call from the room. Remember, you pay dearly for that convenient telephone in your room. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: New Hotel Ripoff Date: 28 Mar 91 22:15:12 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , dgc@math.ucla.edu (David G. Cantor) writes: > I was just a guest at the Del Mar Hilton Hotel (in Del Mar, > clearly, "Local calls 50 cents" and I placed a call to a number in La > My bill contained a $4.86 charge for this call. I objected and the clerk If enough folks on the net were interested to see if the Hilton Hotels have some chain policy, they could EACH call Hilton's 1.800.445.8667 number and ask. It might be reasonable to also ask if the Del Mar property is Hilton owned or privately owned, and if privately owned, 'Are they supposed to be conforming to chain policies that prevent one property from giving the rest of the chain a bad reputation?'. It is always wise to do as much travel planning ahead of time as possible, and this little call may simplify future decisions. ------------------------------ From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 29 Mar 91 08:23:25 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) writes: > Court Rules Phone Books Unprotected; Justices: Copyright Law Doesn't > Apply [Moderator's Note: I think we are witnessing the end of an era > of accurate, reliable telephone directories from the Bell telcos. > Obviously from this point forward instead of maintaining a detailed > and highly technical directory bureau, all telco needs to do is copy > some other directory and put their name on the cover each year. PAT] I think you are wrong. How do you think a local directory is assembled by the phone company? They have their subscriber's names and addresses on their billing computers; dump the names, addresses and phone numbers into a file, sort them, massage them a little, and send the results to a postscript typsetter; voila, instant white-pages. I'd be shocked if the phone companies did it any other way! Since the telcos have the customers, and assign the numbers, and need to have the details in order to run their businesses, there is no reason for their directories to be innacurate. I do have some qualms about the court decision, however. The phone company does spend money to create the entries in the white pages, and it seems to me that rival directory companies are getting a free ride on the back of Ma Bell. Also, who is going to define what an "original work" is? There are a lot of complicated privacy issues here. It would be nice if it were the case that each subscriber "owned" his telephone number, and had the right to decide how it was distributed. That would force the whole industry to get real when it comes to a wide variety of privacy issues; alas, it will never happen. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp [Moderator's Note: Well, the court decision was just another in the series of 'dump on Ma Bell' decisions for which the federal judiciary is well-known. Of course telco spends a great deal of time and money to verify their directories and insure accuracy. Most of the other fly-by-night one shot directory publishers make no attempt to verify anything. They just copy from telco. This can be easily proven as Illinois Bell has done a couple times: IBT puts 'ringers' in their directories; that is, here and there a totally made-up entry which does not exist. This disproves any claims of 'carefully researched and compiled' directories by other publishers. When a competitor's directory comes out (or a new Haines Criss-Cross book) IBT checks it out looking for their 'ringers'. If they find any (ringers), the competitor gets sued for copyright violation. At least they did in the past. I guess now telco gets to do the work for the other publishers for free. If *I* had anything to do with telco directory compilation and distribution, my response to the Supreme Court would be to abolish phone directories entirely. That would wipe out the leeches in the directory-publishing industry overnight and prevent any futher theft of my work, whether the Supreme Court liked it or not. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1991 13:58:52 EST From: KATH MULLHOLAND Subject: Re: Questions About AT&T Credit Card Calls We have tested the new AT&T "scrambled" number cards (that do not mimic an area code/phone number combination) and have found that our Baby Bell (NYNEX) will not accept the card. If this is so, it is only right, since NYNEX also does not accept MCI Sprint, or other common carrier credit cards (not ot mention Visa, etc.) We are recommending to our faculty that they only get an AT&T card if they are travelling overseas and need to call back here. We encourage Baby Bell cards because they are going to be much more flexible as time goes on. Kath Mullholand UNH, Durham, NH ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #251 ******************************  ISSUES 252 AND 253 GOT REVERSED IN TRANSMISSION. ISSUE 252 ARRIVED AFTER 253 IN THIS ARCHIVES. ALSO NOTE DUE TO PROBLEMS WITH MAILER AT EECS.NWU.EDU ISSUES BEGINNING AT 248 AND FORWARD WERE SENT FROM THE BACKUP SITE DSINC.DSI.COM FOR SEVERAL ISSUES.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16213; 30 Mar 91 4:33 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 03:04 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09876; Fri, 29 Mar 91 23:45:13 CST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 1:54:37 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #253 Message-Id: <9103300154.ab08105@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 01:52:59 CST Volume 11 : Issue 253 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: MCI Telephone Records Produced in NY Trial [Eduardo Krell] Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works [Scott Hinckley] Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works [Wm Randolph Franklin] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [W. H. Sohl] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Daniel Guilderson] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Steve Pershing] Re: MCI Card for Germans Includes $15 Gift [Wolfgang R. Schulz] Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing [Jim Rees] Re: More on Frequnecy-Selective Ringing [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: MCI Around Town Followup [Joe Konstan] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ekrell@ulysses.att.com Subject: Re: MCI Telephone Records Produced in NY Trial Organization: AT&T Bell Labs Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 23:05:04 EST The latest twist in that case is that an MCI executive called by the prosecution testified he didn't believe the MCI statement the defense presented was genuine since at that time all MCI statements had a special legend printed (something like "Communications for the next 100 years") and the statement shown by the defense didn't have it. Eduardo Krell AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ UUCP: {att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell Internet: ekrell@ulysses.att.com ------------------------------ From: Scott Hinckley Subject: Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works Date: 29 Mar 91 15:20:19 GMT Organization: Boeing AI Center, Huntsville, AL newsham@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Timothy Newsham) writes: > decision since I wanted to complete my collection (through talking to > the MCI rep I discovered that only 1+ MCI customers could get an MCI > Calling Card). Not true. I have an MCI card and NO phone (the phone in my apartment is under someone else's name and is not MCI.) > So about a year passes by after I switched from MCI back to AT&T. I > pull out the ole' MCI Calling Card that was supposed to be cancelled > nine months previous when I switched subscribers. I try it. It still > works. > So what happens to the bill I could possibly accumulate on this card? MCI simply reports you to a credit collection agency if you don't answer their mail after a reasonable few months. Then the collection agency comes after you. Scott Hinckley Internet:scott@hsvaic.boeing.com UUCP:...!uunet!uw-beaver!bcsaic!hsvaic!scott DISCLAIMER: All contained herein are my opinions, they do not|+1 205 461 2073 represent the opinions or feelings of Boeing or its management| BTN:461-2073 ------------------------------ From: Wm Randolph Franklin Subject: Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Date: 29 Mar 91 22:16:49 GMT In article newsham@wiliki.eng.hawaii. edu (Timothy Newsham) mentions that MCI kept his card valid after he cancelled it and moved. This is also true of credit cards. I've had MC/Visa card reps absolutely refuse to cancel card numbers that I didn't want to renew. They call it a convenience in case I change my mind six months later. I call it their forlorn hope that I will accidently use it and then they can hit me for the annual fee. The only solution is probably to report the number stolen. Wm. Randolph Franklin Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu) Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts Telephone: (518) 276-6077; Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261 Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 ------------------------------ From: W. H. Sohl Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 05:26:02 GMT Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Reply-To: W. H. Sohl Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ In article RAF@cu.nih.gov (Roger Fajman) writes: > Well, our cable system here charges by the TV too. Trouble with this > argument is that, while we have more than two TVs, there are only two > of us living in the house (not counting the cats, who don't watch much > TV at all :-). Since the TVs are in different rooms, it is quite > impossible for us to watch more than two at a time, but we are billed > for all. > We have only one converter box, as all the TVs but one are cable ready > and we have no premium channels (so no unscrambling is necessary). > Under those conditions, the converter boxes just get in the way (and > they charge for remote controls for them too -- even if you supply > your own programmable unit). > The cable company just announced that the basic service is being > divided into three tiers. Initially, the total for all three tiers is > the same as before, but I'm sure the price increases won't be long in > coming (there have already been two in one year). Of course, many of > the channels we like (old movies, CNN) are in the upper tiers. The > lowest tier gets you primarily the local broadcast stations and the > community service stations. While pricing for all three tiers is NOW the same as the basic package was before, IF they break out the pricing and you then need to subscribe to each tier separately, you can bet that that will lead to the scambling of the channels in tiers two and three. Once that is done, you are then forced to use a cable company converter box for each separate TV to descramble tiers two and three. If that happens, the remote control functionality of your existing cable ready TV sets becomes useless for those channels that are scrambled, thus forcing you to opt for the cable company's remote control features at additional cost. > I've never understood the logic of granting an exclusive franchise and > deregulating prices at the same time. Of course, we don't have to > have cable TV, but that's no reason for allowing a monopoly without > price controls. It seems to me that competition should have been the > quid pro quo for deregulating prices. Here in NJ, the cable company is granted a franchise, but that is not an exclusive monopoly franchise. The economic reality, however, is that no other cable company is likely to want to expend the capital costs associated with cableing an already cabled area on a competitive basis. The deregulation of cable as I recall was done by federal action, so I don't know what, if any, local concerns were addressed during the discussion of the legislation before it became law. These are my personnel viewpoints, and not my employer's. Bill Sohl || email Bellcore, Morristown, NJ || UUCP bcr!taichi!whs70 (Bell Communications Research) || or 201-829-2879 Weekdays || Internet whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 23:34:05 -0500 From: Daniel Guilderson Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws > The ideal solution is to have everyone pay based on the number of > hours they "consume" and the relative cost to the supplier (home > shopping network is much cheaper than HBO for the cable company to > provide). I doubt the cable companies would ever submit to this "solution" because they are operating on fixed costs. It doesn't matter if you aren't watching TV during the month of March, they still have to maintain a working connection to your residence. By the same token, it doesn't cost them anything more if you have 100 TV sets hooked up as opposed to one. For a broadcast type service such as cable television, the amount charged to customers should be based on the cost to make and maintain the physical connection. It's different for phone companies because some calls take up more resources than others. Which makes me wonder about how a computer network could be billed. I figure a TCP/IP (or some kind of ISO based protocol) network would be a highly desirable thing for a lot of people. I don't think it's good enough to limit it to SLIP because then the only time your connected to the network is when you call it up. I would want something that's always connected. I figure the fairest way to bill this kind of network would be to only charge for packets that originate from your node. What do you think? Daniel Guilderson ryan@cs.umb.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information From: Steve Pershing Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 11:59:54 PST Organization: Questor - Free Internet/Usenet*Vancouver*BC::+1 604 681 0670 konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I > was wondering what is still available today. Specifically, I'd like: Zoom Telephonics in the Boston, Ma. area are still in business. They made probably the best "Demon dialler". I don't have the telephone number, but you should be able to find them through area 617 information. Steve Pershing, System Administrator The QUESTOR Project: FREE Usenet News/Internet Mail; Sci, Med, AIDS, more Internet: sp@questor.wimsey.bc.ca : POST: 1027 Davie Street, Box 486 Phones: Voice/FAX: +1 604 682 6659 : Vancouver, British Columbia Data/BBS: +1 604 681 0670 : Canada V6E 4L2 ------------------------------ From: Wolfgang R. Schulz Subject: Re: MCI Card for Germans Includes $15 Gift Date: 30 Mar 91 00:27:48 GMT Since MCI offers "Call USA" from Germany too now (by toll-free number 0130-0012), unlike AT&T's Calling Card, everybody can get the MCI Card, as long as he has a MasterCard or VISA Card. With Signup's until March 31st 1991 you will receive $15 off calls to the U.S. The address is: MCI International Langstrasse 50 6450 Hanau phone 06181/252021-22-23-24 fax: 06181/252086 ***Wolfgang R. Schulz, Hamburg, Germany ***BTX (and phone): 0405521878*** ***Bang: ...unido!mcshh!wrs *** UUCP: wrs@mcshh.UUCP *** ***Internet: wrs@mcshh.hanse.de *** MCI: 241-2526 *** ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing Reply-To: rees@citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 17:40:43 GMT In article , kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > The [late, great] Bell System philosophy was dead set against > frequency-selective ringing. Using polarity-dependent superimposed > ringing, four unique parties could be signaled. Eight-party lines > used coded ringing, and could be dialed directly since there were SxS > connectors arranged for automatic coded ringing selection. I don't know what our old (Bell System) switch was before it was replaced with a 1A some time in the late '70s, but it had ringback on 491x. Different values of 'x' would give eight different coded rings plus continuous ring. I miss this feature. Our current switch doesn't even have a ringback number that I can find (I've tried all the test prefixes, and located all kinds of tones, battery, terminated-no-battery, and so on, but no ringback). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 05:06 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing Larry Lippman, as always, brings us those bits of telephone lore that help put pieces together. In his reply he explains that Bell's way to ring more than four parties was to add coded ringing to divided ringing. (I probably misled the group by not adding to remarks about using "ground" as one side of the ringing circuit -- that the "ground" was through a cold-cathode diode vacuum tube in the protector outside the house.) As to frequency-selective ringers, I came along late in the territory of an Independent that seemed to have bought its equipment from wherever there was some that week. You could go into one house and find and Automatic Electric phone; a WECo in the next, and a Stromberg in the third ... plus assorted cats and dogs from time to time. Reminiscent of that time, when WECo built a pink Princess telephone, AT&T was so proud, they ran an double-page color ad about how modern they were in magazine. One of my neighbors remarked to their chum who worked for "the phone company" how classy that looked. A few weeks later, up rolled the chum in his yellow (remember those from the non-Bell telcos, folks?) truck with ... you guessed it ... in a box and proceeded to ask where they wanted it installed (the bedroom, of course, where else?). I don't recall it ever showed up on the bill. But then, it was a different time and a different society, wasn't it? Oh, ending the story about the pink Princess phone: The nice chum from the telco said he was sorry, but he couldn't make the ringer work. This is appropos of the pretty constant remarks about mechanical tuning of riningers. The "book" probably never told people to do it, but in that place at that time, it was done a fair amount. It was probably a result of running a dial network with all that hodgepodge of hardware. As what happens with so many of our narrow views of "the business," this kid thought it was just normal. and, yes, bells hummed and tinkled a lot in that place at that time. We all just thought it was normal. And, thanks Larry, for telling me what a "pole-changer" was for. I saw old references to them, but never in a context that explained what their function was. They must have been very archiac, for by the time this kid came along, all the offices I saw had motor generators for ringing current. I guess they were more maintenance free. I can only guess pole-changers went out before WW II. Larry mentioned "AC power line operated ringing plants" in the context of U.S. PBXs. Most of the Bell and overseas telcos I ever got into used a low frequency AC ringing current (16-2/3Hz in most, which is curiously the same .83333.... of 20 Hertz as 50 Hertz is of 60 Hertz. This always made me suspect I could guess where they got their first ringing generators from. What I found uniquely different was that in my Paris apartment, it seemed the PTT rang phones with 50 Hertz. This could easily have been a current-limited sample of the AC power line. I often thought that probably saved French-technology PTTS a few million in ringing generators over the years. Makes me wonder why the rest of us even bothered to get into 20 Hertz in the first place. But when Larry said: > Sounds like an end-cell charger to me..... and then: > remember liquid countercells? He brought up a whole tale I'll put into another nostalgia post, because this one is getting too long and wandering off its title. Anyhow, thanks and congratulations, Larry! I hope people like Al Varney have more to add to the "mysteries of ringing" and putting the two major ways into context. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 18:43:10 PST From: Joe Konstan Subject: Re: MCI Around Town Followup Episode four in my wonderful experiences with MCI Calling Cards: You may recall at the end of Episode 3 I had (after a 5 month delay) been credited with the 25 cent Around Town surcharges for several months since MCI's 800 number still touted Around Town as a no-surcharge service. I called back today and Around Town is now touted as a reduced charge service. I then speak with a rep. 1. She didn't think Around Town was being discontinued but checked and found out that indeed it was (for crying out loud, it's 3/28 and I'm sure she was telling people to sign up left and right for MCI with the Around Town benefit). 2. She will report that the 800 number (our 800 number sir?) still has the advertisement. 3. She didn't know about any notices but will "make a note to ask about it." Oh joy! Since Around Town is gone April 1, does anyone have the right 800 number for ITT (Metromedia, whatever) to get their calling card. I tried once and got someone who was entirely clueless, but I think it was the wrong 800 number. Joe Konstan ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #253 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16353; 30 Mar 91 4:47 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 01:01 EST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 0:02:04 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #252 BCC: Message-ID: <9103300002.ab25054@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 29 Mar 91 21:11:09 CST Volume 11 : Issue 252 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Rich Zellich] Re: Ground Start vs Loop Start: How to Convert? [John Higdon] Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones [Jeff Carroll] Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones [John R. Levine] Re: Query on 8-Party Ringing [Rich Zellich] Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing [Terry Kennedy] More Even More on Selective Ringing [David Lesher] Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [Tom Gray] Re: Telecom Equipment Wanted [John Higdon] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [Phydeaux] Re: PacBell Blocks 950-xxxx [Peter da Silva] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 10:11:37 CST From: Rich Zellich Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Here in the St. Louis and St. Louis County areas, I have no idea what the various local laws or franchise agreements allow the cable companies to do, but they only charge for the basic entry F-connector (or for the box, if one is connected); they charge for each _box_, not for each internally-connected TV or VCR, and also for each remote control unit (and they're optional, but at least the old city company would give it to you free for the balance of the first year, to get you used to having/using it). I'm not positive, but I think they will also install a second input jack for no extra installation or monthly charge; the only charge is for the converters (city anyway, have no idea about the various StL County cable companies). I've recently had a new house built in the county, and had it prewired for both video and phone. I had a separate jack installed for the future cable input, and it terminates on the other end in a four-foot piece of cable without an F-connector on it; according to the Communications Prewires, Inc. installer, the cable company will drill a hole into my basement and connect to my pre-wired cable on request. They've finally laid the feeder cables up and down our street over the last week, and we're now waiting for them to recontact us to see if we want our house connected to the two-house jack sticking out of a cylinder in my front yard. When they do connect, I will have to buy a few more short video cables and three more Y-adapters to hook up both the raw cable and the output of their converter box to a pair of amplified Radio Schlock switch boxes. These boxes each take four TV and one computer/game inputs, and feed two TV's and a VCR; since I have two of them, and have (or will have) the attic antenna, one of the VCR's, and both cable outputs Y-ed into both of them, I can feed four TV jacks and two VCRs (I currently have two TV sets and two VCRs connected to the switches, with two pre-installed jacks unused in the living room and spare bedroom). The back of my TV/stereo cabinet is an unholy mess of wires and cables, of course, since not only is all the video cable connected every way imaginable, but the TV stereo output (a separate box, more cabling) also feeds into the stereo system, which itself is fed every which way it can possibly be. If I had a cable company that insisted on making me pay for each TV connected, I'd just let them put in their one jack and converter box, and then just cheat and after-wire everything the same way, anyway. The RS boxes are about $40 for the un-amplified one with only one TV and one VCR output, and about $70 or $80 for the amplified version with two TV and one VCR output capability. If you want both raw cable input and premium-channel converter-box input, then all you need do is add a couple of extra short cables and a $3 Y-splitter. Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 10:01 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Ground Start vs Loop Start: How to Convert? Zarko Draganic writes: > Does anyone know of a simple circuit or a device you can buy that will > convert between loop start and ground start? I'm using an answering > device that doesn't realize when the caller hung up on one type of > line, and on the other, senses disconnect immediately. Is the problem > even related to loop/ground start? Ground or loop start should not be an issue here. Different types of CO switching behave differently upon disconnect. The 1/1AESS will provide loop interruption immediately when the caller hangs up. A DMS100 takes a while (and sometimes won't do it at all depending on the hardware/software packs). The same is true for the 5ESS. In Cupertino, you have service from both a 1AESS and a DMS100, depending on the prefix. The old "ALpine" (252, 253, etc.) exchanges are handled by the DMS, and the newer "weird" prefixes (996, 446, etc.) are served out of the 1AESS. If you find that the DMS is not returning a loop signal upon disconnect, you may be able to convince Pac*Bell to correct it. Good luck. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Jeff Carroll Subject: Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones Date: 29 Mar 91 00:08:22 GMT Reply-To: Jeff Carroll Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics In article contact!ndallen@eecs.nwu.edu (Nigel Allen) writes: > Northern Telecom's Harmony telephone set, which Bell Canada and some > other companies rent but do not sell, is a modern electronic telephone > set. The working parts and plastic shell do not weigh very much, and > apparently Northern Telecom's market research with prototypes of the > phone showed that consumers equated low weight with low quality. > And *that's* why there are lead weights in a Harmony telephone. > People who want a heavy telephone will find that manufacturers will > address that demand, but perhaps in an unexpected way. Several of the desk phones of more recent vintage around the office here are AT&T Touchtone desk phones with a carefully engineered (not lead, I don't think; there are health concerns) metallic weight bolted to the inside of the genuine used-to-be-Western-Electric base plate. The phone itself consists merely of a PC card the same size as the keypad and attached to the back of it. Although Boeing is gradually being ISDN-ized, the only ISDN circuits I have seen are at the desks of employees who used to have old-fashioned keysets. These have been replaced by Merlin-style ISDN terminals. The more fortunate of the rest of us (around this particular office, anyway) are using AT&T 610s, which are designed to look like the Japanese programmable speakerphones, down to the simulated speaker baffle in the middle of the handset cradle. Though the 610 *is* programmable, the "speaker baffle" has no slots in it, and no speaker. Don't tell me AT&T is totally without marketing savvy. Jeff Carroll carroll@ssc-vax.boeing.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 28 Mar 91 12:41:59 EST (Thu) From: "John R. Levine" In article you write: > Several posters have referred to some modern residential telephones, > manufactured by AT&T and other companies, as "lightweight". > [Some vendors weight phones with heavy pieces of metal.] I like heavy telephones because they don't fall off the table when you stretch out the cord. It doesn't really matter whether the weight is in active or inactive parts of the phone. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 15:04:13 CST From: Rich Zellich Subject: Re: Query on 8-Party Ringing Donald E. Kimberlin asks: > *how* did Bell accomplish 8- party ringing if they used only one > frequency? In my area, at least, it was simple. They used coded rings, and rang _every_ phone on the party line, instead of trying to ring only the _right_ one. If I remember right, when our number was "IMPerial 5201", we were three short rings (this may have only been a four-party line, too, so they could have used frequency-selective ringing if they had wanted to). To tie the above reference to a previous thread, the IMPerial 5201 number was later changed to HObart 7-5201 and then, much later, to 467-5201 - in other words, in the 45 years my father has lived there, his number has _never_ changed! (IMP = HO7 = 467) Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ From: "Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr" Subject: Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing Date: 28 Mar 91 16:30:51 GMT Organization: St. Peter's College, US In article , 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > So far, I never met anyone who could tell me just *how* Bell > did eight-party with WECo-built appratus. (No weasel stories now, > about apparatus WECo bought, resold and installed in some places. I > know they'd do that if they had to!) Well, BSP 501-250-300, Issue 2, January 1963 describes a system where up to four parties can be signalled using Ring Party on tip, Ring Party on ring, with + or - bias, and gives the codes for the ring-back systems to select the right party. No direct mention of eight-party ringing service is made, but there are two items of interest: "Eight party line stations in step-by-step dial areas" as well as a mention of "one-ring party" and "two-ring party", which might mean that both subscriber's instruments rang, but with distinctive ringing. Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, US terry@spcvxa.spc.edu (201) 915-9381 ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: More Even More on Selective Ringing Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 18:39:28 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers {How did *I* get started on this? - I've NEVER had a party line.} Both Donald and Larry have brought up good points. First, my BSP 500-114-100 titled "Ringing Limitations" answers Donald's query. Paragraph 3.04 says {talking about eight party} Coded ringing is used to differentiate between stations.... In other words, it is only "semi-selective" ringing. While I have not dug too deeply into this aspect, one advantage of at least the two party Bell method was ANI. While the trick with the tapped ringer coil added some noise, it DID allow the CO to figure if Mr. Tip or Ms. Ring was calling Fargo without a "numberpleeze." The isolators, such as a 28A or a 425A, are gas tubes. They don't conduct until a LARGE (~90v) dc voltage is impressed on the line. Ringing is on top of that. Thus, during talking, no unbalance thru the ringer coil, and less noise. But, if you have a 28A or other of the myriad items Ma mentions (11A's, 687B's, 425&6A tubes, 426N diodes and D180036 isolators, to name a few) can you ALSO have ANI, and if so, HOW? Here's a mix of old and new: Can you have party line selective ringing on ESS's? wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (305) 255-RTFM ------------------------------ From: Tom Gray Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? Date: 28 Mar 91 21:18:14 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. >In article forrette@cory.berkeley.edu >(Steve Forrette) writes: >> John Higdon writes: >>> Hence, 2600 Hz would serve as both supervisory and signaling carrier. >>> It was called "SF" (single frequency). >> You seem to know an awful lot about what 2600Hz can be used for! :-) For those of you who want to know how the 2600hz system works, you can obtain the CCITT international standard on R1 signalling. This includes a complete description of how the system works. You may also obtain the AT&T publication "Notes on the Network" which has a more practical description of this system. All of this information is totally public. It is an industry standard. As a matter of fact, I know about it beacuse I designed an SF trunk. Probably USENET is distributed to some places over this trunk type of my design. I obtained all the inforamtion I needed from "Notes on the Network" which AT&T was quite pleased to sell to anybody with the required amount of money. Tom Gray - have SF trunk for hire - will travel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 14:00 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Telecom Equipment Wanted DBILLINGSLEY writes: > I have been messing around with telecom equipment (you > know, taking apart phones, building DTMF decoders, ad infinitum) and > was wondering if anyone has any old equipment not in use anymore that > you would like to sell ... > I guess I'm an undergrad with a wierd hobby. Not at all. You might be amazed at how many responses you will get from readers of this forum. Unfortunately, I have divested myself of most surplus gear due to space considerations. As I was growing up (and fooling around with things telephonic) it seemed as though all manner of doodads simply fell into my lap. Cable, blocks, telephone parts, switchboard parts, CO parts, even payphone parts came from everywhere. Sometimes it was friends of the family that would be cleaning out a garage, sometimes it would be a Pacific Telephone installer that would come back and drop off his collection of surplus stuff. In checking with associates, this seems to be a common experience. Visit any telephone "junkie" and you will find gobs of phone droppings. Even though I have cleaned most of it out, just a casual glance will tell you that a telephone nut lives here! Now where did I put that number for "Phoners Anonymous"? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 15:49:59 PST From: Phydeaux Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service The sad thing about this is that most people are afraid to do any of this themselves. Even if they *did* call the phone company and have them fix it at $60/hr, they'd be better off paying for the service call. I've never had inside wiring problems. I tried to convince one friend of this recently. She lives in an apartment building and is spending $2 each month for "wire maintenance." What a rip-off. reb *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* reb@ingres.com or reb%ingres.com@lll-winken.llnl.GOV ICBM: 41.55N 87.40W h:558 West Wellington #3R Chicago, IL 60657 312-549-8365 w:reb ASK/Ingres 10255 West Higgins Suite 500 Rosemont, IL 60018 708-803-9500 [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell calls their plan 'Linebacker', and like the others it is a total waste of money. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: PacBell Blocks 950-xxxx Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1991 03:41:35 GMT > [Moderator's Note: The difference is, we don't usually expect this > sort of response from Bell payphones ... with COCOTS it is old hat: > refused connections and outrageous prices, etc. We know complaining > about COCOTS does very little good. No so with Bell payphones. PAT] I don't know about you, but I've always found payphone prices outrageous. Even worse was being charged "operator assisted" rates for using my AT&T phone card -- no operator involved. No, COCOTs are at worst just a bigger dose of the same medicine. Plus, just because it's a Bell phone doesn't mean it's not a COCOT. (peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #252 ******************************  ISSUE 253 APPEARS BEFORE 252 DUE TO ERROR IN TRANSISSION.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03457; 30 Mar 91 21:35 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 21:01 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14814; Sat, 30 Mar 91 12:42:45 CST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 19:48:41 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #254 Message-Id: <9103301948.ab27349@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 17:55:38 CST Volume 11 : Issue 254 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Problems in Telecom City [TELECOM Moderator] Educational "Field Trip" to United Telephone of PA [Sean Williams] United Telephone -- 25 Years Ago [Sean Williams] AOS Payphone Experience [Jeff E. Nelson] Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land [Ron Schnell] New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Chris Petrilli] MCI Bill Key Evidence in Murder Trial [Wm Randolph Franklin] Re: Into the Telecosm [Peter Marshall] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 17:11:21 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Problems in Telecom City Since Thursday night, I have been dealing with a strange problem here at eecs involving the delivery of the Digest (the mailing list version) to the several hundred names and exploder addresses on the matrix. The problem: they stalled in the queue and wouldn't mail! We had a power outage early Thursday morning which dumped me (and everyone else at eecs) offline in the early morning hours. I was in the middle of editing issue 248. Once I got back on line, the system was sluggish but I got issue 248 into the mailqueue list channel, where it sat, and sat, and sat, all day Thursday and Friday. Or did it? Or was it a 'ghost'? From what I could tell, 'deliver' was not working correctly. Ditto, issues 249, 250, 251, and 252 just sat there in the queue. And with a three day holiday weekend in the offing to boot! Except we Moderators don't take that many three day holiday weekends. Friday night I was able to get issues 248-253 rerouted through a backup site and now most of you have these issues. Some of you have gotten them twice, and some of you still haven't gotten them once. The next several issues may come to you through the backup site or they may come from eecs ... depending. Things should get back to normal soon. If you get duplicates, toss them out and don't bother writing me about it until/unless several issues have arrived and the duplicates / out of numerical order delivery continues. None of the mailing problems here caused any grief with the comp.dcom.telecom feed: it now goes out using my very own nntpxmit to several strategic and well-connected sites around the world where it is deposited directly in the stream of news; the better to reach you in minutes (or seconds!) after it leaves here. PAT ------------------------------ From: seanwilliams@attmail.com Date: Fri Mar 29 10:09:12 EST 1991 Subject: Educational "Field Trip" to United Telephone of PA I'd just like to tell you all that I took the day off school yesterday to experience an "educational trip" to the United Telephone of PA headquarters in Carlisle yesterday. The Carlisle CO uses a Northern Telecom DMS 100. A technician showed me around the building, explaining the operation of various sections of the DMS. He told me that there wasn't really too much to see, since it was all self contained circuit boards. He was right. He then took me to another room, where the fiber optics are. He told me that the fibers led to long distance carriers and other area exchanges. I asked the man about United Telephone's MessageLine service (voicemail), and he directed me to a little box sitting on the floor. I looked at it, and noticed that it was faintly reminiscent of an IBM PC CPU sitting on its side, and it had a 5-1/4" disk drive, too. There were no labels on the machine indicating the manufacturer, however, and the technician wasn't sure. On the top of the machine was a 1200 BPS modem, which is used to program mailboxes (etc) from the business office. Beside the voicemail system was the DMS' report printer, spewing forth large amounts of seemingly useless information. I pointed at a particular listing and asked the man what it meant. He looked at it, then told me that it meant someone in () made a call to a number which was not in service. "What a waste of paper!" I thought, thinking of all the calls I have made to numbers which were not in service. Some days I just sit and randomly dial numbers to see where United allocates most of their customer numbers (I found that to be in the 3000s and 4000s after much experimentation. The 9000s are used mostly for payphones and distinctive ringing, and the 8000s in Marysville and Carlisle are used for voicemail.) I read in the DIGEST that the DMS 100 was capable of supporting CLASS features, so I asked the technician if United was going to offer it anytime soon. The technician told me that that was a sore spot among the employees, and he recommended that I not talk about it while at United. It seems that a heated debate has been going on for some time about CLASS, since it has been called an "invasion of privacy". Bell offers CLASS though, in most of its area exchanges. After I was done at Carlisle, I visited the Marysville CO. Since Marysville is a much smaller town, the CO was too. They have a DMS 10 (?). [I couldn't hear the man over the high-pitched sound of the fiber optics generator when he was telling me.] Marysville has the same small voicemail system, with the same type of modem. [You can call it if you want, my number's listed below. Maybe you can identify what type of system it is...] I thought it was interesting to note that ALL calls from one exchange to another via United are carried on fiber optics, even though the COs are located less than 10-15 miles from each other. I always thought that fiber was used primarily for long distance, but now know that United uses it for virtually all calls that are not made to a destination within the same exchange. I also thought that it was odd that calls from my Duncannon home to my Marysville job and voicemail are routed to Newport and then across to Carlisle Springs before returning to Marysville. [Making a big loop by going out around the mountains instead of following the highway to Marysville] This explains the short delay I've noticed when calling Marysville from my home. Calls to Newport and New Bloomfield always go through instantly. [See a map for more of an explanation.] After I got home, I wrote a thank you letter to the people who guided me on my tour, and I then wrote another note to the man who coordinated the whole thing, mentioning an interest in a summer job at United before I'm off to college. *** PS Rochester people: The United telephone crews who were helping Rochester Telephone repair their systems returned yesterday afternoon while I was in Carlisle. It has been three weeks since that storm, almost four, hasn't it? Rochester Telephone must have been hit hard! Sean E. Williams | attmail.com!seanwilliams 333 Prospect Avenue / PO Box 227 | seanwilliams@attmail.com Duncannon, PA 17020-0227 USA | voicemail: +1 717 957 8139 ------------------------------ From: seanwilliams@attmail.com Date: Sat Mar 30 15:10:12 EST 1991 Subject: United Telephone -- 25 Years Ago I found a bit of nostalgia in the March 28, 1991 edition of {The Duncannon Record}: *** Twenty-five years ago, March 31, 1966... The United Telephone Company's 1966 directory is off the presses in time for April 1st delivery. For the first time the Perry County Directory will combine all telephone listings for the Blain, Duncannon, Ickesburg, Liverpool, Loysville, Marysville, Millerstown, New Bloomfield, and Newport exchanges into a single alphabetical list. [I have excerpted this from a weekly article in {The Duncannon Record} entitled "Them Was the Days".] *** The directory mentioned in this article is a far cry from today's United "Red Book", which includes listings for an additional two United Telephone-served counties, plus the metro-Harrisburg listings (provided by Bell of Pennsylvania). Of course, the book also includes the modern community pages, with maps/bus routes, etc. And a "Talking Fingers" (voice information) section. (It's like the Donnelley "Talking Yellow Pages" if anyone is familiar with the system. Sean E. Williams | attmail.com!seanwilliams 333 Prospect Avenue / PO Box 227 | seanwilliams@attmail.com Duncannon, PA 17020-0227 USA | voicemail: +1 717 957 8139 ------------------------------ From: "Jeff E. Nelson" Subject: AOS Payphone Experience Date: 29 Mar 91 15:17:39 GMT Reply-To: "Jeff E. Nelson" Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Last night I went to use a payphone next to a Dunkin Donuts shop in Nashua, NH, USA. Rather than finding a phone operated by New England Telephone (NET, a subsidiary of NYNEX), I found an AOS phone. This phone was different. For one thing, it requires 25 cents to place a phone call. NET phones only charge 10 cents. I decided to experiment. To get local directory assistance, one dials 1-555-1212. At NET phones, this is a free call. At this phone, an electronic voice (probably generated internally) said, "please deposit 25 cents for the first three minutes." I then tried 10288-1-555-1212, but as soon as I completed dialing the first 8, the same voice said, "You have dialed an invalid number ... you have dialed an invalid number." I looked around for anything that would identify the owner/operator of the phone. I found nothing, but did notice that the instructions for this phone said that to get directory assistance, the appropriate dialing sequence is "411." Upon dialing, I got the double "invalid number" message. Now I was getting upset. I dialed "0" to speak to an operator. The electronic voice came on instead, and told me that to place a long distance call (credit card, pay-as-you-go, or collect), just dial 1 plus the number. There were more instructions which I forget, but the last was, "press 3 to speak to an operator." Aha! I dialed 3, and a NET operator came on. I asked if she could tell me anything about the phone, and she said that her display didn't even show the number of the phone I was calling from. After exchanging some words about how much we both hated AOS phones, I hung up. I then turned my attention to the phone next to the one I was using. It was one of those blue phones with no coin recepticle; the kind you use when placing a toll-free or credit card or collect call. This phone had a sticker on it identifying it as being owned by "ITC Communications" (I think; those initials may be slightly off). Underneath the name was a toll-free 800 number. I dialed the number, ready to complain about the lousy phone service and lack of 10XXX dialing. A NET recording announced, "that number is not valid from your calling area." Some days you just can't win. Jeff E. Nelson Digital Equipment Corporation Internet: jnelson@tle.enet.dec.com Affiliation given for identification purposes only ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 23:07:11 -0800 From: Ron Schnell Subject: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land Recently GTE converted our C.O. to a "much more advanced and improved digital switch", according to a letter sent to all customers (I assume it was 5ESS or similar). However, since this "improvement", I have noticed several degradations. What I would really like is some advice on the best way to take these complaints to GTE. Especially since they are highly technical compared to what most business office reps could understand. Perhaps someone reading this Digest knows of these problems and some reference number I could quote to the right person. Anyway, here they are: 1. Three-way calling - When I flash and dial the third party, I can't flash back right away. I have to wait almost until the line starts ringing. With the old switch, I could flash back immediately after dialing the last digit. If I try that now, I have to do it all over again. 2. Three-way calling - THIS IS THE WORST PART OF THE WHOLE THING - During three-way calls, the line suddenly becomes one-way. Two people can't talk at the same time anymore. I can't even talk with the second party while the third party's phone is ringing. THIS PROBLEM EXISTS AT ALL TIMES, INCLUDING WHEN ALL PARTIES ARE LOCAL! 3. Flashing in general - It seems like flashing the switchook is much less dependable since the change. I don't think it is just the timing either ... sometimes it seems to work, and sometimes it doesn't. 4. Infinite Dialtone - Sometimes I get a dialtone that won't go away. Touchtoning won't stop it, and I have to hang up for at least five seconds to get one that will work. This is pretty rare, though. I appreciate any help anyone can give. I dread trying to bring these things to GTE's attention. I can hear it now: "We can send a repairman to your apartment sir, but if the problem turns out to be in your phone instrument ..." I'm tempted to move three blocks west so that I can be in PacBell land, but who knows, the problem might be there too. Ron (ronnie@sos.com) ------------------------------ i]From: Chris Petrilli Subject: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 30 Mar 91 01:52:23 GMT Organization: Free Software Foundation I was recently in an AT&T Phone Center and saw a new answering machine that they have brought out. It was a completely digital answering machine, and shaped in a '50s art-deco style (more vertical than horizontal), with a LED display on the front. The person who worked there knew nothing about it, and even a friend who works for Ma Bell didn't know much about it. It costs about $129, and would really solve the sleep disturbances caused by my current answering machines clunky sounds. Chris Petrilli Internet: petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu Insert silly disclaimer drivel here. ------------------------------ From: Wm Randolph Franklin Subject: MCI Bill Key Evidence in Murder Trial Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Date: 29 Mar 91 22:31:17 GMT An MCI bill is the key evidence in a murder trial now underway in downstate New York. A woman is on trial for killing her husband's lover, and the question is where she was at a certain time. For an alibi, she has produced an MCI bill showing a long distance call made from another place to her mother at the critical time. MCI says that the bill is not theirs, for two reasons. 1) It omits a logo that was on all MCI bills at the time but which was removed shortly after. So, if the bill is a forgery, it was copied from a later bill. 2) MCI's copy of the bill, and their master tapes, which were first thought to have been destroyed, show no such call. In contrast, at that time they show a call from the defendant's home to a gun shop. The judge disallowed as evidence a printout from the master tape since the MCI person in court had not personally printed it out himself, but had been mailed the printout. Using that reasoning I'm surprised the judge didn't rule out all evidence from a magtape in general, since how can you prove provenance of a tape? Presumably the DA will now get the original person who printed the record to testify. Anyway, this appears to be the first use of laserprinter fraud in a murder case. I wonder who actually did it, since they haven't said that the defendant is a techie. After they convict her, they should convict her mother for perjury, and disbar the lawyer if they can show he knew the bill was forged. Wm. Randolph Franklin Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu) Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts Telephone: (518) 276-6077; Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261 Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 08:51:44 -0800 From: Peter Marshall Subject: Re: Into the Telecosm This George Gilder article is interesting and useful; for example, as it points to the upcoming NTIA report on their infrastructure study. On the other hand, it is an all-too-typical example of this sort of writing on technology topics, and of a very common perspective on same. As such, its not-so underlying assumptions are those of a garden variety technological determinism. There is a myopia here that is also typical of the approach to such topics regularly evidenced by the telecom industry and NTIA itself. For example, we have here the positing of a "communications crisis," identification of *the* problem as "regulation," and a rhetoric suggestive of telco press releases. In context, the Gilder article really isn't anything to write home about. Peter Marshall ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #254 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03884; 30 Mar 91 22:06 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 21:30 EST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 20:31:21 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #255 BCC: Message-ID: <9103302031.ab13753@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 19:42:43 CST Volume 11 : Issue 255 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Phone Power Plant Nostalgia Story [Donald E. Kimberlin] More on History of Telephone Power Plants [Larry Lippman] Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless [Mike Johnston] Voice Mail Standard Keystrokes [John Boteler] Local Calling Cards vs. LD Company Cards [Sean Williams] Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set [David Barts] What Happened with Sprint's Outage? [Thomas Lapp] Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston [Raymond C. Jender] IBM PC PBX Card: Does it Exist? [Steve Kreisel] An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID [root@surya.uucp] Selective Ring and Business Customers [Matthew McGehrin] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 05:20 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Phone Power Plant Nostalgia Story In article , Larry Lippman twanged a nostalgia nerve with the remarks about end celss and liquid countercells. Here's my tale of just one encounter with them. In the picturesque town of Live Oak, Florida, AT&T had built a toll testroom in Lord-Knows-When along what had been an open-wire line route across north Florida leading to New Orleans. Over the years, AT&T had transferred the building to Southern Bell, and then taken it back when TD-2 microwave exploded along that route. Much of what had been in that building had been removed, and it was crammed with TD-2 microwave bays ... the reason I was there. However, its old telegraph testboard was still there, and still connected in a bunch of telegraph channels that interconnected to Southeastern Telephone, the local Independent (totally unmanned, but it was there). That old testboard still worked, including its Model TWELVE teletype, which we knew enough to plug into the press wires just for some fun. But, the power plant was a true museum piece, as I recall, called a WECo 702C. I remember the number because we couldn't find anybody who knew where to get documents for it. Now, Live Oak had one more antique that added to its story. That was a living antique of the Old South named Harvey. Harvey was, to all common knowldge, the retired "building service man" from Live Oak. An aged Negro in the truest character of the Old Deep South, Harvey took care of that building, in retirement just as he must have done a good deal of his life. The floors gleamed; the lawn was all trimmed and tidy, wastebaskets emptied, toilet cleaned and the whole works. The building had been unmanned for many years, and it had the standard building alarm system that rang in Jacksonville any time someone opened the door. If you didn't know where and how to ring into Jacksonville shortly after entering, a voice would stab out of the top of a rack, and say, "Who's there in Live Oak?" If there was no answer, it was Standard Operating Procedure to call the local sheriff for a visit to the building. Except at Live Oak. On one of my first visits finding Harvey there, I asked the local supervisor at Lake city about Harvey and security, and he told me that everybody back at Jacksonville just knew that an unanswered Open Door alarm at Live Oak meant Harvey was is the building. They knew the Live Oak building was right in the center of town, so nobody with malicious intent would get in there. (Remember, this was a different time and a different America!) Anyhow, the event involving the 702C and Harvey was the day I got told to go to Live Oak and clean the "counter-cell." It was one full of potassium hydroxide as Larry described, and after doping out a suitable way to tie some jumpers around it so we wouldn't inadvertently wind up with an open battery string if the old motor-driven switches of the 702C called for it, I proceeded to start trying to move it. Miraculously, Harvey had shown up. (I kind of think he watched out for us to arrive, for he often came in to bustle around while we were there, exchanging pleasantries and asking us about names we didn't know; people who must have worked there decades before.) My move at the countercell got Harvey very interested, and he started gathering all the needed tools to clean the tank and plates. He joined right in with me, knowing all the right moves to get the thing outside, dump it down the sewer. (Remember, this was really pre-EPA!), scrub the plates and tank and get it back inside for refilling. Now we had a box of some powdered electrolyte to mix with water. Harvey was ready, taking up a position he seemed to know well with a bleached-out broomstick like one sees people use on laundry in a machine. I poured water and powder, and Harvey dutifully stirred with his stick. He was really enjoying it. When I had enough electrolyte mix in the tank, Harvey started stirring at a ferocious rate, saying, "Throw in de blue pill, Boss!" I didn't have any blue pill. After many repeats about this, I could deduce that the old mix must have had some sort of depolarizer to dissolve in the mix, and Harvey just knew it was necessary. The incident must have gone on for fifteen minutes with Harvey stirring so hard I was afraid his old heart would give out. When I finally insisted a number of times that the contents of the "blue pill" must be in the powder nowadays, Harvey finally stopped. But, I never did find the instructions for a 702C Power Plant, much less those for its countercell. When I went on to other assignments, Harvey was last seen still caring for his private AT&T building. I suspect others who followed me there just one day noticed that Harvey didn't show up any more. I sure do hope and pray Harvey had just gone off to his Maker a happy soul. Thanks, Larry, for bringing up the memory! ------------------------------ Subject: More on History of Telephone Power Plants Date: 29 Mar 91 01:14:14 EST (Fri) From: Larry Lippman In article: uccxmgm@unx2.ucc.okstate. edu writes: > I wonder if they used electrolytic rectifiers back then to handle > that kind of current? A liquid electrolytic rectifier was indeed used for small PBX applications during the 1920's. It used one electrode of tantalum and one electrode of lead in an electrolyte solution of sulfuric acid. A floating layer of mineral oil prevented evaporation. The maximum current per device was limited to several amperes, though. One manufacturer of this device was Fansteel Products. Such electrolytic rectifiers were rapidly superceded by copper oxide rectifiers, which were available in capacities up to 20 or so amperes. By the 1940's copper oxide rectifiers were largely superceded by selenium rectifiers. However, even selenium rectifiers, which were used in new product designs until the advent of silicon rectifier diodes during the 1950's, were limited to about 100 amperes in capacity. From the *very* early days when telephone company central offices produced their own electric power from steam boilers, generators were used to create the DC necessary for charging batteries. By 1900 most telephone company central offices used commercial AC power, but to run motor-generator combinations. In fact, one of the benefits from using batteries was the filtering of AC noise created by the commutators of DC generators. AC motor-driven generators used to create DC for battery charging were still in service in a few Bell System central offices as of the early 1980's! The last ones I saw were for +130 and -130 volts used to power vacuum tube carrier and microwave apparatus. Chances are they were not replaced because the associated apparatus had very little remaining service life, and 130 volt battery installations were primarily associated with such old vacuum tube apparatus. Newer apparatus which required 130 volts generally relied upon solid-state DC/DC converters powered by the -48 volt DC battery. Starting around World War I, mercury arc rectifiers came into vogue, but only for smaller central offices. Mercury arc rectifiers were limited to about 50 amperes per device, although multiple devices could be paralleled for larger loads. Many mercury arc rectifiers for smaller central offices were updated during the 1960's through the use of solid-state devices which were plug-in replacements for the rectifier tubes. I feel certain that a few of these updated rectifiers (like the WECo 110A) are still in service today in small SxS CO's. For larger multi-thousand ampere battery plants, AC motor-driven generators were still the only way to go until the 1950's when large silicon rectifier diodes became available. No other rectifier method prior to this time could compete with motor-driven generators for ampere capacity. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: Mike Johnston Subject: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless Organization: Lehman Brothers Date: 30 Mar 91 08:15:45 I just put one of those sleek looking, floor standing hologen lamps in my living room. Imagine my chagrin when after turning the lamp on I tried to use my cordless phone and discovered a loud hum. Incidentally, this hum varies with the brightness of the lamp. I.E the lower I dim the lamp, the louder the hum in my phone. Help! What's a guy to do? Is there any way I can shield my lamp from this or am I just stuck? Michael R. Johnston mjohnsto@shearson.com || mjohnstonn@mcimail.com System Administrator UUCP: uunet!slcpi!mjohnsto Lehman Brothers Inc. Phone: (212) 640-9116 ------------------------------ Subject: Voice Mail Standard Keystrokes Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 18:16:15 EST From: John Boteler Every system I configure which purports to have anything to do with living, breathing humans has '0' reserved for the "Operater". That's my contribution to a low noise environment. For the time being, my super-tricked-out voice server I am working on here uses Cindi's commands for the part that sounds like voice mail. Does this win me a free round-trip ticket to Voice 91?? John Boteler bote@csense {uunet | ka3ovk}!media!csense!bote SkinnyDipper's Hotline: 703 241 BARE | VOICE only, Touch-Tone(TM) signalling ------------------------------ From: seanwilliams@attmail.com Date: Sat Mar 30 14:12:43 EST 1991 Subject: Local Calling Cards vs. LD Company Cards Jonathan White writes: >> if you used 950-xxxx access from your local calling area, you did >> NOT pay the ripoff $0.75/0.80 charge. > You might want to try ITT/Metromedia. They have no surcharge on > calling card calls no matter where you call from. Before checking out another Long Distance company's card, maybe you should check with your own local telephone company. Most local telcos offer their own cards, and many are cheaper to use than a long distance company's. I recently called United Telephone of PA to order a card. It was explained to me that the charge for a call was $.30, as opposed to the higher charge that MCI bills me for local calls. I'm not sure if the United Telephone card can be used for long distance calls, however. I'll probably end up using both cards depending on what type of call I'm making. (I'll post a note after I get my new card.) Bell of Pennsylvania also offers its own "IQ (sm) Card". I'm not sure of the details on that one, however. Sean E. Williams | attmail.com!seanwilliams 333 Prospect Avenue / PO Box 227 | seanwilliams@attmail.com Duncannon, PA 17020-0227 USA | voicemail: +1 717 957 8139 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 00:55:25 pst From: David Barts Subject: Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set Recently, someone posted that a 500 D set was just like a 500 set, except it was designed for use on a party line with divided ringing. I own two Western Electric 2500 DM sets that were formerly used on a LARGE centrex system (two NNX prefixes!). What is the difference between a 2500 DM and a "normal" 2500 set? One of these sets is on the desk beside my computer as I type this. It works just fine, and rings properly even though I don't have party line service. Both sets were manufactured in the late 70's and appear to have been reconditioned at some time in the mid 80's. David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 20:53:01 EST From: Thomas Lapp Subject: What Happened With Sprint's Outage? My question for those in the know: What was the cause of the fiber break which caused the Sprint outage last week? Details please. If it was along a RR right-of-way (and buried) how was it cut? Not by a train wreck I assume? Right? tom internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu (home) : 4398613@mcimail.com (work) uucp : {ucbvax,mcvax,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas Location : Newark, DE, USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 15:56:00 EST From: Raymond C Jender Subject: Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Here in Illinois there is a service that if you supply them with a telephone number, they will respond with a name and address. The only catch is the phone number must be a listed number. I need to do the same thing, only for a suburb of Houston, TX. Anyone know if a similar service is available there? In case you need to know, the number is 713-486-xxxx. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: stevek@cup.portal.com Subject: IBM PC PBX Card: Does it Exist? Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 23:50:43 PST A friend of mine mentioned that he saw an ad for a IBM PC card that mimics a PBX. It was only a one or two line version, but supposedly support a couple of stations and calls could be transferred with hook-flashes. Has anyone heard of this? Any information would be appreciated. Thanks, Steve Kreisel stevek@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ Subject: An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID From: The unknown Florentine Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 12:07:13 PST Organization: Sunshine in a box A few days ago I received a call from a survey firm asking me if I would be willing to fill out a survey if they sent it to me with a check for $5 (sound somewhat familiar?) They said PacBell had hired them (a marketing firm) to do this survey. I actually agreed to do this, figuring I would actually be getting a check that authorized me to be slammed, and a hokey survey extolling a LD carrier. Well I was wrong. They sent a survey mostly about CLID and a few other potential services and a crisp clean $5 bill. Now the survey asks a lot of questions about where I buy telecom products and, in various fashions about what I would think about buying a CLID phone from Pacbell, leasing it from PACBELL, or buying a "Pacbell CERTIFIED or APPROVED phone" elsewhere. {I thought that the Bells could no longer do that type of business.} The phones were all in the $100 - 180 price range, the separate CLID boxes were $40 - 60. They also ask some questions that I thought were none of their damned business, and told them so. It was also interesting to note that the poll (and the "informative brochure") did not mention CLID blocking or BLocked Call blocking. Sounds like PACBELL has no intent to provide these. ------------------------------ From: matthew@pro-nka.cts.com (Matthew McGehrin) Subject: Selective Ring and Business Customers Date: 30 Mar 91 01:16:15 GMT Its interesting to see this new CLASS service called 'Selective Ring'. I wonder if its available to business customers with those bulky boxes we have now? We always had 'selective ring', but it was a centrex feature. If the call was inter-office it would ring once, if it was an outside line, it would ring twice, like ring-ring (quick ring). Inet: matthew@pro-nka.cts.com UUCP: crash!pro-nka!matthew BNET: MATTHEW%PRO-NKA.CTS.COM@NOSC.MIL ARPA: crash!pro-nka!matthew@nosc.mil GENIE: M.MCGEHRIN --- 1+201/944-3102 : PCP via NJNEW 944-3102 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #255 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07005; 31 Mar 91 1:24 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 23:46 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23986; Sat, 30 Mar 91 14:31:03 CST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 22:16:11 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #256 Message-Id: <9103302216.ab27151@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 22:15:55 CST Volume 11 : Issue 256 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Need ComKey 416 and Multiline Phone Information [Andy Jacobson] Re: "How Many Walkmans?" [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Steve Pershing] Re: Higdon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [Floyd Davidson] Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone [John Higdon] Re: More Even More on Selective Ringing [John Higdon] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Carl Moore] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Dave Levenson] Re: Front Door to Apartment Phone Service [Dave Levenson] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Ken Abrams] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 01:21 PST From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Need ComKey 416 and Multiline Phone Information In TELECOM Digest V11 #239 Douglas Scott Reuben writes: > while the other base/power unit powers lines three and four. I have > looked extensively at all the markings inside and outside of the power > units, and see no indication which would easily tell me which one is > which. There are movable blocks inside the unit (under the > DSS/intercom page buttons), but I dunno if they have anything to do > with selecting whether the unit runs L1/2 or L3/4. I found this out > via experimentation with the equipment I have, and there is perhaps a > much simpler way to connect all four lines. (Perhaps something like a > "91A" block, etc?). Yes those movable blocks will select for lines 1/2 or 3/4. One of these Molex-like connectors can be moved from one set of pins to another, making the switch. > I've never tried to connect a ComKey power unit to a 1A2 > system! (The 1A2s, of course, don't have any cards to blow out, at > least not in the phones themselves.) These things are possible. In basic operation, without the various added features, the ComKey is really a 1A2 compatible beast. But don't try to connect them directly as the A/A1 control does not match. 1A2 type phones can certainly be used as stations if you match the proper wiring, and make sure the 1A2 unit has no conflicting option wiring in the spare pairs of its 25 pair cord. The one basic incompatibility is the lack of ringdown. Best to break out the wiring on a jiffy box or other 66-type block and jumper only the leads in use. I have two AT&T Touchamatics, and several 2565 type phones run off of my 416 base unit, and everything works fine save for intercom signaling, which is unfortunately incompatible to the best of my fiddling. Also, I have found the power supply on the thing amazingly resilient as I have inadvertently shorted out the DC on it several ways with no damage. Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 05:12 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: "How Many Walkmans?" In article, (Digest v11,iss247), Martin McCormick asks: > I wonder if they used electrolitic rectifiers back then to handle > that kind of current? I can only surmise that the earliest ones had to use such methods, Martin. However, my point is to pop in here and say that one of Bell Labs' major functions was continuous efforts at developing what were first called "dry disk rectifiers." They needed to have so much good, reliable DC power that it was obvious they'd be looking for the best materials and methods. That lead to even (successfully) developing solid-state higher-frequency diodes of such quality that the famous balanced "ring modulators" were used with speech signals at frequencies of the order of 100 kHz and up to perform the frequency conversions in carrier channel banks. That was the sort of work Brattain, Shockley and Bardeen were assigned to at Bell Labs -- researching improved diode materials -- when they made a "mistake," hooking up two diodes in an erronoeous fashion, and inadvertently producing a current gain. After they called in colleagues to see check their "error," they discovered they had the transistor! How different a story than today's planned, controlled, deliver-the- accountants-a-known-result "research!" Which raises the question: Could the discovery of the transistor have been the last piece of research serendipity? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information From: Steve Pershing Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 11:59:54 PST Organization: Questor - Free Internet/Usenet*Vancouver*BC::+1 604 681 0670 konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I > was wondering what is still available today. Specifically, I'd like: Zoom Telephonics in the Boston, Ma. area are still in business. They made probably the best "Demon Dialer". I don't have the telephone number, but you should be able to find them through area 617 information. Steve Pershing, System Administrator The QUESTOR Project: FREE Usenet News/Internet Mail; Sci, Med, AIDS, more Internet: sp@questor.wimsey.bc.ca : POST: 1027 Davie Street, Box 486 Phones: Voice/FAX: +1 604 682 6659 : Vancouver, British Columbia Data/BBS: +1 604 681 0670 : Canada V6E 4L2 ------------------------------ From: Floyd Davidson Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? Organization: University of Alaska, Institute of Marine Science Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1991 04:50:48 GMT In article mitel!Software!grayt@ uunet.uu.net (Tom Gray) writes: > For those of you who want to know how the 2600hz system works, you can > obtain the CCITT international standard on R1 signalling. This > includes a complete description of how the system works. You may also > obtain the AT&T publication "Notes on the Network" which has a more > practical description of this system. > All of this information is totally public. It is an industry standard. > As a matter of fact, I know about it beacuse I designed an SF trunk. > Probably USENET is distributed to some places over this trunk type of > my design. I obtained all the inforamtion I needed from "Notes on the > Network" which AT&T was quite pleased to sell to anybody with the > required amount of money. "Notes on the Network" was replaced with "Notes on the BOC Intra-LATA Networks - 19nn" where "nn" indicates the year released. The latest edition I have is 1986. There could well be a more recent release. The '86 edition does not give information on ordering "Notes" itself. The following address was listed for "Technical Advisories": Bell Communications Research Information Exchange Management 435 South Street, MRE 2J-155 Morristown, NJ 07960-1961 The '86 edition is Technical Reference TR-NPL-000275. The price is not stated, and I don't remember what it was ... but expect well over $100. The book is indispensable if you live in the telecom industry. Floyd L. Davidson | floyd@ims.alaska.edu | Alascom, Inc. pays me Salcha, AK 99714 | Univ. of Alaska | but not for opinions. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 22:06 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone John Alsop writes: > I just spent a week's vacation in Florida. The house we rented had a > "Charge-a-Phone" instead of an ordinary telephone. It looked pretty > much like a normal phone set, but had various labels with instructions > for use, etc. There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). A group of us had dinner there a number of months ago and it was great entertainment playing with the phone while waiting for our meals to arrive! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: On I-55 from here to St. Louis all the food/gasoline stops along the way have a similar arrangement. At each booth in the restaurant, a wall-phone is hooked to a one-way outgoing line. All calls from the phone must be zero-plussed or 10xxx zero-plussed with billing on a collect, third number or telco credit card basis. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 01:55 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: More Even More on Selective Ringing David Lesher writes: > While I have not dug too deeply into this aspect, one advantage of at > least the two party Bell method was ANI. While the trick with the > tapped ringer coil added some noise, it DID allow the CO to figure if > Mr. Tip or Ms. Ring was calling Fargo without a "numberpleeze." So how in the hell did that actually work? I remember that before party lines were abolished in metro areas in the state, the sure-fire way to tell that a friend had a party line when using his phone was by the "tick-kunk" that came immediately after dialing and just before the originating register dropped. Those of us with private lines had no such noise. We all knew that sound had something to do with identifying the tip or ring party, but to this day no one has ever explained what was going on. But going back a little further we find four-party lines. The instant giveaway there was the dialing of any toll call. An operator would come on the line and ask, "Your number please?" Also, participants on a four-party line would find that the phone would ring when the call wasn't for them. It was only to be answered if it was "ring-ring" or "ring" -- depending on the phone number. That little scheme worked like this: The key was the third digit from the end. A 0-4 would be a single ring while 5-9 would indicate double ring. An example was that one friend had the number 296-8122 (single ring) and another 296-4894 (double ring). This pattern even carried over after four-party and even two-party lines were history. Well into the sixties, customers served out of the #1 crossbar offices had double rings if the phone number was of the right type. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: IBT has long since grandfathered party line service. If you had it thirty years ago and kept it, you can still have it, but they quit offering it sometime around 1960. If you move, or ask to change your number, that's it! Off the party line you go! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 9:31:12 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 The code Woody had written about as a possibility for the splitoff from 416 was 210, not 410. (This was before 905 was announced.) 410 has already been announced as new area code for eastern Maryland. 903 came into use as an area code last year by splitting 214 in Texas. And yes, when N0X/N1X area codes are used up, area codes will have to generalize to NXX form. As I explain in my area code history file, this causes dialing changes so that timeouts can be avoided; if your area has had to program for N0X/N1X PREFIXES, you already have allowed for NNX area codes. ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 Date: 30 Mar 91 22:36:17 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony Harminc) writes: > Finally, what is the current plan when the N10 codes are gone ? The > old plan called for CO (NNX) codes to be used for area codes, starting > with 260. Is that still in the works? That would require ten digit > dialing everywhere in North America (or timeout nonsense). The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Front Door to Apartment Phone Service Date: 30 Mar 91 17:12:24 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) writes: > telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: [ regarding entry-door controls for apartment buildings controlled from the central office... ] > Patrick intimates that this was (another) flawed decision by His > Wisdom. On the contrary, I agree that telephone companies should not > be involved in this type of service. There is no reason to involve > your telco in the unlocking of the front door to your apartment > And then there was the cost: >> [Moderator's Note: I must agree with you I think the sytem works much >> better as CPE than it did under the old arrangement, although the old >> arrangement was better for a small landlord who could not afford the >> initial cash outlay. IBT allowed the installation costs for Enterphone >> to be spread over twelve months if desired. PAT] If the landlord could get a mortgage on the building, he/she could certainly find financing for the CPE, and spread the initial investment over as many years as the bank would allow. I must agree with Jim, here, that this looks like an intra-premises problem, and is best solved with a CPE solution. I prefer to own my own room-to-room intercom, paging, and LAN devices, and buy the external networking from the utility. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 30 Mar 91 19:38:56 GMT Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois In article barefoot@garfield.catt. ncsu.edu (Heath Roberts) writes: >> My view is that the cable "service" should be provided to a single >> point within any home at a standard signal level and then any further >> distribution within the home should be left to the homeowner. [If the owner so desires.] > The ideal solution is to have everyone pay based on the number of > hours they "consume" and the relative cost to the supplier (home ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ These are the right words, now if we can just put them into the proper perspective ... I supplied ALL the hardware to extend my cable service throughout my house. The cost to the cable company to provide my service is not one cent higher if I watch a thousand hours a month than it is if I watch one hour. It is not one cent higher if five members on my family watch five different sets than it is if nobody watches anything. I expect to pay the cable company a fair price for the service that they provide, including a reasonable rate of profit. I do NOT expect to pay extra for things that do not cost the supplier any extra. This is predatory pricing based on their monopoly position. The price I pay for electricity is not related to the number of outlets that I have, the price I pay for water is not related to the number of faucets and the sewer fees I pay is not related to the number of drains and toilets that I have connected. Cable rates should not be based on the number of outlets either unless the building owner has ASKED the cable company to install and maintain the wiring. Ken Abrams uunet!pallas!kabra437 Illinois Bell kabra437@athenanet.com Springfield (voice) 217-753-7965 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #256 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09982; 31 Mar 91 3:23 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 02:48 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27112; Sat, 30 Mar 91 16:19:58 CST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 0:38:40 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #257 Message-Id: <9103310038.ab00024@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 00:31:28 CST Volume 11 : Issue 257 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Eight and Ten Party Ringing in the Bell System [Larry Lippman] Lorain Products Co. and More on Telephone Power Plants [Larry Lippman] The Culture of Technology [Technology Review, via Peter Marshall] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [John R Hall] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Dave Levenson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Eight and Ten Party Ringing in the Bell System Date: 30 Mar 91 00:30:13 EST (Sat) From: Larry Lippman In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > Needless, to say, you could often > hear your ringer click or buzz when another party's frequency sailed > down the line, anyway! I was told by a WECo engineer some years ago that the above was the reason why the [late, great] Bell System felt that frequency-selective ringing was "inelegant". Since the WECo method of polarity-controlled superimposed ringing to ground provided four selective ringing codes, and the frequency-selective methods provided only one more code, Bell felt that their method - which required no tuned ringers and had little propensity for bell tapping when used with the 425A and 426A cold cathode electron tubes - was the optimum choice. > Unanswered to my satisfaction is that Bell employees many > times over the years told me that "Bell companies had 8-party service, > too," but they were always evasive about *how* 8 parties could be rung > with only 20 Hertz. And, I personally did some work replacing WECo > 350/355 CDO's in rural Mississippi last year, to hear these stories > proliferated. Yet, the old CDO's there had no evidence of ever having > had anything but 20 Hertz ringing generators. You must bear in mind that the WECo eight party method is a semi-selective method involving four "electrical" codes and two ringing "cadence" codes, for a total of eight codes. The ringing supply was solely 20 Hz. There was really no "secret" nor any reason for anyone to have been "evasive". > So, my question to this forum, where someone certainly knows, > is *how* did Bell accomplish eight party ringing if they used only one > frequency? Or, is it one of those bits of lore that had some truth > someplace where perhaps Bell had acquired an Independent using > frequency-selective ringing ... and then got the story embellished > with retelling and retelling? It's not at all a bit of lore. While it is indeed true that the Bell System maintained a wide diversity of non-WECo CO apparatus in telephone companies which they had acquired, this has little bearing upon the present discussion. > So far, I never met anyone who could tell me just *how* Bell > did eight-party with WECo-built apparatus. (No weasel stories now, > about apparatus WECo bought, resold and installed in some places. I > know they'd do that if they had to!) You have now met (electronically, at least) such a person. :-) My WECo experience in multi-party lines was limited to SxS, so that's what I will tell you about. There were *many* WECo SxS connectors that supported multi-party ringing. An example is the connector per SD-30862-01. I quote from the CD-30862-01 circuit description: "This circuit is used for extending a call from a toll or local selector to a subscriber line of either an eight party semi-selective ringing rural line group or a ten party three code ringing line group". This connector was used in No. 1, No. 350A and No. 355A SxS CO's. As previously discussed, WECo provided four party full selective ringing using either positive or negative battery superimposed upon ringing from tip-to-ground or ring-to-ground, summarized as: PARTY 1 negative superimposed battery ring lead to ground PARTY 2 negative superimposed battery tip lead to ground PARTY 3 positive superimposed battery ring lead to ground PARTY 4 positive superimposed battery tip lead to ground The party code number is an *absolute* number which corresponds to the precise condition above. The party code number was used in plant records and apparatus drawings. There is actually some rhyme and reason to the numbering, which I'm certain astute readers will notice. Eight parties could be achieved by using coded ringing; i.e., the parties one to four used the above scheme with a "one-long" ringing cadence, and parties five to eight used the above scheme with a "two-short" cadence. This meant that a given telephone set rang for two of eight possible parties. By adding a third ringing cadence, ten parties could be signaled (note reference to ten party ringing in above quoted CD section). The differences between multi-party connectors and regular connectors were comparatively minor, and included: (1) provision for a ringing synchronization lead "PKU" which assured that ringing was started at a precise time so that a false, partial cadence would not be sent; and (2) greater flexibility in ringing control and ring-trip relay wiring options to accommodate the variations in polarity. Multi-party ringing in a WECo SxS CO was set up so that two connector shelves of 100 numbers each were required, resulting in a commitment of 200 directory numbers. One shelf had the connectors wired for tip-party ringing, and the other shelf had the connectors wired for ring-party ringing. The SxS connector wiper had four contacts: the standard tip, ring, sleeve, plus a fourth "A-lead" for ringing selection. On the connector bank multiple wiring block, the A-terminal corresponding to each directory number was strapped to one of five terminals: (1) resistance ground interrupted with a "one-long" cadence to provide negative superimposed battery; (2) resistance ground interrupted with a "two-short" cadence to provide negative superimposed battery; (3) resistance ground interrupted with a "three-short" cadence to provide negative superimposed battery; (4) solid ground interrupted with a "one-long" cadence to provide positive superimposed battery; and (5) solid ground interrupted with a "two-short" cadence to provide positive superimposed battery. While the above scheme was the most common for implementation of 8-party and 10-party lines in a WECo SxS office, it was not the only method. The WECo 35-E-97 (actually modified Automatic Electric Company apparatus) SxS CO used a connector per SD-30909-01 which accepted and decoded an *additional* digit to select one of ten possible ringing codes. These ten codes corresponded to the same ten possibilities outlined above. So, now you know how the [late, great] Bell System did eight and ten-party semi-selective ringing. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Subject: Lorain Products Co. & More on Telephone Power Plants Date: 31 Mar 91 00:37:11 EST (Sun) From: Larry Lippman In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > > By the way, there is another Ohio name to add to the saga. C. P. > > Stocker designed the first magnetic 60-20 hz converter, called it the > > Sub-Cycle, and founded Lorain Products Inc. just west of Cleveland. > > They also made no end of telco power equipment. > Lorain Electric is, of course, still in business, providing many a > Sub-Cycle to this very day. Lorain Products has unquestionably been the largest outside supplier of power plants to WECo and the Bell System. It is interesting to note that while WECo designed and manufactured many power plants, in many instances they simply chose to use a Lorain product - which says a great deal about the engineering and manufacturing quality of Lorain Products. One thing I could never figure out was what motivated WECo to design and manufacture a power plant internally as opposed to obtaining one from Lorain Products under a KS-spec. No one I knew at WECo had the answer either, and the best we could figure was that with every new power plant requirement, someone in upper management at WECo would flip a coin having two sides: WECo on one, and Lorain on the other! :-) > Voltages of 24, 48 or 52 Volts at 2,000 or > 5,000 or even 10,000 Amps weren't (and still aren't unusual to provide > talk battery for a whole telephone exchange. They consist simply of > an AC-powered set of rectifiers charging ("floating") a large string > of lead-acid batteries, just like the one in your car, to power the > phones and for that matter the switching and transmission equipment as > well. What's fun is to happen to be near the cells when the AC fails. > The current draw is such you can see the plates in the glass cell > tanks bend and flake under the stress. One can also *hear* the plates in the cells creak, along with hearing an immediate evolution of hydrogen gas bubbles which are thus displaced when the plates are stressed. > It consisted of *forty-two* 6 Volt automobile batteries > connected in series, floated across a rectifier. THAT not only could > shock you; it could do a nice burn at the same time. Needless to say, > one works *very* carefully in such plant! While I did not see it happen, I once saw the aftermath of a 500 MCM 130-volt power feeder cable which shorted to a cable rack when its aged rubber insulation disintegrated during cable "mining" work. The resultant arc burned through a 1/4" by 1-1/2" piece of steel like a knife through butter. The craftsperson doing the work suffered only minor injuries - not from the arc or spewed molten metal, but from falling off a ladder in surprise! :-) A truly scary experience is to move a piece of old RH or RHW rubber-insulated power feeder cable, watch both the outer insulation and the rubber flake into dust, and see exposed conductor within a fraction of an inch of grounded metal! I could never understand why WECo continued to use potentially unstable rubber-insulated power cable for almost forty years after far superior plastic insulation was available following World War II. A cardinal rule in working around batteries is to always use tools that are wrapped with insulating tape - in order to prevent accidental short circuits. I must confess that I did not always follow this rule, and that I have suffered the consequences - which fortunately were minor. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 13:30:55 -0800 From: Peter Marshall Subject: The Culture of Technology From Langdon Winner, "A Postmodern World's Fair," TECHNOLOGY REVIEW, Feb./Mar., 1991 An interesting counterpoint to the George Gilder article posted here recently, this column is by a member of the Dept. of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Insititute: ------------- As I begin making plans to attend the World's Fair in Seville, Spain, in 1992, I'm also girding for the ideological onslaught these events always bring ... the underlying message is always the same: celebration of limitless progress through technological change. The Spanish fair seems ready to echo this weary theme with uncritical devotion ... but shouldn't the experience of the past two centuries lead us to reexamine the contexts and consequences of "progress"? I've tried to imagine what an alternative World's Fair might offer. How about "Humanity in a Postmodern World" as a colorful, overarching theme? Here are a few of the fair's possible attractions: The Pavilion for the Social Construction of Science ... the social dynamics of science in intricate detail ... places where knowledge products, sometimes mistakenly called discoveries, are crafted as within a complex, mulit-centered social process. The pavilion would ask spectators to ponder the question, Science in whose interest? ... Palace to the Ironies of Progress. As they enter the great hall, spectators would compare predictions of past World's Fairs to today's realities. The palace would also contrast the conventional signs of technological and ecomeconomic advance ... with the uncounted costs of these developments ... Theater of Futures Foreclosed. A series of entertainments would show how decisions we make today close off paths that future generations might take. In short, a Postmodern World's Fair would playfully debunk old myths while encouraging people to try some new ideas on for size. It is unlikely, of course, that such an event could be financed. By removing the need for people to think critically or to demand a share in making decisions, old-fashioned rituals of progress serve the reigning power structure. Thus World's Fairs will go on projecting glossy utopias said to be just around the corner and assuring us that the future is in good hands. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 11:35:28 EST From: John R Hall Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Well, I agree in general that "inside wire maintenance" plans are not worth much especially for someone who is minimally handy with tools. However, I lived in a high rise for several years, and I did choose the inside wire maintenance plan, and I'm glad I did. When I got my initial service, I asked from what point in the loop I would be responsible for repairs. The best I can tell, the answer was a telephone panel located in a stairwell a couple of floors down (I was on 17), but I was never quite sure of this. The wire went internally through the walls and floors from that point where it popped up in the kitchen jack. Inside were many pairs of wires. We also had an entry door system which operated off a special code on a lobby telephone that rang on our regular phone line. I was not convinced that if something went wrong I would be able to fix it, so I opted for Illinois Bell's inside wire maintenance plan. Well, two years later my phone went dead - no dial tone. I called repair, and the repair person had to check in a couple of places in the building where I didn't have access, and he was in my apartment for about six hours. He got it working, and his diagnosis was one corroded jack (probably due to moisture from an adjoining cooling duct) and a "wiring error" (curious, though because it worked OK before). It was very confusing because I couldn't follow the wiring easily from jack to jack, and the cable in the boxes was a rat's nest. So I was glad I paid the wire maintenance surcharge. In my current place, the wiring runs clearly along a conduit straight down to the basement, and I would have no problem in diagnosing a problem with it (my tip and ring ARE reversed, but I don't have access do the basement - guess they want to protect that old coal bin which is still full of coal even though the antique boiler was converted to gas who-knows-how-long ago). John ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed Date: 30 Mar 91 17:48:49 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , gsipe@pyrite.nj.pyramid.com (George Sipe) writes: > (This may have been discussed before but...) > I'm interested in Caller ID for my home, but would want an RS-232 > interface to it. A really stupid (and cheap) interface would be great > -- something that has no memory and simply sends the information out > the serial port (or into the bit bucket if nothing is connected or > paying it attention). Try ClassMate from MHE Systems. It is available from Bell Atlantic Business Supplies (they have an 800 number). For about $50 they give you a box the size of a cigarrette pack. It has a modular jack on one end, and a DB-25 on the other. You connect the modular jack to your phone line, and the other end to an RS-232 DTE device. The box is powered from the Carrier-Detect and Transmit Data leads of your RS-232 device, and it presents the Caller-ID information to you over its Received Data lead. (It looks like a simplex modem, receive-only.) Data output is fixed at 1200 bps, seven data bits, with the parity bit forced to zero. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #257 ******************************  ISSUE 258 WAS DELAYED IN TRANSMISSION AND ARRIVED FOLLOWING 259 BELOW.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24149; 31 Mar 91 18:17 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 17:43 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27268; Sun, 31 Mar 91 03:55:11 CST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:02:43 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #259 Message-Id: <9103311602.ab07352@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:02:22 CST Volume 11 : Issue 259 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson A Response to Len Rose Story in the Washington Post [Jim Thomas, CuD] Internet <-> Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions [Phil Trubey via Nigel Allen] Conference on Inter-Hospital / Physician Computer Consultation [D Parsons] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 00:38 CST From: TK0JUT1@mvs.cso.niu.edu Subject: A Response to Len Rose Story in the Wasington Post Although Len Rose accepted a Federal plea bargain which resolved Federal charges against him in Illinois and Maryland, and state charges in Illinois, he will not be sentenced until May. Therefore, many of the details of the plea or of his situation cannot yet be made public. Len pleaded guilty to two counts of violating Title 18 s. 1343: 18 USC 1343: Sec. 1343. Fraud by wire, radio, or television Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined not more than $1000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. In our view, Len's case was, is, and continues to be, a political case, one in which prosecutors have done their best to create an irresponsible, inaccurate, and self-serving imagery to justify their actions in last year's abuses in their various investigations. Len's guilty plea was the result of pressures of family, future, and the burden of trying to get from under what seemed to be the unbearable pressure of prosecutors' use of law to back him into corners in which his options seemed limited. The emotional strain and disruption of family life became too much to bear. Len's plea was his attempt to make the best of a situation that seemed to have no satisfactory end. He saw it as a way to obtain the return of much of his equipment and to close this phase of his life and move on. Many of us feel that Len's prosecution and the attempt to make him out to be a dangerous hacker who posed a threat to the country's computer security was (and remains) reprehensible. The government wanted Len's case to be about something it wasn't. To the end, they kept fomenting the notion that the case involved computer security -- despite the fact that the indictment, the statute under which he was charged, or the evidence DID NOT RELATE TO security. The case was about possession of proprietary software, pure and simple. The 23 March article in the {Washington Post} typifies how creative manipulation of meanings by law enforcement agents becomes translated into media accounts that perpetuate the the type of witch hunting for which some prosecutors have become known. The front page story published on March 23 is so outrageously distorted that it cannot pass without comment. It illustrates how prosecutors' images are translated into media narratives that portray an image of hackers in general and Len in particular as a public threat. The story is so ludicrously inaccurate that it cannot pass without comment. Mark Potts, the author of the story, seems to convict Len of charges of which even the prosecutors did not accuse him in the new indictment. According to the opening paragraph of the story, Len pleaded guilty to conspiring to steal computer account passwords. This is false. Len's case was about possessing and possessing transporting unlicensed software, *NOT* hacking! Yet, Potts claims that Rose inserted a Trojan horse in AT&S software that would allow other "hackers" to break into systems. Potts defers to prosecutors for the source of his information, but it is curious that he did not bother either to read the indictments or to verify the nature of the plea. For a major story on the front page, this seems a callous disregard of journalistic responsibility. In the original indictment, Len was accused of possessing login.c, a program that allows capturing passwords of persons who log onto a computer. The program is described as exceptionally primitive by computer experts, and it requires the user to possess root access, and if one has root privileges, there is little point in hacking into the system to begin with. Login.c, according to some computer programmers, can be used by systems administrators as a security device to help identify passwords used in attempts to hack into a system, and at least one programmer indicated he used it to test security on various systems. But, there was no claim Len used this improperly, it was not an issue in the plea, and we wonder where Mark Potts obtained his prosecutorial power that allows him to find Len guilty of an offense for which he was not charged nor was at issue. Mark Potts also links Len directly to the Legion of Doom and a variety of hacking activity. Although a disclaimer appeared in a subsequent issue of WP (a few lines on page A3), the damage was done. As have prosecutors, Potts emphasizes the LoD connection without facts, and the story borders on fiction. Potts also claims that Len was "swept up" in Operation Sun Devil, which he describes as resulting "in the arrest and prosecution of several hackers and led to the confiscation of dozens of computers, thousands of computer disks and related items." This is simply false. At least one prosecutor involved with Sun Devil has maintained that pre-Sun Devil busts were not related. Whether that claim is accurate or not, Len was not a part of Sun Devil. Agents raided his house when investigating the infamous E911 files connected to the Phrack/Craig Neidorf case last January (1990). Although Len had no connection with those files, the possession of unlicensed AT&T source code did not please investigators, so they pursued this new line of attack. Further, whatever happens in the future, to our knowledge *no* indictments have occured as the result of Sun Devil, and in at least one raid (Ripco BBS), files and equipment were seized as the result of an informant's involvement that we have questioned in a previous issue of CuD ( #3.02). Yet, Potts credits Sun Devil as a major success. Potts also equates Rose's activities with those of Robert Morris, and in so-doing, grossly distorts the nature of the accusations against Len. Equating the actions to which Len pleaded guilty to Morris grossly distorts both the nature and magnitude of the offense. By first claiming that Len modified a program, and then linking it to Morris's infectious worm, it appears that Len was a threat to computer security. This kind of hyperbole, based on inaccurate and irresponsible reporting, inflames the public, contributes to the continued inability to distinguish between serious computer crime and far less serious acts, and would appear to erroneously justify AT&T's position as the protector of the nets when, in fact, their actions are far more abusive to the public trust. After focusing for the entire article on computer security, Potts seems to appear "responsible" by citing the views of computer experts on computer security and law. But, because these seem irrelevant to the reality of Len's case, it is a classic example of the pointed non sequitor. Finally, despite continuous press releases, media announcements, and other notices by EFF, Potts concludes by claiming that EFF was established as "a defense fund for computer hackers." Where has Potts been? EFF, as even a rookie reporter covering computer issues should know, was established to address the challenges to existing law by rapidly changing computer technology. Although EFF provided some indirect support to Len's attorneys in the form of legal research, the EFF DID NOT FUND ANY OF LEN'S defense. Len's defense was funded privately by a concerned citizen intensely interested in the issues involved. The EFF does not support computer intrusion, and has made this clear from its inception. And a final point, trivial in context, Potts credits Mitch Kapor as the sole author of Lotus 1-2-3, failing to mention that Jon Sachs was the co-author. The {Washington Post} issued a retraction of the LoD connection a few days later. But, it failed to retract the false claims of Len's plea. In our view, even the partial LoD retraction destroys the basis, and the credibility, of the story. In our judgement, the Post should publicly apologize and retract the story. It should also send Potts back to school for remedial courses in journalism and ethics. Some observers feel that Len should have continued to fight the charges. To other observers, Len's plea is "proof" of his guilt. We caution both sides: Len did what he felt he had to do for his family and himself. In our view, the plea reflects a sad ending to a sad situation. Neither Len nor the prosecution "won." Len's potential punishment of a year and a day (which should conclude with ten months of actual time served) in prison and a subsequent two or three year period of supervised release (to be determined by the judge) do not reflect the the toll the case took on him in the past year. He lost everything he had previously worked for, and he is now, thanks to publications like the {Washington Post}, labelled as a dangerous computer security threat, which may hamper is ability to reconstruct his life on release from prison. We respect Len's decision to accept a plea bargain and urge all those who might disagree with that decision to ask themselves what they would do that would best serve the interests both of justice and of a wife and two small children. Sadly, the prosecutors and AT&T should have also asked this question from the beginning. Sometimes, it seems, the wrong people are on trial. [Moderator's Note: Jim Thomas, the author of this article, is the Moderator of Computer Underground Digest, a publication which began about a year ago as an offshoot from TELECOM Digest. For subscription information, write: tk0jut1@niu.bitnet. And my thanks to Jim for an excellent presentation here today. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 03:00 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Internet <-> Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue Phil Trubey (phil@shl.com) of SHL Systemhouse Inc. in Ottawa was kind enough to post the following instructions about exchanging e-mail between the Internet and Telecom Canada's Envoy 100 service. (Telecom Canada is an association of Canada's major telephone companies, the largest of which is Bell Canada.) * forwarding a message originally from phil@shl.com (Phil Trubey) Due to the fairly large number of requests for this info, I've decided to post the following info. I've used it a couple of times and it seems to work. To reach someone with an Envoy account, send your message with the following address in the "To:" field: /ID=envoy_id/S=last_name/G=first_name/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ @GEMINI.ARC.NASA.GOV For example, if you want to send a message to Peter Jones, whose Envoy ID is "p.jones", send to the following address: /ID=P.JONES/S=JONES/G=PETER/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ @GEMINI.ARC.NASA.GOV NOTE! 1) The address line must be all capital letters. 2) This is actually one long line. It is broken into two lines in these examples so it will fit within 80 characters. 3) The person receiving the message pays for BOTH the cost of sending the message and receiving the message. As you can see, Envoy addresses tend to be very long. You may want to use some of the advanced features of your mail program to save the addresses of people you frequently send to. For example, the Popmail mailer provided with NSTN has a "Group" menu that lets you save the addresses of one or more people, and mail to them by picking a selection off a menu. How can people mail to me from Envoy? To mail to you, they must do two things: 1) Send their Envoy message to the following address: [INTERNETMAIL@NASA]NASAMAIL/TELEMAIL/US 2) The first line of text in their message must be: To: your_user_id@your_address For example, if your user ID is "jsmith" and you address is "fox.nstn.ns.ca", the first line of the message would be: To: jsmith@fox.nstn.ns.ca Phil Trubey | Internet: phil@shl.com SHL Systemhouse Inc. | UUCP: ...!uunet!shl!phil 50 O'Connor St., Suite 501 | Phone: 613-236-6604 x667 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Fax: 613-236-2043 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 15:14:39 EST From: "Donald F. Parsons MD" Subject: Conference on Inter-hospital and Physician Computer Consultation Preliminary Announcement from The New York Academy of Sciences: A CONFERENCE ON EXTENDED CLINICAL CONSULTING BY HOSPITAL COMPUTER NETWORKS Spring, 1992. Cambridge, MA Moderator: Donald F. Parsons MD In recent years there has been a serious and continuing decline in the number of operating rural health facilities and in the availability of acute care in rural hospitals. This situation has contributed significantly to rural economic decline and the rising cost of health care in USA. Increasingly, patients have the extra expense of travelling to distant large medical centers for treatment. A partial reparation of the situation can be achieved by computer networking between consultants at large medical centers and rural hospitals and physicians. Xrays or other medical images necessary for the consultation can be transmitted over ordinary phone lines in a few minutes, using new data compression algorithms and error-correcting modems. A diagnosis, or patient-stabilization information can be phoned, faxed or e-mailed back to the rural center in a short time. Chronic treatments that require repeated consultant control (such as chemotherapy) can be handled in the same way. The patient is able to stay at the home site for such treatment. Phone/fax consultant-access systems using dedicated switchboards, are already working well in several states (e.g., Alabama, Tennessee and Georgia). These states are attempting enhancement by addition of digital text and image transmission capability. The identification of preferred technical approaches to such computerized networking is a main objective of this Conference. We will review medical computer networks already operating, both in USA and elsewhere, and discuss new possibilities. This Conference is the first comprehensive discussion of this question. It is badly needed since communication between experimenting groups has been at a minimum, and the need for such systems has received little attention by granting agencies and legislators. Only recently, has a BITNET discussion group (HSPNET-L@albnydh2) on this subject become available. Apart from the technology and design of such hospital computer networks (including the place of local bulletin boards, landlines, satellite and packet-radio links), we will address many related issues: medical staff attitudes and training in use of computers, types of patient data packages, confidentiality of data, legal issues, etc. We will also address a variety of applications: high-definition TV, teleradiology, telepathology, fetal monitoring, accreditation/ education programs, access to literature searches in rural areas, improvement of disease notification, exchange of state and federal medical advisories, and disaster and trauma management. Hopefully, this Conference will serve to focus and catalyze the use of modern medical informatics principles for the improvement of the quality of health-care delivery. For further information contact: The New York Academy of Sciences, 2 East 63rd Street, New York, NY 10021. (212) 838-0230. Fax: (212) 888-2894, or: The INTER-HOSPITAL & PHYSICIAN CONSULTATION NETWORKS DISCUSSION GROUP (HSPNET-L@ALBNYDH2.BITNET). Owner and Moderator: Donald F. Parsons MD, PhD, DSc. Wadsworth Center, Room C200, New York State Department of Health, Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12201-0509. Tel: (518)474-7047; Fax: (518)474-8590. E-mail to moderator: BITNET dfp10@albnydh2; Internet dfp10@uacsc2.albany.edu; UseNet dfp10@leah.albany.edu; Compuserve 71777,212 Address for Discussion Contributions, Subscription and Listserv Fileserver: HSPNET-L@ALBNYDH2.BITNET or mail to moderator. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #259 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03680; 1 Apr 91 3:07 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:38 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25181; Sun, 31 Mar 91 03:17:21 CST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 15:08:33 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #258 Message-Id: <9103311508.ab29758@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 15:07:45 CST Volume 11 : Issue 258 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Roger Fajman] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Dave Levenson] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Jeff Sicherman] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [David Farber] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Dave Levenson] Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security [Jonathan White] Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) [Jonathan White] Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land [John Higdon] Re: Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set [Dave Levenson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger Fajman Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 21:15:20 EST Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws > While pricing for all three tiers is NOW the same as the basic package > was before, IF they break out the pricing and you then need to > subscribe to each tier separately, you can bet that that will lead to > the scambling of the channels in tiers two and three. Once that is > done, you are then forced to use a cable company converter box for > each separate TV to descramble tiers two and three. That sounds logical, but does not appear to be what is happening. For the month of March, subscribers to the first two tiers have to use a converter box, but not subscribers to the highest tier. As of April 1, they are renumbering the channels and converter boxes will not be required for those not subscribing to the premium channels (HBO, etc.). The strange thing is that there is no obvious relationship between the new channel numbers and the tiers. Changing tiers requires a visit from the cable company, which suggests that they are doing something in their boxes on the poles. ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 31 Mar 91 02:25:02 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , zellich@stl-07sima.army.mil (Rich Zellich) writes: > If I had a cable company that insisted on making me pay for each TV > connected, I'd just let them put in their one jack and converter box, > and then just cheat and after-wire everything the same way, anyway. Around here EVERYTHING is scrambled. Cheat all you want, but they have BIG $ class clout and have it all set up that you WILL be prosecuted for theft of service (just like any old phone phreak) if caught. What we all really need to do is find which politicians now have Florida condos financed by out of state banks under terms the politician could hardly refuse, and that were not available to him before cable came to town. If enough citizens fought hard enough, they would not be able to get their license renewed without more reasonable terms. ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 31 Mar 91 15:26:56 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel Guilderson) writes: > The ideal solution is to have everyone pay based on the number of > hours they "consume" and the relative cost to the supplier (home > shopping network is much cheaper than HBO for the cable company to > provide). I agree. This is why I like the concept of pay-per-view cable. The local cable company here is offering one or two pay-per-view channels. These are usually filled with boxing, and other sports events I don't care to watch. I much prefer to have them offered on that basis, where I don't pay for them unless I want to watch them. Different events carry different prices, but the idea is exactly what Danial seems to want. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 31 Mar 91 02:10:50 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , Robert J Woodhead writes: > I do have some qualms about the court decision, however. The phone > company does spend money to create the entries in the white pages, and > it seems to me that rival directory companies are getting a free ride This really misses the basic idea that the phone company ought NOT own YOUR number. Now with alternate phone companies being able to provide you dialtone this is more significant. They are paid well to manage the dwindling phone number resourse. I am in no way suggesting they should be paid any less than they are now for providing local white pages. I get really POd when I have to battle to get ALL the Metro Boston books I am entitled to, and when 411 is so badly configured that you MUST tell them what phone book (Central, North, South, West) to look in or they won't even look for you. 411 was bearable because it was free, but now they 'traded' charging for 411 for providing 911. AOS companies currently deserve every foul name they are called. But I bet an alternate 411 service here in MA that found what you were looking for without your knowing which book to use would be a big hit, and I bet they could charge less and make money. But even without an alternate 411, consider the trees saved, and $s saved by optionally providing white pages on CDROM. Each disc labeled and boxed is well under $2 to make. The 'free' Boston four white books pile can't be that cheap. I would instantly opt for a disc rather than paper, and would even consider $10 'ok' until their volume got high enough that their mastering costs became irrelevant. What does NYNEX want for that CD? Try $10,000 per year, or MORE if networked beyond 1 PC! Phone numbers are a crude temporary necessity they have imposed on us. Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone be voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is being refered to. In the meantime, the post office shouldn't 'own' my street address, and the phone company shouldn't 'own' my electronic (phone) one. [Moderator's Note: The post office does not own your street address. The only organization which possibly 'owns' your street address is your municipal government, which if they operate like ours, has at one time or another passed an ordinance naming the streets and detirmining the measurements used to provide each parcel of land with one or more uniquely identifying numbers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 00:27:07 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article sp@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Steve Pershing) writes: >konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: >> I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I >> was wondering what is still available today. Specifically, I'd like: > Zoom Telephonics in the Boston, Ma. area are still in business. They > made probably the best "Demon Dialer". My Graybar Telecommunications catalog list them as catalog numbers #176T (176 number capacity) and #93T (93 numbers) on page 1-51. Includes a number of other capabilities I won't copy here. (Email if necessary). It's 1A2, key-system, touch-tone compatible. I think the prices were about $80 and $110 when I last checked. ------------------------------ From: David Farber Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 31 Mar 91 01:47:12 GMT Reply-To: David Farber Organization: University of Pennsylvania Unless I got a dud, the new AT&T Digital Answering set is an unreliable machine which fails to answer at unpredictable times. Its quality is fair. I would recommend some other, quieter unit. ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 31 Mar 91 15:37:30 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , ronnie@sos.com (Ron Schnell) writes: > I was recently in an AT&T Phone Center and saw a new answering machine > that they have brought out. It was a completely digital answering > machine, and shaped in a '50s art-deco style (more vertical than > horizontal), with a LED display on the front. The person who worked > there knew nothing about it, and even a friend who works for Ma Bell > didn't know much about it. It costs about $129, and would really > solve the sleep disturbances caused by my current answering machines > clunky sounds. I can tell you a little about the new AT&T solit-state answering machine: It uses no magnetic tape. Both the greeting and the messages are digitized and stored in semiconductor memory. When you are listening to your messages, you may save or erase individual messages, leaving others. You may listen in any order. It remembers new and old messages, more like AUDIX or other voicemail systems. I'm not sure how much storage it has, but it's far less than cassette-based machines. I think I remember someone telling me that it can take less than ten minutes of messages, if there are no "old" messages saved. There is a battery that maintains the memory in the event of a power outage, but its life is only a few hours. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: jonathan white Subject: Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security Date: 31 Mar 91 16:29:51 GMT Organization: New York University wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > MCI offers account information via their 800 number also ... > [Moderator's Note: Oh really? Would you please post the number we I called 1-800-444-3333 and although I got a real live customer service rep when I said that I had called for automated account information I was told that it was normaly available and that the system was down. [Moderator's Note: I just now tried the above number, and not only does the automated system discuss 'your' existing MCI account and balance, it also allows you to convert 'your' line to MCI One Plus service if desired. So, I converted several of you to MCI as your primary carrier while I was there. :) ha ha! PAT] ------------------------------ From: jonathan white Subject: Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) Date: 31 Mar 91 16:38:43 GMT Organization: New York University wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > Below is a list of carriers that offer no surcharged calling card > calls: > ITT/Metromedia is now going under Metromedia Communications(or > something like that ... dropped the ITT part). I think their 950-0488 > rates are higher than 1+ ... also their 950-1011(?) rate is different. According to Metromedia customer service rep "April" rates on my residential account are, for interstate calls: 1 + calling card day $0.17 - $0.26 $0.26 - $0.29 evening $0.11 - $0.21 $0.16 - $0.19 nite $0.09 - $0.16 $0.13 - $0.17 This is per minute rates. You have to figure out at what point it is cheaper to use a calling card with a surcharge. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 11:23 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land Ron Schnell writes: > Recently GTE converted our C.O. to a "much more advanced and improved > digital switch", according to a letter sent to all customers (I assume > it was 5ESS or similar). However, since this "improvement", I have > noticed several degradations. The switch you describe is none other than an Automatic Electric GTD-5, probably the worst affliction to ever plague the telecom industry. It is (by modern standards) featureless, had been virtually abondoned by the manufacturer (for good reason), and has the worst feature implementation of any digital switch on the planet. For some reason, GTE droids always refer to that switch as "advanced". The last time I quite properly badmouthed the GTD-5, I got some flack from GTE types about how it was really a wonderful switch with all kinds of capabilities. All of that is total rubbish; the switch IS garbage. It has software and hardware deficiencies that render it only suitable for GTE CO service (since GTE couldn't care less about its level of service in the first place). It does not have, nor will it ever have ISDN, CLASS, or any other advanced features. The three-way calling problem you describe simply indicates that GTE did not think you were worth ordering the advanced conference bridge and that you would put up with the standard pathetic digital three-way. > What I would really like is some advice on the best way to take these > complaints to GTE. Especially since they are highly technical > compared to what most business office reps could understand. Sorry, you are out of luck. First off, GTE will cancel your first three trouble reports as "resolved" to make its report to the PUC look good. Second, since GTE could not care less about customer satisfaction, you will be told, in essence, to take a hike. > 1. Three-way calling - When I flash and dial the third party, I > can't flash back right away. Inherent in the switch; nothing can be done. > 2. Three-way calling - THIS IS THE WORST PART OF THE WHOLE THING - > During three-way calls, the line suddenly becomes one-way. This is the digital conferencing. It COULD be solved, but would require the installation of a hardware/software pack. Remember, you are dealing with GTE. > 3. Flashing in general - It seems like flashing the switchook is > much less dependable since the change. Again, inherent in the switch. > 4. Infinite Dialtone - Sometimes I get a dialtone that won't go > away. This is a hardware malfunction. It can be fixed, but good luck trying to get GTE to do anything about it. > I dread trying to bring these things to GTE's attention. You should. My opinions on Pac*Bell notwithstanding, you stand a much greater chance of having it all work if you moved into PB territory. Pac*Bell may have thin feature offerings, but what it has seems to work perfectly. From the GTE Definitions Handbook: reorder -- What you typically get after dialing most numbers from a GTE telephone. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set Date: 31 Mar 91 15:49:33 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , davidb@pacer.uucp (David Barts) writes: > Recently, someone posted that a 500 D set was just like a 500 set, > except it was designed for use on a party line with divided ringing. I > own two Western Electric 2500 DM sets that were formerly used on a > LARGE centrex system (two NNX prefixes!). What is the difference > between a 2500 DM and a "normal" 2500 set? The 500 D was a Dial set. (The 500 C was the non-dial version with the large round plastic cover where the dial was.) Many older telephone sets carry the designation 500C/D meaning that they were field-convertible between dial and non-dial use. The 2500 is the 500 with touch-tone dialing, and was sometimes identified as 2500 D. (There was no 2500 C, however, since the 500 C would work just as well!) Eventually, the D was dropped. The M was added when modular hardware was installed. A 2500 DM means a dial set with touch-tone, and modular handset and mounting cords. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #258 ******************************  ISSUE 258 AND 259 REVERSED IN TRANSMISSION. 259 IS FILED BEFORE 258, AND 260 COMES NEXT IN THIS FILE.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04761; 1 Apr 91 3:47 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 20:25 EST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 19:25:42 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #260 BCC: Message-ID: <9103311925.ab23825@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 18:31:46 CST Volume 11 : Issue 260 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Mail and News Delivery Complaints [TELECOM Moderator] FORBES and BUSINESS WEEK on Local Competition [Peter Marshall] Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me [Marshall Barry] Testing For BUGS on Your Phone Line [Scott Marshall] Return to the Land of Selective Ringing [David Lesher] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:44:40 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Mail and News Delivery Complaints There have been numerous problems with mail and news delivery since Friday, beginning with issue 248. I am aware of all of them, including duplicate copies in the mail and some people not getting copies at all. Because the 'deliver' program here at eecs is apparently out of order, (at least not working where telecom is concerned) mail is being handled from a backup site -- a place where we had to re-write a bunch of addresses on the list, etc ... and still the bounced mail is rolling in at a fast pace. I am remailing the copies by hand when I can figure out what was wrong. The comp.dcom.telecom side of things was working okay ... but apparently some problem occurred with the maps over the weekend, and a few places in my nntpxmit could not get correctly resolved by the server. Then, issue 256 got out from here only partially edited due to another software flaw ... So -- live with it. What you see is what you are getting. Things will get back to normal whenever. There is no need to write me about duplicates or non-delivery problems until at least a few more issues have gone out ... if the problems continue at that point. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 09:22:01 -0800 From: Peter Marshall Subject: FORBES and BUSINESS WEEK on Local Competition "The Baby Bells Learn a Nasty New Word: Competition," BUSINESS WEEK, 3/25/91: Breaking up local phone monopolies -- via new technologies -- looks to be the "issue of the 1990s...." After sweeping the long-distance business in the 1980s, competition is headed for local phone service. The regional monopolies of local phone companies are beginning to be undermined by such technologies as microwaves, fiber optics, and wireless phone systems. Long-distance carriers and cable-TV companies are trying to grab some of the market for local communications. And government officials are questioning the need to maintain the century-old system of regulated local phone monopolies. All that makes competition in local phone service "the biggest telecommunications issue of the 1990s." But there's a hitch: Local phone companies complain that they're not yet free to compete. There's little danger of the phone monopolies crumbling overnight. Still, veterans of the 1984 Bell System breakup know how quickly -- and how drastically -- things can change. Some Baby Bell executives are seizing on the nascent competition to justify deregulation. The challengers who claim they will make all this happen are not a formidable lot -- yet. For example, the combined revenue of the alternate-access companies -- fiber-optic and microwave -- will be $150 million this year, says Yankee Group Inc. All but one of the upstarts are losing money. But they have on their side the awesome power of an idea whose time has come: competition. Already, regulators are beginning to hand down rulings that challenge the monopoly system. In 1988, for example, the Federal Communications Commission issued a precedent-setting ruling that softens the previously rigid geographic boundaries of local phone companies. It allowed Southwetern Bell to provide phone service to an Atlantic Richfield Co. research center in an area served by a GTE Corp. phone company. Similar border crossings are probably happening quietly all over the country. To date, the states have outdone the FCC in promoting competition -- particularly New York. By the end of the decade, small businesses and even residential customers may have some choice in local phone services, too. That is, if new wireless phones, called personal communications networks (PCNs), live up to their promise. Backers say that PCNs could actuallly form a second phone system paralleling the wired system. Not surprisingly, the Baby Bell holding companies are eager to seize control of PCNs. In a move that could undermine the local wired system, some are seeking to operate PCNs themselves, rather than through their regulated telephone companies. A more immediate threat to the phone monopolies could come from the cable-TV industry. If phone companies gain admittance to the cable-TV business -- as they have been lobbying for permission to do -- several cable-TV companies are poised to counterattack. Even as competition appears, however, business customers complain that the local phone companies still behave like monopoly public utilities. According to some critics, the Baby Bells largely ignored the local phone business. In the seven years since the Bell breakup, they have pumped millions into other businesses. In 1989, the Baby Bells actually generated slightly more cash flow from depreciation than they spent on new investments. In effect, they treated their core businesses as cash cows. Meanwhile, the new competitors continued to attack with derring-do. Traditional phone companies just don't work that way. The difference in corporate culture is immense. However quickly competition comes, the direction is certain. The walls, indeed, are tumbling down. "Divestiture Revisited," FORBES, 3/18/91: Since the breakup of the Bell System seven years ago, the regional telephone utilites have been in clover. Their comfortable business of colelcting monthly rent for telephone lines and taking a large commission for handling connections for long-distance companies has made them Wall street favorites. The stock prices of the seven regional Baby Bells have on average tripled, to a level of twice book value. All this good fortune is built on an assumption that is no longer valid: that local telephone service is and will remain a monopoly. An onslaught of new technologies, hungry entrepreneurs and pro-competition regulators are all teaming up ... the fuse is lit. The money at stake is an annual revenue stream of about $14 billion. This revenue excludes the fixed-rate "access charge". Bypassing the local telephone company in most American cities to avoid padded monopoly charges is now a fast-growing business of $100 million a year. Bypassers are starting to do to the local phone companies what MCI did to AT&T's long-distance business in the 1970s. But the competitive threat doesn't stop there. Competitive forces are only starting to be felt now in local service. If nothing else happens, the competitors could quite possibly siphon off an estimated $5 billion in revenues from the telephone companies by the end of this decade. More important, the mere threat of bypass, microwave and radio links will be enough to force realignments in rates. Is there economic justifiaction for the $14 billion in fees paid to local monopolies? Some, but not much ... where did the 45% rate- sharing formula come from? Out of the air. Competition is coming to the local telephone monopoly, bringing with it all kinds of new services for the Information Age. The smartest thing that politicians and regulators can do is get out of the way. ------------------------------ From: Marshall Barry Subject: Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me Reply-To: mbarry@isis.UUCP (Marshall Barry) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 21:45:38 GMT John Higdon wrote about Sprint's billing... Figured I'd add one more wonderful note about the same sort of thing. When I moved from Phoenix to Los Angeles, I disconnected my number there, and terminated (I thought) my Sprint 1+ access. Wrong. TWO YEARS later, I suddenly received a bill for over $400.00 for long distance for six month's worth of calls. Seems Sprint had been chosen for the "default" 1+ access account, and just reconnected it with my current one in another city, two years later. Another wonderful case where they PROMISED to fix it, and it took three months for them to straighten out the original charges ... in the meantime adding new charges to MY account. Neither letters nor phone calls seemed to make any difference, until I finally had my attorney write them a letter, threatening legal action, a show cause as to why they should be allowed to provide service, and a class-action suit. Matter was fixed in five days. In article John Higdon further writes: > ... headaches and go elsewhere for long distance service. At this > point, Sprint would have to be nearly free for me to consider using > it further. For the record, I have had a Sprint account since it > was Southern Pacific Communications offering the excess capacity of > the railroad communications. Considering the resouces, technology, > and talent that operation has had available to it, it certainly has > become a monumental disappointment. Sorry for really chopping your message, but you brought up a couple of interesting points. First, I had been a Sprint User for QUITE some time myself - but, after a $31K (yes THOUSAND) Sprint Bill (someone hacked my "access code" and handed it out to places I never heard of) - and the fact that it became $31K due to the fact it took Sprint eleven weeks (almost three months) from the time I reported the first "unauthorized accesses" to the time they deleted the code, I was - to say the least - disappointed. When Sprint told me that I would have to PAY that bill, in full, because I was a "company" and it was "probably some disgruntled employee who gave it out to everyone" - I was more than disappointed - I was OUTRAGED! They did everything down to sending collection agents to MY HOME to get this "money that was due them". After several MONTHS of complaints - To everyone from the PUC to the FCC, I finally got to someone in Sprint's office who said, simply, "Do you know where xxxx is?" "No." "Do you know anyone in the xxxx County Jail?" "Where?" ... followed by "This has OBVIOUSLY gotten out of hand ... you reported the access when the total amount due was $640, how much of that is yours and how much is the `unknowns'?" I figured out that I owed about $370 of that bill (which was about our average monthly billing) - and I paid it. They then came after me for another $500 (which THEY figured I had to owe them - and we went round and round again). Finally - I got THAT straightened out, and connected to 1+ for Sprint - biggest mistake I ever made. I got billed three, four, five, and six times for the EXACT same call (time date number, etc. all Identical) and was told to pay it and submit documentation as to why I should be re-imbursed ... etc. Thanks, Sprint, but no thanks. BTW, got billed for SOME calls six or seven months after they were made and billed for two HOURS on a call I know was under two minutes. is also Data: (303) 657 0126 +&+ (303) 426 1942 3/12/2400 baud Snail Mail: P.O. Box 486, Louisville, CO 80027=0486 [Moderator's Note: It sounds like you have really been through the wringer with those people. Do they still have droids calling you on the phone from time to time offering big savings on your long distance bill, free calculators, and five dollar rebates if you change your one-plus over to them? I manage the phone system in our office, and we had a very sour, very bitter experience with Sprint over a check for several thousand dollars which they misapplied and could not locate. We finally had to sue them. I may write more details soon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DISC3C1@jetson.uh.edu Subject: Testing For BUGS on Your Phone Line Date: 31 Mar 91 05:28:00 CST Organization: University of Houston Who needs to buy one of these things? There are numbers you can call, that are supposed to show you if your line is been tapped. They call it a sweep. It is an alternating pitch supposedly; and is meant to stay high pitched if your line is being bugged and alternate if not. For example, call this sweep: 214-357-8686 Scott Marshall : Sterling Sysop of - : Aviation The Hornets' Nest : Sciences (713)868-4372 : 11625 Martindale Rd 24oo/96oo/14.4K : Houston, TX 77048 Baud Rates : USA [Moderator's Note: Where did you get your information from, Scott? Yes, you do connect with a (probably unsupervised) sweep tone when you dial the above number, however I called it from six different phone lines today and get the alternating high and low tones in each case. I find it hard to believe that *any* phone I used is 'bugged', let alone all six. And how would a location in Texas know anything about a bug on my line in Chicago in any event? Someone gave you bad information, I'm afraid. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Return to the Land of Selective Ringing Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 15:56:24 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers John asked about a noise while dialing those with party lines, and how the ANI worked. Larry is surely the man for the both questions, and I'll defer to him. But there was ANOTHER distinctive noise you could hear during ring cycle: bridge lifters. Here's the story, as it was explained to me: Party lines were intended for conservation of wire. The typical application was: CO-----------------------------------------Mr. Tip |-Ms. Ring where the distance between them was small. But when private lines became widely available, Bell had a problem. Most folks would opt for them, and only one party would be out there (Say Ms. Ring) by herself. She still WANTED party line service. A similar situation existed when Mr. Tip called the business office and raised Cain because Ms. Ring was ALWAYS on the phone to her commodities broker. Ma's options were: a) Force Ms. Ring to change to private line service. b) Give her a private line without charging extra. c) Leave her as the ONLY party on a given party line. d) Party her with someone NOT next door. Now Ma often tried tactic a), but the problem with it was the PSC and/or the FCC frowned on such coercion. The Beancounters LOATHED c) and b) cuz they wanted every penny. That left d). Now the reason you could NOT just do this: ___________________________Mr. Tip co/ \ \______________________Ms. Sleeve was a guy named Farad. Cable is capacitive. When Mr. Tip was dialing, he was breaking the loop current with the pulser in his dial. BUT, the stub going off to Sleeve's condo had a lot of capacitance in in, and it terminated in a good sized ringer cap, too. (Maybe several, if Ms. Sleeve had a set in each room.) That (total) capacitor distorted Mr. Tip's dial pulses, and confused his Strowger Switch. It could also, I suspect, shunt audio to ground during talking, but I have never bothered to do the needed math to prove or disprove that. [Of course, there is another solution: Touch-tone. As I recall TT was first proposed to eliminate the problem of dial pulse distortion on ultra-long rural loops.] So Ma called her elves at Murray Hill, and they invented a bridge lifter. It goes between the CO and the outgoing pair and lifts (disconnects) Mr. Tip when Ms. Sleeve is off-hook, and vice versa. I'm now speaking out of my hat, but I THINK it only affected things during dialing. Otherwise, how could the other party demand surrender of the pair for an emergency? In any case, you can HEAR the bridge lifter, in an office with ringing sidetone, (as opposed to those that give you the switch generated tone) as a "raspy" quality to the ring. I often notice this while calling a doctor's office. In closing, I was sure that you could get party line service here in Miami in 1989, but I now see no mention of it. [Moderator's Note: Do you think the ringing you heard on the call to the doctor's office was due to the doctor's line probably being bridged to a live answering service in some other exchange, etc? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #260 ******************************   Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 19:34:21 CST From: TELECOM Moderator To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #261 Message-ID: <9104011934.aa15314@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Apr 91 19:33:32 CST Volume 11 : Issue 261 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are [John Covert] Sprint Outage in CA Last Week [Steve Elias] ANI and ONI [Larry Lippman] Revertive Calling [Larry Lippman] Calling Party ID on Two-Party Lines [Dave Levenson] "Dial 900 Directory": Guide to Services [TELECOM Moderator] Interop 91 Conference Notice [TELECOM Moderator] User Interfaces (was Envoy 100 Gateway Instructions) [Ralph W. Hyre] Request for Etymology [Daniel DanehyOakes] Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft [David Cornutt] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 08:47:19 PST From: John R. Covert Subject: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are Dave Levenson wrote: > The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten > digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no > sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls intra-NPA. We call this "The New Jersey Plan", because New Jersey never had 1 + 7D within the area code. It was the Bellcore recommended plan, but it met with objections all over the country. All of the following places have, within the past few years, either gone to or announced 1 + 10D within the NPA: Dallas-Fort Worth, Northern Virginia, Maryland, Toronto, Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, San Antonio, Detroit, Arizona Philadelphia dropped the "1", but it is a relatively small area code, close enough to New Jersey to have been able to get away with the New Jersey plan. Arizona announced 7D, and had so many objections they changed to 1 + 10D. Here in Massachusetts, dropping 1+ has been mentioned, but it hasn't been mentioned loudly and definitely enough yet to attract attention. In 508, 7D couldn't happen until the SxS exchanges, of which there are still a large number, are all gone. The Washington, DC, area has the best plan: 7D is local within your own NPA (whether that be 202, 703, or 301); 10D is local to one of the other two NPAs; and 1 + 10D is toll, either within your own NPA or to one of the other NPAs. 1 + 10D is accepted for local calls to other NPAs, and the call gets routed and billed the same as if you had dialed just 10D. I wish that would become the nationwide plan. Regards, john ------------------------------ Subject: Sprint Outage in CA Last Week Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:48:39 PST From: Steve Elias thomas%mvac23.uucp@udel.edu (Thomas Lapp) wrote: > My question for those in the know: What was the cause of the fiber > break which caused the Sprint outage last week? Details please. If > it was along a RR right-of-way (and buried) how was it cut? Not by a > train wreck I assume? Right? Wrong! According to the local news here in the bay area, the fiber was cut by the train wreck. The video they showed made this easy to believe. The train wreck had ripped up the track badly, along with all sorts of other stuff that must have been under or along side the track. The newsfolk did make some comment indicating that those who had put the fiber down may not have gotten the appropriate permissions from the track owners, however. As an aside, there was a similar controversy (but no train wreck or fiber cut) in Framingham, MA about a year ago. eli ------------------------------ Subject: ANI and ONI Date: 31 Mar 91 20:42:05 EST (Sun) From: Larry Lippman In article kent@sunfs3.bos.camex.com (Kent Borg) writes: >> ANI was added around 1973, before that you >> dialed a toll call as 1+ ..., but the operator had to ask "Number, >> please?"; you KNEW she meant the number you were calling from! ANI from WECo was in service as of 1960 for SxS CO's. This was ANI-B, which used a 5 KHz or so identification tone. ANI-B was quickly replaced with ANI-C by 1963 or so. ANI-C and the later ANI-D became the standard methods of providing ANI in SxS CO's, and I would not be surprised if some is still in service in rural areas. ANI-C and ANI-D used short 340 volt DC pulses on the sleeve lead that were decoded using a neon lamp matrix. > I never knew. I always had to ask what she meant. I had assumed that > they knew where I was calling from (you mean I could have lied and > gotten away with it? -- never occured to me), yet I had just dialed > the number I wanted, so why would she ask that? Fraud by giving an incorrect number to the ONI operator was a problem, but not that serious. The first line of defense was that the called party (we know *that* number for certain!) would be contacted should the billing number not be in service, or should the call charges be contested by the party upon whose bill they appeared. Some ONI fraud was easy to spot - like giving a telephone number from a CO other than the one calling from! The ONI operator certainly knew what CO belonged to the trunk being answered. In some areas the ONI operator had a chart of valid thousands and hundreds groups for each CO served by the ONI position; this somewhat reduced the problem of being given non-existent numbers. There was a more sophisticated approach tried in some areas. The ONI position automatically used the keyed numbers to access a special test trunk back to the originating SxS CO, which used a special test distributor and connector to ascertain if the calling number that was furnished to the ONI operator was busy. If it did test busy, it was presumed that the number furnished to the ONI operator *could* be valid. It it did not test busy, then it was presumed that the number furnished to the ONI operator was phony. I never personally saw one of the above verification systems since comparatively few were installed due to their marginal value at reducing fraud. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Subject: Revertive Calling Date: 31 Mar 91 21:29:06 EST (Sun) From: Larry Lippman In article rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes: > > Using polarity-dependent superimposed > > ringing, four unique parties could be signaled. Eight-party lines > > used coded ringing, and could be dialed directly since there were SxS > > connectors arranged for automatic coded ringing selection. > I don't know what our old (Bell System) switch was before it was > replaced with a 1A some time in the late '70s, but it had ringback on > 491x. Different values of 'x' would give eight different coded rings > plus continuous ring. I miss this feature. Our current switch > doesn't even have a ringback number that I can find (I've tried all > the test prefixes, and located all kinds of tones, battery, > terminated-no-battery, and so on, but no ringback). I feel certain that your CO has a ringback number; it may well be "hidden" as a three or four digit number, rather than a seven-digit test line number, however. Ringing another party on the same party line is a unique case called "revertive calling". Such a call cannot be completed using the conventional SxS connector. It was accomplished using apparatus known as a reverting call selector. While there was more than one way to implement revertive calling in a SxS office, a typical method was to dial four digits such as NNYD, where NN is a two-digit access prefix common to the CO, Y is your party code number and D is the party code number of the destination station. After dialing the appropriate four-digit number above and hearing an acknowledgement tone, your handset was placed on hook. Your telephone then rang along with that of the destination party. When the ringing stopped it indicated that the other party had answered and you picked up your handset. To abandon an unanswered call required momentarily picking up your handset. Implementing revertive calling the *right* way was a little tricky from a circuit design standpoint, since your ringing code is *not* the same as that of the called party! How could your telephone ring to indicate that the called party was being rung with a different electrical and/or cadence code? This is why in a better reverting call implementation, two digits were dialed: your ringing code and that of the called party. What really happened is the the ringing cycle was split. During your silent interval the ringing condition for the other party was placed on the line; during their silent interval your ringing condition was placed on the line. If your ringing was electrically the same condition but with different cadence for the other party, you simply heard their cadence and the ringing cycle was not split. Less sophisticated reverting call selectors did not ring your telephone at all. You dialed an access code followed by the party code of the called party. You heard an acknowledgement tone and hung up. After you *think* the other party has had time to answer the telephone, you then picked up the line. If they were there, fine; if not enough time or they picked up and heard silence and then hung up -- tough. In some ESS CO's where party lines were almost non-existent, *no* reverting call trunks were installed at all. If you wanted to call another party on your party line, you were required to go through the operator. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Calling Party ID on Two Party Lines Date: 1 Apr 91 04:42:04 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA John Higdon asks how party identification works on two party lines. The party whose ringer is connected between Tip and ground, known as the 'tip party', has the hookswitch wired so that part of the ringer is connected between tip and ground without the normal DC blocking capacitor whenever the handset is off-hook. The other party, called the 'ring party', does not. After collecting enough digits to identify the called party, the originating register in a five-crossbar switch performs a tip-to-ground resistance check for about 100 msec. This is the 'click-plunk' you hear when originating from either party on such a line. If it finds resistance less than about 2000 Ohms, it identifies the caller as tip party. This is why, years after most of us could walk into almost any appliance store and buy a telephone set equipped with a modular jack and take it home and plug it in, subscribers on party lines are denied this right. The fine print in the phone book, and some mouldy old Bell System Practice, no doubt, requires that only non-modular telephone sets furnished by the telephone company may be used on two-party service with ANI. The telco must wire the correct selective ringing and party identification option when installing the set. Any why doesn't the unbalanced line condition result in hum during the call? Because the ringer's inductance hides the ground-loop-induced AC hum path! Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 2:17:03 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: "Dial 900 Directory": Guide to Services A little publication came to my attention today which I want to mention to you for whatever it is worth. Since subsctiptions are free, you might want to send in your name. The "Dial 900 Directory", which bills itself as 'your complete guide to 900 services' is published quarterly by Dave Edwards. The current 32-page issue lists several dozen 900 numbers, ranging from sports and business news through a variety of adult services. Party lines, jokes, confessions, sports, trivia contests, product giveaways, etc are all categories represented. Since the 900 industry is heavily into sex programing, the 900 Directory reflects this with several full page ads for adult services, but a full page ad for the Business News Network is also there, along with ads for lottery results and rock music promotions and a wake-up service. From 900-321-SINS to 900-999-KINK as it where, and a lot more. This is the first time I have seen such a large collection of 900 numbers in one publication, unless you count the ads in the {Weekly World News}. To order your copy and be on the mailing list for quarterly updates: 1-800-786-4-FUN (surprise! 800 number rather than 900!) Then enter code number 906363 when requested. If you prefer to order by mail, write: The 900 Directory ATTN: Dave Edwards Post Office Box 2270 Temecula, CA 92390 You would also contact Mr. Edwards if you have a 900 service you want to list in his directory. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 2:34:22 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Interop 91 Conference Notice The Interop '91 events will be held this year at the San Jose Convention Center, October 7-11. The three main components to this year's program include: In-Depth Tutorials, October 7-8 Executive Interop, October 7-8 Conference and Exhibition, October 9-11 The events will include some 45 coference sessions, and displays by 250 or more vendors. For more information, to register or receive a detailed conference program, call 1-800-INTEROP. From outside the USA: 1-415-941-3399. Interop, Inc. is located at: 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100 Mountain View, CA 94040-1219 FAX: 4154-949-1779 PAT ------------------------------ From: "Ralph W. Hyre" Subject: User Interfaces (was: Envoy 100 Gateway Instructions) Date: 1 Apr 91 16:15:05 GMT Reply-To: "Ralph W. Hyre" Organization: AT&T OSS Development, Cincinnati In article ndallen@contact.uucp (Nigel Allen) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 259, Message 2 of 3 > * forwarding a message originally from phil@shl.com (Phil Trubey) > To reach someone with an Envoy account, send your message with the > following address in the "To:" field: > /ID=envoy_id/S=last_name/G=first_name/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ > @{internet site [name deleted]} This is a pretty sad statement for X.400 implementations. Hasn't anyone built a reasonable user agent to these ISO beasts? The Internet user@hostname convention is pretty straighforward. Telecom Canada should follow Compuserve's example and build an Internet Gateway, rather than forcing the entire load on one US government facility that happens to translate RFC822 into X.400. As a user, I won't accept any system that forced me to remember the arcane X.400 syntax. Is there a delivery or user agent that works with the ISO directory stuff? (X.2500?) I want to be able to use my 'old' user interface {user@organization - which is all the X.400 address really captures anyway.} [Example: Bob.Allen@AT&T] ------------------------------ From: Dan'l DanehyOakes Subject: Request for Etymology Date: 1 Apr 91 17:43:20 GMT Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA I may have asked this before, but if so nobody answered (or I didn't receive the answer) ... What "slamming" is is pretty evident from context -- but why is it called that? D ------------------------------ From: David Cornutt Subject: Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft Organization: NASA/MSFC Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 17:59:49 GMT There's one hell of an argument going on in the Usenet rec.aviation group about the use of cellular phones from aircraft. Can anyone answer: (1) what effects this could have on the cellular phone net? (2) what, if any, FCC regulations might apply? David Cornutt, New Technology Inc., Huntsville, AL (205) 461-6457 (cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov; some insane route applies) "The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my employer, not necessarily mine, and probably not necessary." ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #261 ******************************   Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 22:35:57 CST From: TELECOM Moderator To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #262 Message-ID: <9104012235.aa22306@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Apr 91 22:35:17 CST Volume 11 : Issue 262 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jeff Wasilko] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Michael Ho] Re: New Hotel Ripoff [Bob Yazz] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Herman R Silbiger] Re: Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me [John Higdon] Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed [Al L Varney] Re: User's Evaluation of Handheld Cellular: Fujitsu / Motorola [J Gottlieb] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Damon Schaefer] Re: What Happened With Sprint's Outage [Jim Maurer] Re: Movie Excerpt / Ringing Phones [Carl Moore] Re: An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID [R. Kevin Oberman] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Wasilko Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 00:18:15 EST Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable In article Barton.Bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) writes: > for providing local white pages. I get really POd when I have to > battle to get ALL the Metro Boston books I am entitled to, and when > 411 is so badly configured that you MUST tell them what phone book > (Central, North, South, West) to look in or they won't even look for > you. 411 was bearable because it was free, but now they 'traded' > charging for 411 for providing 911. I had to call Boston DA today to track down a Boston area number. I knew the company was in the Boston area, but not in Boston. I told the operator this, she checked the Boston listings, and told me she couldn't find a listing. I asked her to check the surrounding areas, she said she had to know the name of the town. When I asked her to do a cross-directory check, she hung up on me! I called back, asked for the supervisor and told her what happened. She said that the operators can do a search of surrounding areas without any problem. She took some info about the call (the DA operator didn't giver a name, either) and said she would look into it. When I asked the supervisor about why the DA operator would have hung up on me (hinting that the operator didn't want to spend the time due to a time quota), she said there is no quota and suggested that it was an equipment problem. Can anyone tell me what it's really like behind a DA console? Surely there must be quotas/time limits per call. What kind of searching capability do the operators have? How is the informatio presented to the operator when there is more than one matching name? Thanks! RIT VAX/VMS Systems: | Jeff Wasilko | RIT Ultrix Systems: | BITNET: jjwcmp@ritvax +----------------------+ INET:jjwcmp@ultb.isc.rit.edu| INTERNET: jjwcmp@ritvax.rit.edu |____UUCP:jjwcmp@ultb.UUCP____| ------------------------------ From: ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 01:47:01 GMT In konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that phone book listings are not > creative works and that the factual contents are not protected by > copyright. Specifically, anyone else can reproduce the alphabetical > listing right from the phone book! If the sweeping generalities in the Post article are true, I have to disagree with the Supreme Court, because it left this big, vague "originality" problem in case law. But in this particular case, I'm actually chuckling quite loud. Here's a rural telco that basically didn't feel like giving its directory information out to anyone, and they got spanked -- but in the process, they apparently brought grief to other telcos (like US West) who have maintained copyrights on the White Pages but have been willing to license the subscriber lists. Now, anyone can rip 'em off for free. Everybody say 'thanks' to that li'l telco. (I bet the BOC's are gonna be as happy with that company as the press is with CNN for launching that silly prior restraint case.) Michael Ho, University of Nebraska Internet: ho@hoss.unl.edu | Face it. Harry was WAY too homely for Sally. Disclaimer: Views expressed within are purely personal and should not be applied to any university agency. ------------------------------ From: Bob Yazz Subject: Re: New Hotel Ripoff Date: 31 Mar 91 22:33:10 GMT On that Del Mar Hilton the phone bill overcharge -- This hotel is in my local calling area so I called them up and asked about it. I got the manager in charge of their phone system. She insisted that it was Pacific Bell that programmed their system and that Hilton charged their hotel guests a non-local rate Only because Pac Bell charged Hilton a non-local rate. I insisted her information was false. She offered to look at my bill, and I believe that if I had been the guest with the bill she'd have refunded the $4.86 for "guest relations" reasons and let it go, but she did promise to get with Pac Bell and make sure they were charging correctly. She also indicated exactly what the earlier poster indicated -- that a call to La Jolla (an abutting community to the south) was a local call from the Pac Bell payphone in the lobby but Not a local call from the Pac Bell programmed Hotel Telephone System. My Pacific Bell directory indicates that Del Mar to La Jolla is a zone 1 (as local as it gets) call. Anybody at Pac Bell or Hilton reading this? Payphone ripoff problems in California? Call Pacific Bell at 800/352-2201 Bob Yazz -- yazz@lccsd.sd.locus.com They take complaints M-F, 8-5 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 19:48:32 EST From: Herman R Silbiger Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article , kddlab!lkbreth.foretune. co.jp!trebor@uunet.uu.net (Robert J Woodhead) writes: > There are international VCR's that do what you want. The Akihabara in > Tokyo is lousy with them, as they are a big hit with tourists. These > VCRs can play PAL, SECAM and NTSC VHS tapes, and also have tuners that > can pick up all the formats. They have an internal converter and, I > THINK, can drive a PAL, SECAM or NTSC tv or monitor. The 47th Street Photo catalog shows several multi-standard VCRs, as well as multi-standard TV sets and camcorders, all at prices not much different from NTSC equipment. They also have multi-standard coffee makers. Herman Silbiger ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 18:22 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me Marshall Barry writes: > Another wonderful case where they PROMISED to fix it, and it > took three months for them to straighten out the original charges ... > in the meantime adding new charges to MY account. The person that spoke with me last month indicated that it takes months for Sprint to resolve billing problems. He told me that he would be following up monthly until charges for the old number stopped appearing. This is not impressive. What I am doing about it is simply turning off all usage of the account until it is fixed. Not one call will be routed over Sprint until two months have gone by with no new charges on them. I have never had this sort of problem with AT&T. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 20:20:05 CST From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed Organization: AT&T Network Systems Oops! Some corrections: In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Al "Oops" Varney) writes: > [In other articles, Fred R. Goldstein and Jim Rees write:] Fred> The 1ESS has relays in it, not to do the actual switching, Fred> but to switch ringing voltage and the like on to the loop. It makes a Fred> lot of noise, although nothing like a panel office! This is correct, in the sense that the "switches" are not "relays". Jim> The 1ESS (and the 1A, which uses a less antiquated processor) uses Jim> reed relays to do the actual switching. They're vacuum-sealed, so Jim> they're quieter than the old ones. I suspect that the 1 can do Caller Jim> ID too, though Im not sure. > The No. 1 ESS Switch indeed uses sealed relays for the switching But I meant to say "reed switch" here ^^^^^^ > fabric, but "reed relays" ??? Nope. The actual T/R path is through > magnetic-latching relays, surrounded with some metal and a coil. ^^^^^^ ...and here > Pulse the coil one way, the contacts close and REMEMBER to stay > closed. Pulse the other way, the contacts open and REMEMBER to stay > that way. No current is used to maintain either position. I E-mailed a better explanation to Jim, but in summary, the reason I disagreed about the term "reed relay" was because of the word "relay"; but then I used it myself (Ooof)! They are "switches" because they do not actually switch a current based on another current or pulse. They are switched "dry" (sans current); the contacts can't be cleaned and will stick or weld shut if switched "wet" frequently. Therefore, external relays to trunks and lines must be used to remove battery/ ground before setting up a path through the network. A matrix of switch crosspoints is arranged so that closing a tip/ring crosspoint in a matrix automatically opens all the other pairs in the same X row and Y column. When a path is "released", it's X and Y matrix points are marked idle, but the crosspoints remain closed until some other action selects another crosspoint in the same X row or Y column. Further errata: > Instruction set vaguely resembles an orthoganal version of 1E, with No "Freudian" jokes, please... it's ^^^^^^^^^^ "orthogonal". > a typical instruction (24 or 48 bits wide) taking .7 milliseconds. let's try "microseconds", eh? ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Al Varney, AT&T, Lisle, IL You really ought to read the stuff before you publish, dum-dum. Al ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: User's Evaluation of Handheld Cellular: Fujitsu vs Motorola Date: 31 Mar 91 07:24:24 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan In article kddlab!lkbreth.foretune.co. jp!trebor@uunet.uu.net (Robert J Woodhead) writes: > The complaint is that the Japanese government closed it's market > to the Micro Tac, and then subsidized the creation of a competitor. The issue is very complicated. I never fully understood it until I read an article that explained the whole incident. Now I forget both where I read it and most of the details. But I thought I would point out a major difference in the cellular market here as compared to the U.S. In the U.S., one buys a cellular telephone on the free market and then must pick a carrier. The free market (and carrier kickbacks) keeps the price of equipment low, while the duopoly of cellular carriers in any given market forces the customer to be ripped off, with little real choice. Here in Japan, the duopoly extends to the equipment side. You don't see cellular phones being sold in stores here. Rather, you choose your cellular carrier (either NTT [the telco] or IDO in Tokyo), and they also rent you the telephone. You have very little selection. The NTT hand-held that most people carry around looks quite old-fashioned when comapred to what is sold in the U.S. NTT is now running a large campaign on T.V. and in the print media featuring Bruce Willis, announcing at least three new hand-held cellular phones. Japanese who have come to visit me when I'm in Los Angeles have been impressed with my Mitsubishi 900 hand-held, saying they've never seen such a nice-looking and small unit in Japan. The new NTT-offered sets will change this, but if I understand correctly, they could never offer the Motorola MicroTAC because Motorola's phones are not compatible with the NTT system. I bet if Motorola were a Japanese company, rather than cry to the government about there being no cellular systems in Tokyo compatible with their equipment, they would have seen to it to build compatible telephones. ------------------------------ From: Damon Schaefer Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed Date: 31 Mar 91 01:38:19 GMT Organization: Hewlett Packard, Vancouver, WA The original questioin was from a "while" ago... X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 614, Message 1 of 9 I think this will catch the attention of many. Bell Atlantic Business Supplies is marketing a device called "CLASSMATE". It is a device that plugs has a RJ-11 and a DB-25 connector on it. It converts CallerID to Your serial port. It comes with some software that allows you to hook the output of the box to your favorite database (or other application program.). The device is priced at about $49.00 and will be shipped in about two to three weeks. Judging by the usefulness of this unit I would order early... Note for the PROGRAMMER: Please let me know about the interesting software you write for this GEM!! The phone number for Bell Atlantic Business Supplies: 800-523-0552 James Van Houten POTS (301) 507-9191 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: What Happened With Sprint's Outage Date: Mon Apr 1 14:33:08 1991 From: jim@slxinc.specialix.com In V11, #255 Thomas Lapp wrote: > My question for those in the know: What was the cause of the fiber > break which caused the Sprint outage last week? Details please. If > it was along a RR right-of-way (and buried) how was it cut? Not by a > train wreck I assume? Right? If you mean the Sprint outage in the San Francisco Bay area last week, yes the fiber break was along a railroad right-of-way, and yes it was a train wreck. A Southern Pacific freight was traveling southbound through Hayward, CA on a section of track where the max. speed is 10 MPH. One of the cars had old fashioned style friction bearings (probably a car used in company service, those style bearings are no longer legal for interchange) and it developed a "hot box", meaning the bearing overheated. What usually happens in a hot box is the end of the axle melts and the wheel comes off the axle, followed rapidly by the car derailing! In this case it was followed by about twelve other cars. Fortunately there were no hazardous materials involved, just frozen chickens and stuff. When that much weight hits the ground it can dig some very deep trenches, and it seems they never bury the fibers deep enough! It took a few days, but the line is now opened, and I believe Sprint has fixed their line. Jim Maurer Specialix Inc. jim@specialix.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 10:40:59 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Movie Excerpt / Ringing Phones Since the earlier message, I stopped in a motel which had a note saying that if your call goes unanswered after FOUR rings, try hanging up and redialing. (Otherwise, you may be charged for call even though it's unanswered.) ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID Date: 31 Mar 91 17:23:40 GMT In article , root@surya.uucp (The unknown Florentine) writes: > It was also interesting to note that the poll (and the "informative > brochure") did not mention CLID blocking or BLocked Call blocking. > Sounds like PACBELL has no intent to provide these. No, Pac*Bell has no reason to ask. California state law requires that CLID blocking be available. So why bother asking? Actually, there is one valid question--total blocking or per-call blocking. Pac*Bell wants per call while several "consumer" groups want total blocking. So it's not whether to block CLID, but how. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman@icdc.llnl.gov (415) 422-6955 Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing and probably don't really know anything useful about anything. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #262 ******************************  ^A^A^A^A Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05149; 3 Apr 91 12:28 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac02297; 2 Apr 91 12:01 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20957; 2 Apr 91 0:01 CST Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 0:01:02 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #263 BCC: Message-ID: <9104020001.aa05145@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Apr 91 00:00:08 CST Volume 11 : Issue 263 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Jeff Carroll] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Roger Fajman] Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone [Brent Chapman] Re: Lorain Products Co. and More on Telephone Power Plants [Dan Boehlke] Re: Computerized Phone Callers [John R. Levine] Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? [Tad Cook] Re: Information needed on 2500 DM Set [John R. Covert] Re: More on Selective Ringing [Rolf Meier] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Randy Borow] Re: Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston [Randy Borow] Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Jim Gottlieb] Digest Gets Forged Message! [Ron Schnell] Information Needed on Internet <=> Sprintnet Gateway [Joseph Tucker] Re: I Can't Wait For Caller ID to Start in Chicago! [Christopher Owens] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Scott Dorsey] Telecom Archives and FTP (was: Delivery Complaints) [Peter M. Weiss] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Carroll Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 1 Apr 91 19:56:14 GMT Reply-To: Jeff Carroll Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics In article ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel Guilderson) writes: > It's different for phone companies because some calls take up more > resources than others. Which makes me wonder about how a computer > network could be billed. I figure a TCP/IP (or some kind of ISO based > protocol) network would be a highly desirable thing for a lot of > people. I don't think it's good enough to limit it to SLIP because > then the only time your connected to the network is when you call it > up. I would want something that's always connected. I figure the > fairest way to bill this kind of network would be to only charge for > packets that originate from your node. What do you think? This topic is discussed rather heavily in the comp.protocols.* newsgroups by people far better qualified than I; but I'll offer my 0.16 bits. My feeling is that the additional overhead involved in per-packet accounting would result in unnecessarily high costs to everyone. I'd advocate flat-fee billing to all but those who impose significant burdens on the network, who could be charged by some coarse measurement of bandwidth consumed. Jeff Carroll carroll@ssc-vax.boeing.com ------------------------------ From: Roger Fajman Date: Mon, 01 Apr 91 17:55:45 EST Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws > As of April 1, they are renumbering the channels and converter > boxes will not be required for those not subscribing to the premium > channels (HBO, etc.). I got an additional piece of information today. The channel numbering with converter boxes is still going to be different than without a converter box. Can anyone say why this is done? It's confusing when you have some sets with converters and some without. ------------------------------ From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone Date: 2 Apr 91 00:35:40 GMT Organization: Ascent Logic Corporation; San Jose, CA In john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). > [Moderator's Note: On I-55 from here to St. Louis all the food/gasoline > stops along the way have a similar arrangement. At each booth in the > restaurant, a wall-phone is hooked to a one-way outgoing line. All > calls from the phone must be zero-plussed or 10xxx zero-plussed with > billing on a collect, third number or telco credit card basis. PAT] If you look at the customers at these joints, you'll probably see a relatively large number of long-haul independent truckers. These phones are commonly found at restaurants along Interstate highways. The drivers use them for such things as arranging delivery details of their current loads, lining up future loads, and simply calling home. I believe that many of them will allow incoming calls, on the assumption that if the driver is sitting there waiting for a call back, he's likely to order something to eat or drink while he waits. Brent Chapman Ascent Logic Corporation Computer Operations Manager 180 Rose Orchard Way, Suite 200 chapman@alc.com San Jose, CA 95134 Phone: 408/943-0630 ------------------------------ From: Dan Boehlke Subject: Re: Lorain Products Co. and More on Telephone Power Plants Date: 31 Mar 91 01:03:39 -0600 Organization: Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, Minnesota In article , kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > A truly scary experience is to move a piece of old RH or RHW > rubber-insulated power feeder cable, watch both the outer insulation > and the rubber flake into dust, and see exposed conductor within a > fraction of an inch of grounded metal! I could never understand > why WECo continued to use potentially unstable rubber-insulated > power cable for almost forty years after far superior plastic > insulation was available following World War II. It is my understanding that good real rubber products resist acid better than even most of today's plastics. Acid resistance would be very important arround batteries. Dan Boehlke Internet: dan@gac.edu Campus Network Manager BITNET: dan@gacvax1.bitnet Gustavus Adolphus College St. Peter, MN 56082 USA Phone: (507)933-7596 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Computerized Phone Callers Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 1 Apr 91 13:01:47 EST (Mon) From: "John R. Levine" In article <1991Apr1.081053.6680@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> you write: > They would have to establish that the calls where made from your > phone. This would require them to subpoena the Phone Company's > records. Nope. Most 800 numbers get itemized billing, so your calls show up as line items on the bill. > They then have to prove material damages. Nope. Most places in the U.S. using the phone to harrass someone is against the law whether or not the victim loses money thereby. I'm no fonder of annoying phone pitches than anyone else, but using your computer to annoy them back is a bad idea. Personally, I find the most effective thing to do to them is to put them on hold indefinitely. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? From: tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) Date: 1 Apr 91 19:49:35 GMT In article , mpd@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan) writes: > Okay, we've all heard of those nice devices which allow you to split a > Selective Ringing line into a fax-line, modem-line, etc., by the > addition of a little device obtainable from Hello Direct or other > telephone equipment suppliers. > But, here is a one which I haven't seen: A Selective Ring blocker. > For example, say I have Selective Ringing, and use it for the > following: > Normal: Voice Line > Two Short: Fax line > Now, with one of those little gems from Hello Direct, I can > successfully split the line so my fax will pick up when I get two > short rings. > However, in both cases, regardless of which line the call is destined > for, my "normal" line will ring - somewhat of a pain-in-the-you-know- > what if someone in Singapore is sending me a fax at two in the > morning, when I really don't want to hear the "normal" line ring, even > two short rings. Why would this happen? If this is true, why does the box separate the calls into two outputs? From the Hello Direct catalog: "Our Ring Director automatically connects each call to the phone or device associated with that phone number." > Is there a device which will "block" the normal line from ringing when > someone calls in on one of the alternate "selective" numbers? This > way, emergency client phone calls can get "thru", but the occassional > fax-at-2-am will not cause the phone to ring, awakening the household? Sure! Its EASY! Just install the device ahead of everything, just like the instructions for these units always show. The only way you could ever hear the calls to your fax machine is if you left a telephone wired to the incoming line BEFORE it reaches this device. This is why there is a "normal" output ... that is the one you hook your telephone to, and it only rings when someone dials your "normal" phone number. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 13:16:44 PST From: "John R. Covert 01-Apr-1991 1615" Subject: Re: Information needed on 2500 DM Set > The M was added when modular hardware was installed. Not so. The "M" indicates that A-lead control is provided. Internally, the set is wired so that the switchhook, when lifted, makes a contact closure between the Black and Yellow wires, in order to provide control if the station has an appearance on a key system. /john ------------------------------ From: Rolf Meier Subject: Re: More on Selective Ringing Date: 1 Apr 91 18:01:54 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article David Lesher writes: > few years ago North Supply listed replacement ringers for 500 sets in > four different schemes. Donald named three terms. I recall: > 20, 30, 40, 50, hz [decimatic??] > 22, 33, 44, 55, 66 hz > 16, 25? 35.5? etc hz > From REA form 522, Part III: single frequency: 20 Hz decimonic: 20 Hz 30 Hz 40 Hz 50 Hz harmonic: 16 2/3 Hz 25 Hz 33 1/3 Hz 50 Hz 66 2/3 Hz [actually I added this one since it is sometimes used] sychronomic: 20 Hz 30 Hz 42 Hz 54 Hz Another interesting spec is that the voltage increases as frequency increases, and the generator must be capable of up to 140 Vrms on the higher frequencies! Hope this helps. Rolf Meier Mitel Corporation ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 1 13:48:21 CST 1991 Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Chris Petrilli discussed AT&T's new digital answering machine. Actually, it's not that terribly new, since they were in the stores back in November of '90. I was seriously considering purchasing one (and at our employee discount the price was great :-) ); however, the big drawback for me was that the outgoing message is limited to a maximum one minute in length; and, with the type of business I run out of home, I occasionally must leave outgoing messages of greater than one minute. All in all, though, I was impressed with the machine: remote programmability (even with rotary or pulse phones), voice prompts, time and date stamps, LED message indicator, personal memo feature, auto disconnect (of machine) when picking up any extension, etc. Another tidbit: the machine is tapeless; it uses two digital chips to do its job -- and no, it's not a computerized voice. You can record your own messages. Like Chris said, it's thin: about seven inches tall, one inch thick, and six inches wide and stands vertically. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 1 15:04:32 CST 1991 Subject: Re: Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston Raymond Jender asked what the Houston 713 CNA Number is. Bad news, Ray. That number is one where you need an authorization code in order to obtain information. Unlike Illinois Bell's CNA number here in Chicagoland, the Houston number is not available to the general public. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadow, IL. ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Date: 1 Apr 91 10:09:55 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan In article Robert_Swenson.OSBU_North@ xerox.com writes: > Also planned is a per-call blocking feature which requires a three > digit code before placing each call. It's already implemented. Dial *67 from almost any Pacific Bell ESS-served line and you will hear a confirmation tone followed by dial tone. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 17:50:31 -0800 From: Ron Schnell Subject: Digest Gets Forged Message! The article with ID telecom11.254.6@eecs.nwu.edu says its from me, but it's not. Please post something immediately so that I don't get any replies. Ron ronnie@sos.com [Moderator's Note: Here it is. Sorry about that, and I wonder who would have been so nasty to us? Its kind of a stupid thing to do, considering the non-controversial nature of the message. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 12:10 CST From: JTUCKER@vax2.cstp.umkc.edu Subject: Information Needed on Internet <=> Sprintnet Gateway Could someone please post the instructions on the gateway between Sprintnet and the Internet. Joseph Tucker ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 09:48:43 CST From: Christopher Owens Subject: Re: I Can't Wait For Caller ID to Start in Chicago! In comp.dcom.telecom rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com writes: > Personally, I am eager for CLID to begin -- and with no blocking > whatsoever. Why? I have been getting tons of annoying, gross, > disgusting phone calls. So, what's wrong with the solution of allowing blocking, but allowing your line to be set up to reject calls that originate with CLID blocked? Seems like that would please everybody. ------------------------------ From: Scott Dorsey Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Reply-To: Scott Dorsey Organization: NASA Langley Research Center Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 14:10:26 GMT In article kddlab!lkbreth.foretune. co.jp!trebor@uunet.uu.net (Robert J Woodhead) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 251, Message 1 of 11 > steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: >> My question: Does there exist a commercial "plug-in-and-play" >> converter box between these different signals. What would be the best >> for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? > There are international VCR's that do what you want. The Akihabara in > Tokyo is lousy with them, as they are a big hit with tourists. These > VCRs can play PAL, SECAM and NTSC VHS tapes, and also have tuners that > can pick up all the formats. They have an internal converter and, I > THINK, can drive a PAL, SECAM or NTSC tv or monitor. Most of these units are VCR's that produce a PAL signal from PAL tapes and an NTSC signal from NTSC tapes. Changing from one scan rate to another is very, very difficult (anyone remember the Eidekoscope with the three storage CRTs?), but building equipment designed to use either one isn't all that hard. International VCR's will probably work only with international TV sets. You might be able to get your NTSC TV to synch up on a european TV signal, although you probably won't get the sound carrier and the color won't be there. Oh, there are shops in NYC that do sell multistandard TVs and VCRs. Scott ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 07:52 EST From: "Peter M. Weiss" Subject: Telecom Archives and FTP (was: Delivery Complaints) Would it be worthwhile to note that back issues are available by FTP from lcs.mit.edu? Pete [Moderator's Note: Good point. And when you have used anonymous ftp to login to lcs.mit.,edu, you will need to then 'cd telecom-archives' to get into our section. Feel free to help yourself! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #263 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05731; 3 Apr 91 12:41 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ad02297; 2 Apr 91 12:07 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa32285; 2 Apr 91 1:18 CST Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 1:18:29 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #264 BCC: Message-ID: <9104020118.aa31358@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Apr 91 01:05:44 CST Volume 11 : Issue 264 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson End of the [Party] Line [AP wire via Bill Berbenich] Party Lines, ANI and ESS [Larry Lippman] Calling Party ID on Two Party Lines [David Lesher] Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones [Julian Macassey] Slam Your Friends! [Michael Ho] Re: Telecommunications: The Transmission of Information [Carol Springs] The "Sweep" Tone [Fred Ennis] Party Line Service on our Exchange Thirty Years Ago [Fred Ennis] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Berbenich Subject: End of the [Party] Line Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 20:49:24 EST Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu I read this story off the AP wire and was reminded of the days, not so long ago in 1982 and '83, that I had a party line in rural Maine. I felt like I was reliving a little bit of early Americana by having a party line in the Eighties. As I recall, it was either have a party line or wait a few months and pay an extremely high installation fee to get a private line. Anyway, I hope you all enjoy this story as much as I did. By JANET L. CAPPIELLO Associated Press Writer WOODBURY, Conn. (AP) -- In the bucolic towns of western Connecticut, where farmhouses and antiques shops dot the rolling hills, about 100 people are hanging onto a piece of the past: the telephone party line. But as the Woodbury Telephone Co. starts to upgrade its equipment this spring, the holdouts will all be switched to private lines, forced into the age of computerized telecommunications. Woodbury Telephone, itself a relic from the days of small, independent phone companies, has received permission from state regulators to replace the last of its two- and four-party lines with private lines. Southern New England Telephone Co., which serves 1.5 million customers to Woodbury's 16,000 customers, eliminated its last party line in January. Around the nation, the number of party lines has been steadily decreasing but one study in 1987 by the United States Telephone Association said there were still 2.8 million people on party lines. In 1985, there were 4.6 million party lines, it said. Although the party line is going the way of hand-cranked telephones, J. Garry Mitchell, Woodbury Telephone's president, sees no reason to mourn. He calls party lines old-fashioned, and has been trying to abolish them for two decades. "Party lines (are) nothing to be proud of," Mitchell said. Party lines were popular from 1910 until the early 1960s, he said. Customers share a phone wire but have separate telephone numbers. Even the people with party lines, mostly older customers, say they've put up with the occasional inconvenience of finding someone else already on the line more for economy than out of a sense of nostalgia. In 1961, Woodbury Telephone charged $6 a month for a two-party line, $4.95 for a four-party line, and $7.25 for a private line. Today, those costs haven't risen more than 50 cents per month. Robert Keating, a 61-year-old Woodbury architect who grew up with a party line, says he has one now because it's the cheapest way to have separate telephone numbers for his home and the business he operates out of his house. Still, having party lines is "sort of nice, in a way," he said. "It sort of keeps the town rural, if you want to call it that." Telephone lore has it that party lines were a great source of gossip for busybodies bold enough to eavesdrop on their neighbor's conversations. Norma Bennett, 72, a retired Woodbury operator, remembers the story about two women who were chatting on their party lines while a third listened in. "One said, `I wonder when the mailman is coming?' And the one who was listening in answered, `Soon, because he just went by here."' Party lines were once standard telephone fare because there wasn't enough equipment to provide private lines, Mitchell said. Some party lines accommodated up to ten customers, usually all in one neighborhood. Woodbury Telephone has provided telephone service in the towns of Woodbury, Southbury and Bethlehem and parts of Roxbury and Oxford since 1899. SNET serves the rest of the state, except for a small corner served by New York Telephone. Woodbury Telephone is being allowed to eliminate the service now because of a $1.8 million equipment upgrade, Mitchell said. Eliminating party lines also became imperative because of computerized 911-emergency response systems. When a caller dials 911, the caller's address appears on a computer screen at the dispatch center. With party lines, there's a risk that the address could be that of the other customer, Mitchell said. Freida Gauthier, 78, who has had a party line "ever since I had the phone ... over 40 years," says she's willing to pay a little extra for the sense of security she will get having the emergency 911 service. "I live alone," she said. She too has kept the party line because the service is less expensive, and she rarely uses her telephone. She talks fondly of the days when people got much of their news through party lines. "Other people would listen in to what was going on. That was fun," she said. She quickly added that she had never eavesdropped herself. Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Party Lines, ANI and ESS Date: 2 Apr 91 00:15:36 EST (Tue) From: Larry Lippman In article wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) writes: > While I have not dug too deeply into this aspect, one advantage of at > least the two party Bell method was ANI. While the trick with the > tapped ringer coil added some noise, it DID allow the CO to figure if > Mr. Tip or Ms. Ring was calling Fargo without a "numberpleeze." > The isolators, such as a 28A or a 425A, are gas tubes. They don't > conduct until a LARGE (~90v) dc voltage is impressed on the line. > Ringing is on top of that. Thus, during talking, no unbalance thru the > ringer coil, and less noise. But, if you have a 28A or other of the > myriad items Ma mentions (11A's, 687B's, 425&6A tubes, 426N diodes and > D180036 isolators, to name a few) can you ALSO have ANI, and if so, > HOW? ANI party detection based upon a balanced ground was only used with two party lines which had fully selective ringing. Four party and eight party lines were always assigned a class of service for ONI if the originating CO were equipped with ANI. > Here's a mix of old and new: Can you have party line selective > ringing on ESS's? ESS always had the technical support for two party, four party and eight party lines. However, contemporary with new ESS installation was usually an effort to upgrade outside cable plant to minimize or even eliminate party lines. No operating telephone company really wants to maintain party lines. This was also accompanied by a tariff change filing and notification of affected party line subscribers that they *had* to change to private line service. In some cases where a state public utility commission would not permit total elimination of party line tariffs, the telephone company would bill a "recalcitrant" subscriber at a lower rate for two party service, but in fact give them the equivalent of a private line. To make this "legal" for accounting purposes, the subscriber in question was often assigned the "ring party" on a hypothetical two party line. For practical purposes, the ring party on a two party line is no different from that of a regular subscriber with a private line. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Calling Party ID on Two Party Lines Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 21:05:15 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers John Higdon asks how party identification works on two party lines. Dave Levenson explains... > This is why, years after most of us could walk into almost any > appliance store and buy a telephone set equipped with a modular jack > and take it home and plug it in, subscribers on party lines are denied > this right. Err, Ma didn't always do this correctly. A technician (who worked on a project of mine at a past agency) bought his party-line 500 set from Ohio Bell. He wanted to install some more sets. You guessed it - he was ring party! We wired the other 500 sets to also provide the ground through the ringer. I never *did* figure out how Ma was so confused that She could provide party line service, charge for party line service, and yet not KNOW it when they offered to sell him the phone! Yet when he called them about it, they pitched him about getting private line service. ;_] By the way, Lou was one of the hold-outs I mentioned. He had been the ONLY party on the pair for several years, and had NO intention of giving in, when I last talked to him. ------------------------------ From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones Date: 1 Apr 91 06:59:08 GMT Reply-To: Julian Macassey Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article contact!ndallen@eecs.nwu.edu (Nigel Allen) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 243, Message 7 of 14 > Several posters have referred to some modern residential telephones, > manufactured by AT&T and other companies, as "lightweight". > Northern Telecom's Harmony telephone set, which Bell Canada and some > other companies rent but do not sell, is a modern electronic telephone > set. The working parts and plastic shell do not weigh very much, and > apparently Northern Telecom's market research with prototypes of the > phone showed that consumers equated low weight with low quality. > And *that's* why there are lead weights in a Harmony telephone. > People who want a heavy telephone will find that manufacturers will > address that demand, but perhaps in an unexpected way. There are a couple of reasons to add weight to today's modern electronic phones: 1. Give the handset enough weight so it can activate the hookswitch. The alternative to this is to use cheezy microswitches instead of decent solid multicontact switches. Yes, this is one thing that distinguishes garbage phones. 2. Give the base some weight so the damn thing doesn't keep being yanked off the desk and dropping to the floor. Cheezy, crummy, sleezy, phones that are supposed to handle today's telecommunications needs are also often lighter because they use thin wall plastic that cracks and bends easily. A good phone (and that includes Northern telecom) is made from thick wall ABS such as Monsanto Cycolac T grade. This stuff is hard to break or flex. Modern handsets, even if they are using decent G3 style handsets, often are lighter because they have an electret element rather than a carbon T1 type element. Old style phones also had metal bases and gong ringers with iron and brass in them. These weighed more than phones with Ceramic resonator disc warble units. I have always considered TIE phones to be excellant examples of cheap, nasty, crummy, cheezy phones with nasty plastic, nasty little hook switches and armies of dweebs in polyester suits peddling them door to door. They managed to move telecommunications back five decades by selling phone systems that blew fuses when Tip and Ring were shorted. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Subject: Slam Your Friends! Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 21:44:02 GMT In acf5!whitejon@cmcl2.nyu.edu (jonathan white) writes: [MCI's account information line] > [Moderator's Note: I just now tried the above number, and not only > does the automated system discuss 'your' existing MCI account and > balance, it also allows you to convert 'your' line to MCI One Plus > service if desired. So, I converted several of you to MCI as your > primary carrier while I was there. :) ha ha! PAT] Waitjustaminnitbuster. Are you saying that by calling this number, someone can arbitrarily cause 'his or her' (read: ANY) line to be slammed? Time to call the phone company and see if we can get slam protection here. (Is 'slam' an 'official' word, or did c.d.telecom just adopt it as an apt description?) (Or was I swallowed up in a Moderator joke? Hmmm...) Michael Ho, University of Nebraska Internet: ho@hoss.unl.edu Disclaimer: Views expressed within are purely personal and should not be applied to any university agency. [Moderator's Note: No, it was not a joke. Well, the part about converting you over to MCI was, but not the part about being able to do it. One of the menu choices given was 'to set up your phone with one plus dialing' ... and I am sure they did not mean with AT&T as the default carrier! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 13:05:28 EST From: Carol Springs Subject: Re: Telecommunications: The Transmission of Information Organization: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Lexington, MA In Volume 11, Issue 245, Donald E. Kimberlin highly recommends the following new book which he received through his book club: > Telecommunications (The Transmission of Information) > Dayton, Robert L., McGraw-Hill, 1991, 184 pp., case bound > ISBN 0-07-016189-5 > (My book club's price: $27.95) I called the McGraw-Hill bookstore at corporate headquarters this morning to order this book. I just received a voice mail message from the bookstore saying that the book shows up as not having been published yet, and that the warehouse doesn't know exactly when it will be available. So don't be surprised if the book isn't in bookstores and libraries yet and if your efforts to get a store or library to order a copy are unsuccessful at first. The general public may have to wait a few weeks longer for the book. The woman from the McGraw-Hill bookstore recommended that I try my order again at a later time. I shall do so. Carol Springs carols@drilex.dri.mgh.com ------------------------------ Subject: The "Sweep" Tone From: Fred Ennis Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 00:07:25 EST Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Scott Marshall recently gave a "sweep" number that he wrongly thought would provide a "sweep" of the line for bugs or taps. The "sweep" at that number is a sweep of frequencies, which you either monitor on a scope or with a meter to check the frequency responsoe of the line. Since a search for bugs or taps on a line is also called a "sweep" we can see how the "urban legend" got started. Bottom line is that it's nearly impossible to detect a properly installed legal wiretap. The best you can do is just try to confuse whoever might be listening in (grin). ------------------------------ Subject: Party Line Service on our Exchange Thirty Years Ago From: Fred Ennis Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 00:07:25 EST Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Someone was asking about the use of eight party lines when the telco only had four ringer options (tip +/- ground and ring +/- to ground). Back when I was growing up in the 50's and early 60's we had Nxx-5911 in our exchange. Dialing any last digit would still ring our phone, with 5912 giving two rings, 5913 giving three rings, I think 5914 gave us four rings and 5915 gave a long and a short. They were repeated at 5916 thru 5910. This is pure conjecture here now, but I'd assume Bell could run ten parties on such a system, because there could be five distinctive rings on tip to ground and another five on ring to ground. And, from our "That's not a bug, that's a feature!" department, I used to give out 5913 to my friends, so mother and dad always knew if the phone was for me. I now find it funny that telco marketing folks have rediscovered this concept and are now selling it as "distinctive ringing"! Plus ca change, c'est plus la meme chose! F. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #264 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12162; 4 Apr 91 19:18 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21603; 4 Apr 91 2:28 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27044; 4 Apr 91 1:23 CST Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 1:09:47 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #265 BCC: Message-ID: <9104040109.ab09537@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Apr 91 01:09:29 CST Volume 11 : Issue 265 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Delays, Backlogs, etc. [TELECOM Moderator] Re: Request For Cellular Phone Service Manuals [Carl Wright] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Mark Rolfs] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Carl Wright] Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land [Carl Wright] Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless [Martin McCormick] Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless [Nils Arbeitstein] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Jamie Cox] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Gilbert Amine] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [Ed Greenberg] Re: Sprint's Billing and Service [Christopher Lott] Re: Sprint's Billing and Service - A Pleasure For Me [Pankaj Mayor] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 0:03:54 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Delays, Backlogs, etc. As many of you know, this past weekend there was a major problem on portions of the Internet with a network server which caused a great deal of mail (including a dozen or more issues of the Digest) to go undelivered; get bounced back to the sender; or get delivered in some random and unpredictable order. In the case of this Digest, there were numerous instances of duplicate and triplicate copies of issues; in many instances missing issues; and in general a lot of havoc including out of numerical order delivery. I've been spending literally *hours* here the past couple of days responding to requests for missing issues, answering complaints of 'did you get my article; why did I not get a reciept; why has it not been published, etc' ... Because I physically cannot work 24 hours per day -- or even several hours per day on a regular basis -- on the Digest, and because there has been a huge flow of stuff arriving in the past few days which was clogged up in the system over the weekend, I had to take a rather drastic action: most articles received in the past few days have been returned to the sender with a request that they be held at least a week or so, and only submitted if they remain relevant at that time. Quite honestly, in the nearly three years I have been involved in the production of this Digest, I have **never** seen a backlog as I have experienced the past three days! You will note there were no Digests at all on Wednesday ... I spent several hours handling administrative mail. So, if you sent an article here anytime since last Sunday and got it back with a form letter saying 'thanks, but no thanks', do not take it personally ... about 95 percent of the other correspondents got the same thing ... and at that, I still have enough here to fill a couple issues today! In all, about 100 messages were returned unused. Again, PLEASE read all replies before you write your own. If the topic is covered (or saturated is more like it), then DO NOT send anything. Do not send your article here and to an unmoderated telecom (or other) newsgroup at the same time. One person did that Monday and I am still getting copies of his two line, totally irrelevant message. 237 copies have arrived so far. You MUST write to this group by mail. You cannot post messages direct. PAT ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Request For Cellular Phone Service Manuals Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1991 03:38:59 GMT Brandon Allbery asks for information on cellular phone service. He and other readers may be interested in books from the Cellular Bookstore (tm). They offer the with info on 150 phones. Also of interest will be the which provides programming information on over 200 models of cellular phones. Both are available for $149 from: Bishop & Assoc. 1018 164th St. S.E. Suite A-24 Mill Creek, WA 98012 206-485-0572 Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: Mark Rolfs Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 3 Apr 91 18:23:51 GMT Organization: HP Fort Collins, Co. Randy Borow writes: > All in all, though, I was impressed with the machine: remote > programmability (even with rotary or pulse phones), voice prompts, > time and date stamps, LED message indicator, personal memo feature, > auto disconnect (of machine) when picking up any extension, etc. > Another tidbit: the machine is tapeless; it uses two digital chips to > do its job -- and no, it's not a computerized voice. You can record > your own messages. Like Chris said, it's thin: about seven inches > tall, one inch thick, and six inches wide and stands vertically. Either some of your information is in error or there is more than one AT&T digital answering machine available. I bought one recently and am reasonably pleased with it but it does not have voice prompts, time-date stamp, or remote programming via a rotary phone. It does have the rest of the features you mentioned and has a total message capacity of about seven minutes, according to the documentation. Mark Rolfs ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1991 04:17:19 GMT In response to Moderator's assertion that alternate phone directory companies are a bunch of cheating copy-cats, I must disagree. Our local alternate pays 45 cents per name to obtain the names from Michigan Bell to prepare their book. They used to pay two cents per name less than ten years ago. They didn't actually tell me how long ago it was, but the young lady I spoke to couldn't have been working longer than that. The practice of including "ringers" in compiled lists is common in compilations of information, but the practice doesn't mean that people actually steal the information frequently. Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1991 04:34:11 GMT Notwithstanding John Higdon's certainty that you will get your problem reports marked "resolved" with no actual solution, report them on the phone and then report them in writing. If John ends up being right, call the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) and also write them. The information is below. CPUC President - G. Mitchell Wilk 415-557-2444 Commissioners are: Norman Shumway 415-557-1407 Patricia Eckert 415-557-3700 John B. Ohanian 415-557-2440 Danel Fessler 916-752-2896 Division of Ratepayer Advocates John Leutza 415-557-1272 Commission Advisory & Compliance Division S. Robert Weissman 415-557-2558 The address is: CPUC 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 415-557-0647 Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 16:42:07 CST From: uccxmgm@unx2.ucc.okstate.edu Subject: Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless The interference to the cordless phone from the halogen lamp is a perfect example of an irritating problem which began to show up about 25 years or so ago when silicone control rectifiers, (SCR's) and triacs, (double SCR's), began to be used as control devices in everything from power tools to light dimmers. These marvelous devices have made it possible to build light dimmers and motor speed controllers which are a fraction of the size and cost of older rheostat based controls. The problem is that they do this voltage control by turning on once each AC cycle in the case of SCR's and once each half-cycle in the case of triacs. Any time current is rapidly switched into a conductor, electromagnetic energy is produced. When the halogen lamp is dimmed, the control lead of the SCR or triac is being fed with an AC signal with sufficient phase shift to turn the SCR on just as the AC sine wave is nearing the zero point. The SCR turns itself off when zero is reached and won't come on again until about the same point in the next cycle. The result is that the bulb is fed with short saw-tooth pulses rather than a sine wave of lower voltage. The upshot of this involved description is that modern solid-state lighting and motor controls can generate stupendous electromagnetic interference in the low-frequency radio spectrum. The best defense is a good AC line filter between the lamp and the power outlet. The problem may be in finding a filter which can handle the wattage of the lamp without cooking. Finally, try this little test. If you are lucky, no one will see you do this and think your crazy, but it demonstrates what I just told you. If the room is very quiet, put your ear near the lamp bulb and very slowly, turn the brightness control up. If the control is a full-range control, the bulb may barely start to glow. At the same time, your interference should start and you should also hear a faint buzzing or ringing sound from the bulb. This is the electromagnetic shock of that saw-toothed wave form. Now turn up the light and you will probably hear the noise vanish or soften. This is because the wave form is more like a sine wave. Don't burn your ear on the bulb while doing your research. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Oklahoma State University Computer Center Data Communications Group Stillwater, OK ------------------------------ From: Nils Arbeitstein Subject: Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless Date: 1 Apr 91 02:23:41 GMT Organization: Hack-Tic This story sounds familiar to me. Try and shield the transformer, which usually is located within the stand of the halogen light. Don't forget to not just put some metal around it, but also to connect it to ground. That ought to do the trick. nils@ooc.uva.nl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 3 Apr 91 00:54:24 GMT Reply-To: jcox@x102a.ess.harris.com (Jamie Cox) Organization: Harris Govt. Aerospace Systems Division The new machine is the "Digital Answering System 1337". I saw one the other day at the AT&T store. My brochure states that it has seven minutes of "total recording time". It has an LED which shows the number of messages received. It looks very different from any other answering machine I've seen, but I don't know how well it works. One nice thing about a digital machine is that you can go directly to a specific message without waiting for intervening messages to go by. Jamie Cox jcox@mlb.ess.harris.com | Phone: 1 407 727 6397 (work) Harris Government Aerospace Systems,| 1 407 723 7935 (home) MS 19/4827, P.O. Box 94000, | "Speaking only for myself." Melbourne, Florida USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 17:51 GMT From: Rochelle Communications <0004169820@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed In an article which appeared in the TELECOM DIGEST V11 #249 on March 29th, 1991, George Sipe writes: > I'm interested in Caller ID for my home, but would want an > RS-232 interface to it... Can anybody give me any pointers? > ANY RS-232 Caller ID interface would be of interest since I've > found none so far. There are two products on the market which provide a Caller ID/RS-232 interface. The first product is ANI-232, available from Rochelle Communications of Austin, Tex (800-542-8808). It provides Caller ID decoding (compatible with both US and Canadian formats), ring detection, and on-hook/off-hook indication (for call timing, and to keep track of unanswered calls). The ANI-232 is available now and sells for $85. It comes with a free demonstration software which displays the Caller ID data on an IBM PC. A Developer's Package is also available for serious developers/VARs. Rochelle has also developed a PC-based Caller ID Telephone Line Simulator for testing and demonstration of Caller ID products. The second product is CLASSMATE Model 10, developed by MHE Systems (Tustin, California), and is distributed by Bell Atlantic Business Supplies (800-523-0552) for about $50. It is a cost effective solution for hobbiests and developers who do not need the ring detect and off-hook detect features. The CLASSMATE is not compatible with the Canadian and US WEST implementations of Caller ID. Gilbert Amine Rochelle Communications, Inc. gamine@mcimail.com +1 512 794 0088 ------------------------------ From: Ed_Greenberg@3mail.3com.com Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 10:41 PST Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service Phydeaux writes: > ..... I've never had inside wiring problems. I tried to convince one > friend of this recently. She lives in an apartment building and is > spending $2 each month for "wire maintenance." What a rip-off. I live in an apartment building. We have an interesting situation for inside wiring. Pairs are multipled through apartments and down to a phone closet on the side of the building. There they are cross connected to the incoming cable on nut and bolt type blocks. The entire shebang is locked with a lock that says "Bell System"! Inside this locked island of pre-mfj phonedom is one (count 'em) grey modern demark for my two lines. I had the telco mount this during my one inside wire failure. My inside wire failure was sabotage, or more probably vandalism. Somebody seemed to have reached into the cabinet (it's open at the bottom) and pulled down a loop of wire (mine.) The telco charge to fix this was $60, which was paid (cheerfully) by the building management. Thus I have established a precedent that inside wire maintenance is, at least at 1600 Stokes Street, a building repair. Next question: If I want to perform my own connection to the inside wire, will the telco send a man at no charge to unlock the lock? edg [Moderator's Note: Here in Chicago, in one of the very bad neighborhoods, a situation like yours culminated in one group of neighbors going after another group with *guns*, each accusing the other of disrupting phone service while trying to install their own lines. They had gotten into each other's pair multiples and made a terrible mess. It turned out one person had paid the janitor in their building to 'run a wire' for them. He knocked out the others ... just another of the wonderful aspects of permitting the federal judiciary to administer the phone system in the USA. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 12:49:29 -0500 From: Christopher Lott Subject: Re: Sprint's Billing and Service Organization: The University of Maryland Dept of Computer Science Here's our Sprint billing story - my housemate seems to have several Sprint accounts, despite his repeated efforts to have them closed down. One month they didn't credit our account with one of our checks and listed that amount on the next month's bill as a balance. We sent in a copy of the cancelled check, got the credit, forgot about it. Then some time later an account statement for one of the old accounts showed up, with the disputed amount shown as a credit balance. Seems that they applied the missing check to one of the "closed" accounts instead of our active account. So we asked for a refund check. Got it some time back. Hey, they had their chance. We don't feel too guilty about it. Why in heck don't they close old accounts out, finis, when asked? Christopher Lott \/ Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 cml@cs.umd.edu /\ 4122 AV Williams Bldg 301 405-2721 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 15:26:38 EST Subject: Re: Sprint's Billing and Service - A Pleasure For Me Organization: Syracuse University From: Pankaj Mayor In article mbarry@isis.UUCP (Marshall Barry) writes: > BTW, got billed for SOME calls six or seven months after they > were made and billed for two HOURS on a call I know was under two > minutes. Nearly two years ago I made a 55 minute call to India using Sprint's access code (I had AT&T as my primary carrier then). I never got billed for that call. Thanks US Sprint for a gift of over a hundred bucks. Pankaj ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #265 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12217; 4 Apr 91 19:19 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04725; 4 Apr 91 4:35 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa25274; 4 Apr 91 3:29 CST Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 2:48:22 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #266 BCC: Message-ID: <9104040248.ab29049@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Apr 91 02:48:11 CST Volume 11 : Issue 266 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Where Can I Purchase Old Pay Phones? [Phil Collins] SouthWestern Bell Testing CLASS Services [Rich Zellich] Dublin Number Expansion [Charles Bryant] Strange Phone Call [David E. Bernholdt] New FCC Modem Tax? [Arun Baheti] New CRTC Brochure [Nigel Allen] Add Washington State to the 1+10D List [David Barts] Raytheon Single Mode Equipment [Rick Battle] Modular Adaptor for British Phones [Tad Cook] What are Tymnet et al? [Adam Denton] Lack of TELECOM Infrastructure Affects Elections in Albania [R. Budd] MCI Eliminates Mercury (in TV Advertising) [Earl Hall] Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants [Larry Lippman] Phoneline Levels, Studio Interfaces in E Europe [Robert Horvitz] Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US [Dr Sabine Thuermel] Information Needed on Phoenix Telecom Conditions [Steve Wolfson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Phil Collins Subject: Where Can I Purchase Old Pay Phones? Date: 3 Apr 91 14:06:52 GMT Organization: Alliant Computer Systems, Littleton, MA A few years ago you could buy old pay phones to use in your house or whatever. Does any one know where I can buy one now at a resonable price? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 9:14:43 CST From: Rich Zellich Subject: SouthWestern Bell Testing CLASS Services From this morning's {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}: Columnist Susan Thomson, after a long discussion of how SWB is providing, through a third party, a pay-your-phone-bill-by-phone service (for big bucks - $3.95 for each charged phone bill under $50 & $4.70 for each one between $50 & $100. Wow! What a "service"! ... makes me want to run right to my phone and start giving money away :-(), goes on to discuss ongoing and future trials. Apparently, SWB has, for the past year, been testing Call Return, Call Blocker (pre-blocking of specific numbers), Call Cue (auto redial), Priority Call (special rings on incoming calls, even overriding busy), Selective Call Forwarding, and Call Trace. In Joplin, the first four services are a package within a package; each one $3/month alone, each add'l one $1.50 to a total of $7.50 for all four. Call Trace has an installation fee - $7.50 residential, $14.50 business -and costs $8 for the first call "traced" each month, and $2 for each subsequent one. Selective Call Forwarding is $3.30/month alone, or $2 with any of the other options. The article says "similar" prices are applicable in Chillicothe and Kirksville, where SWB is testing a combination of Call Return, Call Cue, and Call Trace. SWB plans to offer some form of this "call control" in St. Louis sometime next year, and eventually throughout it's five-state territory, but no decision has been made yet on what combination of options (gee guys, why not just offer _all_ of 'em?) will be offered where and at what prices. Caller ID is said to be planned for a startup test next month in Muscogee, OK. Someone other than SWB will offer the display units starting at $30, and SWB's price for the feature will be $6.50 residential and $8.50 business. SWB says it will offer per-call blocking free as a matter of course wherever it offers Caller ID (the article discusses _only_ per call blocking, but actually states just "will offer blocking free" with no explicit mention of default blocking). Block-blocking isn't mentioned, either. ------------------------------ From: Charles Bryant Subject: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: Datacode Communications Ltd, Dublin, Ireland Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 15:10:01 GMT With our bills Telecom Eireann customers have got a leaflet giving the first stages of the 01 area number expansion plan. Last year the first stage expanded numbers starting with 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 70 and 79 adding a 6 on the front. This put Dublin in the unusual position of having numbers both six and seven digits long in the same calling area (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). From April 8th all numbers starting with 69, 8 will have a 2 added to make them 269 XXXX and 28X XXXX. By 1994 all numbers will have been changed to start with 2, 4, 6 or 8. By experiment, I verified that the 2 is currently optional. It makes me wonder why British Telecom split London from 01 into 071 and 081. Why not just add a digit? And if eight digit numbers are too long, why not split into 017 and 018 leaving more room for expansion. Or even split 01 DXX XXXX into ten areas 01D DXX XXXX removing the need for the tables to convert old number to new area. Charles Bryant (ch@dce.ie) ------------------------------ From: "David E. Bernholdt" Subject: Strange Phone Calls Date: 3 Apr 91 15:34:54 GMT Organization: Quantum Theory Project, Univ. of Florida I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) This was repeated about four times, then it said "Are you still holding?" and I mechanically answered "Yes". The voice said "I'm sorry, but I have not been able to connect the call. I will try again later," and hangs up. It called again, perhaps 20 minutes later. Same drill, except this time I didn't answer the "Are you still holding?" question. It said nothing more, and held the line until I hung up. The third time it called, I hung up after the first "I am trying to connect your call ..." It didn't call back after that. I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1991 11:21 CST From: Arun Baheti Subject: New FCC Modem Tax? Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is being considered? ab ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 10:53 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: New CRTC Brochure Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto The Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission has just released a free brochure that explains in simple, non- bureaucratic language how it regulates telecommunications, broadcasting and cable television in Canada. The brochure was developed "as part of the Commission's ongoing efforts to strengthen its communication with Canadians." The booklet is called, "So, what good is the CRTC?". If you would like to receive a free copy, write to: Information Services Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0N2 telephone (819) 997-0313 (voice) fax (819) 994-0218 TDD: (819) 994-0423 You can also order a free copy of the CRTC annual report from the same address. I would particularly encourage anybody who works for a regulatory commission to order the booklet, and think about preparing a similar one for their own agency. (A word of explanation about the 819 area code: The CRTC is actually located in Hull and has Hull phone numbers, but like many federal government offices in Hull, receives its mail through the Ottawa post office.) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 21:59:00 pst From: David Barts Subject: Add Washington State to the 1+10D List > All of the following places have, within the past few > years, either gone to or announced 1 + 10D within the NPA: > Dallas-Fort Worth, Northern Virginia, Maryland, Toronto, Georgia, > North Carolina, Alabama, San Antonio, Detroit, Arizona You can add Western Washington State to the 1+10D list, as US West announced that permissive dialling would begin sometime around November in NPA 206. David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 16:19:57 -0500 From: Rick Subject: Raytheon Single Mode Equipment Does anyone know if Raytheon makes fiber optic single mode equipment. I have part numbers M90 and RDM428. Any ideas??? Thanks, Rick Battle battle@umbc4.umbc.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Modular Adaptor for British Phones From: tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) Date: 3 Apr 91 23:32:05 GMT Does anyone know of an adaptor that will plug into a standard RJ11 modular jack and adapt it for a British telephone? As I recall, British phones do something funny where they break out the ringer on a separate wire, and there needs to be a capacitor in the phone outlet in the wall in series with this lead. So the adaptor I need would have a male RJ11 plug on one side, then the three wire connection to the British phone on the other, with the capacitor (I assume running from the ring side of the line to the third wire on the British jack) in the adaptor. Any source for something like this in the USA? Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 16:13:53 EST From: Adam Denton Subject: What are Tymnet et al? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Middletown, NJ What are these? Are they services that provide long-distance data connections by dialing a local or semi-local number? How much do they cost, and how can I find out more about them? Thanks in advance, Adam Denton asd@mtqua.att.com [Moderator's Note: Tymnet and Sprintnet (formerly known as Telenet) are two major public data networks. They employ local dial-up lines to connect with their networks. Both have numerous local sales offices for inquiries, etc. In the case of Telenet, call 1-800-TELENET. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Apr 91 21:40:39 EST From: KLUB000 Subject: Lack of TELECOM Infrastructure Affects Elections in Albania The lack of communication between rural areas of Albania and Tirana and other major cities played a crucial role in the inability of opposition parties to bring their message through to all the people. This was the conclusion drawn from an analysis by the New York Times and the Associated Press on the first free elections in Albania's history. In rural areas, where the Communist Party won representative seats by landslide margins, what telephones existed, and there were very few, belonged to privileged Communist families. Other modern means of communication, fax machines, computer networks, even automative transportation was non-existent. The Democratic Party, the main opposition party, had difficulty campaigning in many villages, despite being given telephones, computers, and private automobiles (which are illegal in Albania) by the Communists because of their inaccessibility due to the mountainous terrain of the country and a poor road system. Communists also continued to control the communications media. From descriptions of the country provided in travelogues, much of Albania is still trying to enter the 19th Century, never mind the 21st. According to news reports, the Communists garnered 70% of the total vote despite overwhelming opposition victories in Tirana, Durres, Shkoder, and other cities and the turning out of the President, Ramiz Alia, from his legislative seat. The point is the impact proliferation of information through telecommun- ications instruments can have on the development of alternative opinions and the push to democracy. However, poor telecommunications infrastruc- ture can undermine such an effort. Richard Budd | E-Mail: IBMers - rcbudd@rhqvm19.ibm VM Systems Programmer | All Others- klub@maristb.bitnet IBM - Sterling Forest, NY | Phone: (914) 578-3746 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 03:19:31 PST From: cdp!erhall@labrea.stanford.edu Subject: MCI Eliminates Mercury (in TV advertising) The advertising people have done it again! First AT&T gave Fiji an NPA areacode ("Baku Vinaku Beachside"). Now MCI has eliminated British Telecom's domestic competition. In a "Friends and Family" television commercial I saw 2 nights ago, a British-accented woman in the commercial says: "In England, there's only one phone company. In America, we get a choice - and a better hamburger." (But, can MCI give us decent Fish and Chips?) Earl Hall | via PeaceNet: | GEnie: ERHALL Chicago IL | cdp!erhall@labrea.stanford.edu | +1 312 685 9735 ------------------------------ Subject: Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants Date: 2 Apr 91 01:09:23 EST (Tue) From: Larry Lippman In article john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). > A group of us had dinner there a number of months ago and it was great > entertainment playing with the phone while waiting for our meals to > arrive! I don't know if they are still in business, but during the 1970's in Hartford, CT there was a tavern called "The Dialtone Lounge" that had a telephone at every table and booth. While there was no outside line access, one could call in orders and call from one table to another. Calling from table to table was a great way to initiate conversations with the opposite sex, and probably accounted for the popularity of the establishment! :-) Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 00:23:27 pst From: Robert Horvitz Subject: Phoneline Levels, Studio Interfaces in E. Europe I am writing a pamphlet describing how to build a low-cost, low-power radio station under conditions prevalent in Central/Eastern Europe. It will be translated and distributed in those countries. Many applicants for radio licenses in the post-communist countries are particularly interested in airing telephone talk shows. So my question to TELECOMDigest readers is: Do Eastern Europe telephone systems operate at the same line levels as in the US? Can anyone recommend a particular telephone interface unit that combines low cost with the ability to handle noisy, unstable phonelines? Equipment specs and source addresses with phone, fax and telex numbers will be most appreciated - and included in the pamphlet's listing of "Sources." Respond by email, if you wish, or post your comments to the Digest. Either way, thanks in advance! Robert Horvitz 1122-1/2 E St. SE Washington, DC 20003-2232 USA antenna@well.sf.ca.us ...{apple,pacbell,hplabs,ucbvax}!well!antenna ------------------------------ From: Dr Sabine Thuermel Subject: Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US Date: 2 Apr 91 12:17:00 GMT Organization: Siemens AG, Munich, W-Germany We at Siemens, Munich are doing research on intelligent networks. I would like to get into contact with US universities working in the same field. I am grateful for any pointers. Sabine Thuermel e-mail: thuermel@ztivax.siemens.com snail-mail: Dr. Sabine Thuermel ZFE IS SOF22 Siemens AG Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 8 Muenchen 83 Germany phone: +49/89/63644705 fax: +49/89/63640757 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 10:01:20 CST From: Steve Wolfson Subject: Information Needed on Phoenix Telecom Conditions I am relocating to the Phoenix Area and would appreciate a quick synopsis of the local state of telcom, costs customer service etc. Anyone other than the BOC (U.S. West?) operating in the area. Also a comparison the cellular carriers if possible. If it matters, I expect to be living around Chandler/Tempe. Thanks, Steve Wolfson -- Motorola Inc. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #266 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01938; 5 Apr 91 7:43 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24751; 5 Apr 91 6:44 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04277; 5 Apr 91 3:48 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11208; 5 Apr 91 2:41 CST Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 1:45:22 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #267 BCC: Message-ID: <9104050145.ab04106@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Apr 91 01:45:11 CST Volume 11 : Issue 267 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are [A Boardman] Re: Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft [David Lemson] Re: Taking an Agressive Stance With Harassing Callers [Larry Riba] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Daniel R. Guilderson] Re: End of the [Party] Line [Lars Poulsen] Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Bob Yazz] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Tad Cook] Re: Sprint Outage in CA Last Week [Jim Maurer] Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security [David Smallberg] Re: MCI Around Town followup [Fred E.J. Linton] Re: Calling Cards With No Surcharge [Steve Forrette] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 17:09:37 -0500 From: amb@ai.mit.edu Subject: Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are > The Washington, DC, area has the best plan: 7D is local within your > own NPA (whether that be 202, 703, or 301); 10D is local to one of the > other two NPAs; and 1 + 10D is toll, either within your own NPA or to > one of the other NPAs. 1 + 10D is accepted for local calls to other > NPAs, and the call gets routed and billed the same as if you had > dialed just 10D. This will never be possible in at least one place -- the 516 NPA is within the LATA from the 212 NPA, and a call carried by NY Tel. Dialing without the 1+, however, would lead to some sort of time-out scheme to decide whether one was dialing 516 as an NPA, or just the 212-516 exchange in 212. From 212, incidentally, all out-of-NPA calls are dialed 1+, and all 0+ calls, even within 212, are dialed 0+212+7d. Talk about a full NPA ... Andrew Boardman amb@ai.mit.edu ------------------------------ From: David Lemson Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1991 23:23:33 GMT cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov (David Cornutt) writes: > group about the use of cellular phones from aircraft. Can anyone > answer: > (1) what effects this could have on the cellular phone net? We've been through this before. The bottom line, from several authoritative sources that I'm told, is: In rural areas where cells are likely to be fairly spread apart, the impact on the cellular network is likely to be minimal. It might be even "ok". (If you can even get a tower!! The antennas that cell phones use, including on the site towers, have almost zero coverage straight up, where you are!) In metro areas, such as if you were in a heli over Manhattan, it would WREAK HAVOC, as it keeps bouncing you from channel to channel trying to only receive you at one site, which it receives you at several sites at once! This is discounting the fact that you might hear others' conversations. As for FCC rules, it appears that there are no regulations that disallow this, but it is REALLY not a good idea. Cell phones were made for people to be travelling relatively slowly. David Lemson U of Illinois Computing Services Student Consultant Internet : lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 23:12 MST From: LARRY RIBA Subject: Re: Taking an Agressive Stance With Harassing Callers In , Randy Borow (rborow@bcm1a09.attmail. com) writes: > BTW, it was revealed that the reason this guy had been bugging me was > because he "cared for" my friend so much. Huh? My friend was 25, this > guy was 50ish! I think he was of a "different persuasion," shall I > say. Geez, I sure picked a winner down there on campus. (You should > have seen the judge's reaction to this!) Would it have mattered less to you if the calls were being made by a 20-year-old female? Are you suggesting that older gay people are more likely to harass others via the telephone? Perhaps the moral of your story is that it doesn't pay to socialize with those of a "different persuasion." I fail to see how these ageist and homophobic comments relate to the harassing calls. Larry Riba | University of Colorado at Boulder | Boulder, CO 80309-0530 Internet : riba_l@cubldr.colorado.edu | voice +1 303 628 6924 [Moderator's Note: I did not interpret his 'guy was 50-ish' remark as what you term ageist. I took it to mean he thought the guy should have been a bit more mature -- at his age -- than to seek pleasure from playing games with his telephone. I think he was saying he fully expected to find a much younger person responsible. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 19:08:00 EST From: "Daniel R. Guilderson" Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable > PAT writes: > [Moderator's Note: [stuff deleted] > If *I* had anything to do with telco directory compilation and > distribution, my response to the Supreme Court would be to abolish > phone directories entirely. That would wipe out the leeches in the > directory-publishing industry overnight and prevent any futher > theft of my work, whether the Supreme Court liked it or not. PAT] That would be a counterproductive response for a company which was in the business of pleasing its customers. Publishing a directory probably doesn't cost the phone company a whole lot relative to the entire business. Since it is great public relations and great advertising, it would be prudent to keep producing and distributing them. Another thing to consider is that the cost of compiling and checking the directory information is probably miniscule compared to the cost of manufacturing and distributing the directories. My last thought on this is that the competing directory publishers have to get the information somehow. I would think that it would be easier and cheaper to buy the information directly from the phone company, probably in electronic form. I say this because of all the different white page directories I have ever seen, I have never seen one that wasn't reformatted to fit in more advertising. With that in mind, I would imagine that the cost of buying the electronic info would be small compared to the cost of working with a hardcopy or the cost of scanning in the information. By the way, the framers of the US Constitution never intended copyrights to protect personal information. They were intended to protect creative works. Trying to apply a limited law to a more general case will most likely be disastrous. Daniel Guilderson UMass Boston, Harbor Campus, Dorchester, MA USA ryan@cs.umb.edu [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the informaiton by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. They are free to take the information, period. Telco cannot forbid them to rip off the information in the directory, nor can they force them to pay for it. You say 'telco is in the business of pleasing its customers' ... but what about the alternate directory people? Are they trying to please anyone, or just make a fast buck show up even faster? Since they no longer have to pay telco for the directory listings (for to force them to pay if they were unable to do so would be denying them what the court said they could have with no strings attached), how many of those companies do you think will actually volunteer to pay anything? Do you have money you wish to give away to telco? If I was in telco's place, I'd suspend directory publishing at least for two or three years and let the lucky benefactors of the Court's Wisdom wind up bankrupt and out of business, *then* start publishing directories again. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lars Poulsen Subject: Re: End of the [Party] Line Organization: Rockwell CMC Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 20:52:24 GMT TELECOM Digest vol 11 issue 264 msg 1 reprinted an AP wire service story submitted by Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 about the end of party line service in Woodbury, Connecticut. I enjoyed the story, but would like to make a couple of technical comments. I wish there were a way to get them back to Ms Cappiello of AP. > By JANET L. CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writer ... > Woodbury Telephone is being allowed to eliminate the service now > because of a $1.8 million equipment upgrade, Mitchell said. > Eliminating party lines also became imperative because of computerized > 911-emergency response systems. > When a caller dials 911, the caller's address appears on a computer > screen at the dispatch center. With party lines, there's a risk that > the address could be that of the other customer, Mitchell said. This does not ring true to me. If the switch software can provide ANI for billing, I would expect it to provide ANI for E911 witout problems. It disturbs me when businesses deliberately tell lies to regulatory agencies. (It also disturbs me that we set up regulatory agencies that aren't technically competent to see through such fibs). While this particular obfuscation is relatively harmless, I bet that if the company fibs about harmless things they probably lie through their teeth about facts that have a material impact on the ratesetting. Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer CMC Rockwell lars@CMC.COM ------------------------------ From: Bob Yazz Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Date: 4 Apr 91 07:25:17 GMT Jim Gottlieb writes: > Dial *67 from almost any Pacific Bell ESS-served line and you will > hear a confirmation tone followed by dial tone. On my DMS-100 line in San Diego, I get a CPC disconnect and the DMS-100 "catch-all" recording -- "We're sorry, your call did not go thru". A couple of times the equipment got confused and required 30 seconds on-hook to be able to provide dialtone again. Could be because I'm on DMS-100 or because I'm in San Diego and the CLID trials are planned for LA and SF. Bob Yazz -- yazz@lccsd.sd.locus.com Payphone ripoff problems? Californians call Pac Bell at 800/352-2201, M-F, 8-5. From elsewhere try the FCC's enforcement division at 202/632-7553. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls From: tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) Date: 4 Apr 91 23:19:22 GMT In article , bernhold@red8.qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) writes: > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." > After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your > call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) > I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize > what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? This is an automatic dialing system used by phone solicitors. The idea is to increase the productivity of phone solicitors by having a machine call people and que them up for the next available solicitor ... kind of like when you call the airline, and get a recording saying "ALL OUR AGENTS ARE BUSY NOW...PLEASE HOLD FOR THE NEXT AVAILABLE AGENT"... only in reverse. These things are supposed to be set up for minimum or no waiting time, based upon statistics and a large number of agents. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sprint Outage in CA Last Week Date: Wed Apr 3 16:58:01 1991 From: jim@slxinc.specialix.com In vol. 11, issue 261 Steve Elias wrote: > The newsfolk did make some comment indicating that those who had put > the fiber down may not have gotten the appropriate permissions from > the track owners, however. As an aside, there was a similar > controversy (but no train wreck or fiber cut) in Framingham, MA about > a year ago. Sprint did have permissions to put the fiber alongside that track. When they put the fiber in they had to shut that line down and ran work trains to haul equipment and supplies. They did the same thing when MCI put the fiber along the track from San Jose to San Francisco, only since that line is double track they only shut down one track. Many railroads are now getting large sums of money for letting the phone companies put in fiber along their right-of-way, and as we've seen in this wreck and the wreck in Cajon Pass a couple of years ago (which also had an oil pipeline rupture) show that these fibers can be disrupted. Both this wreck and the one in Cajon Pass were on the Southern Pacific, a large "ICC Class One" railroad, imagine what could happen on some of the smaller short lines with low quality trackwork. Maybe the long distrance carriers should have redundant fiber on a different routing? (Like also along the Union Pacific from San Jose to Oakland.) That way one wreck won't disrupt the long distance network. Jim Maurer Specialix Inc. jim@specialix.com ------------------------------ From: David Smallberg Subject: Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 20:55:44 GMT In article fulk@cs.rochester.edu (Mark Fulk) writes: > I just spoke to Gena Fulmer at the above number [ 1-800-347-8988 ]. She > admits to having heard quite a few complaints, and indicated that they would > likely be acted on. Maybe Rochelle Richter and Gena Fulmer don't talk to each other. I just got off the phone with Ms. Richter. Here's the history of the system: a survey of customers showed that people would love automated access to the kinds of information that they had previously had to ask a human operator for. Originally, a caller would give his Sprint account number to access the system. This was a pain for many people, and *lots* of complaints were received; things were changed so that your phone number is accepted instead. Sprint examined the Privacy Act, and does not disclose things that the Act prohibits (call details, customer name or address). They do, of course, give the total amount of your bill. Her claim is that the cost of the programming change to require a PIN is not yet justified by the number of complaints. There is some consideration of flagging a number to disallow automatic billing info access. It's a numbers game -- oodles of people like the system, whereas I'm only the 19th person to have called her (she's keeping a list, to let us know if things change). I gave her the "boss suspects you're looking for another job" and "jealous boyfriend suspects you're doing a lot of calling to that guy you met from far away" scenarios. I didn't think she felt that these were problems, given that no one's complained that it's happened to them. One thing she said was "Well, you can't have perfect security -- someone who really wants the information could probably find some way to get it." Oh, and since the number is that of Sprint's executive offices, I would imagine that those of you who've been having serious billing problems could direct your complaints there (You probably already have). David Smallberg, das@cs.ucla.edu, ...!{uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!cs.ucla.edu!das ------------------------------ Date: 2-APR-1991 22:12:31.46 From: "Fred E.J. Linton" Subject: Re: MCI Around Town followup In response to a recent query, the ITT "Longer Distance" service-questions 800 number *was* 1 800 221 4064 (ages ago, when they sent me my ITT LD card). Hope that's still valid. Fred ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 13:43:00 -0800 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Calling Cards With No Surcharge Cable & Wireless also has a calling card that has no surcharge. They have 950 access in many areas, and 800 access for the rest. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #267 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10643; 6 Apr 91 14:31 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa28764; 6 Apr 91 12:58 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa29085; 6 Apr 91 11:52 CST Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 11:11:33 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #268 BCC: Message-ID: <9104061111.ab06446@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Apr 91 11:11:14 CST Volume 11 : Issue 268 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination [Larry Lippman] 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct [Stephen Fleming] First Day of CLID in Delaware [Ken Weaverling] 10xxx Dialing From Hotels == Potential Fraud? [Ed Greenberg] A New Low for Western Union [haynes@cats.ucsc.edu] Directory Assistance "Quotas" (was: Supreme Court: White Pages) [R Bowles] Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed [Phydeaux] Voice Actuated Phone Systems [John Boteler] Can I Convert a Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? [Daniel Wynalda] Seeking Comparisons on Cellular Equipment and Systems [stehle@erg.sri.com] Information About Digital Switching Software [SheshaPrasad G. Kris] 56kbps Alternatives? [Mark McWiggins] Latest on Text-to-Speech Processing? [R. Steve Walker] Converting PCM to ADPCM [Quinn Jensen] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination Date: 2 Apr 91 11:04:04 EST (Tue) From: Larry Lippman In article DISC3C1@jetson.uh.edu writes: > Who needs to buy one of these things? There are numbers you can call, > that are supposed to show you if your line is been tapped. Oh, right. Like 1-800-FIND-BUG or 1-900-FIND-TAP. :-) > They call it a sweep. It is an alternating pitch supposedly; and > is meant to stay high pitched if your line is being bugged and > alternate if not. For example, call this sweep: 214-357-8686 I think someone has been watching too many James Bond movies. While I had a pretty good suspicion as to what the above number actually is, I called it to make certain. It sounds to me like a 24B Loop Checker circuit. These "sweep tone" lines, which exist in many, but by no means all central offices, are used by installers to make a rapid assessment of the transmission quality of subscriber loops. Dialing the number associated with the test line connects it to a loop checker generator circuit which places a continuously repeating sweep tone on the line. The sweep time period is usually 15 to 20 seconds. In the field, an installer uses a simple audio frequency level meter with a specially calibrated scale (it usually has red and green colored regions for "go" and "no-go"). The installer watches the meter while listening to the sweep tone; if the needle states in the green, then the loop transmission quality is usually "okay". The above system is usually called a "Loop Checker". From a transmission measurement standpoint, it provides rather imprecise information. However, it is a quick and dirty measurement method which requires inexpensive field equipment and does not require much training on the part of the installer for use. It is important to realize that the amplitude of such loop checker generator lines is NOT CONSTANT over the swept frequency range. Therefore, this line is of no value for serious transmission measurements. The expected amplitude variation is taken into consideration on the level meter indicator scale. Needless to say, loop checker test lines have *NO* utility in the detection and location of eavesdropping devices on a telephone line. > [Moderator's Note: Where did you get your information from, Scott? The human imagination has no bounds, eh? :-) Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!fleming@uunet.uu.net Subject: 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 08:36:56 PST Just called local information (411) in northern Virginia. Got a new recording: "You may be connected to this number for an additional charge of 30 cents. The number is: xxx" Nice. Very nice. Especially when I'm in my car trying to juggle pencil and paper. Should get some use. (Disclaimer: for all I know, NT invented this service, but *I've* never encountered it before!) Stephen Fleming | Internet: fleming@cup.portal.com | Director, Strategic Mktg. | CI$: 76354,3176 AOL: SFleming | Northern Telecom | BIX: srfleming X.500: ??? | 7900 Westpark Drive, A220 +----------------------------------| McLean, Virginia 22102 | Opinions expressed do not | (703) 847-8186 | represent Northern Telecom. | ------------------------------ From: Ken Weaverling Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 12:48:21 EST Subject: First Day of CLID in Delaware Caller*ID started Monday (1 April 91) in Delaware. I called Diamond State last week to order it, and was told that they couldn't take orders for it until the first day that they were authorized to offer it. So, I spent all morning trying to call Customer Service today and all I got was an engaged signal. Finally, around lunch time, I got through to an automated message that put me on hold for 10 minutes for the first available operator. I've had to wait until April 3 it to be installed on my line. :-( I just HATE having to wait to play with my new toys! ------------------------------ From: Ed_Greenberg@3mail.3com.com Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 10:57 PST Subject: 10xxx Dialing From Hotels == Potential Fraud?? Bull Puckey! > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). Some have said that permitting 10xxx+0 dialing could result in fraud, since the perpetrator, oops, I mean customer, might request a call to be completed by the operator and billed to the calling number (as in "I'm having trouble dialing, could you please call... ") Why not offer dial-8 access to Charge-A-Call lines? Why not? Because it wouldn't be possible to rape the customer that way. edg ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu Subject: A New Low for Western Union Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 11:52:00 GMT As if things there weren't bad enough, I see that Western Union is trying to change its corporate name to "New Valley". ------------------------------ From: Richard Bowles Subject: Directory Assistance "Quotas" (was: Supreme Court: White Pages) Date: 5 Apr 91 00:12:22 GMT Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, MD 21218 I don't know about Boston, but once-upon-a-time I worked for the DA vendor for Pacbell in California -- and probably half of the software involved gathering huge amounts of statistics regarding DA operator performance. The items included how long per call, per key-stroke, number of keystrokes per call, number of listings retrieved per call ... and many more. The key issue is that the DA operator was PAID based on his or her performance on a number of the criteria, so you can rest assured they are at least tempted to be less than cooperative on potentially long or complicated calls. While I didn't have a lot of contact with the actual operators (I was a programmer), what I saw and heard made it sound like one of the worst, most demeaning, and high-pressure jobs available. These people were monitored constantly, handled calls at an unbelievable rate without any pauses, and even had put up a little sign when they needed to go the bathroom. DISCLAIMER: My knowledge is over five years old and a bit fuzzy. Opinions are just that and mine. This has NOTHING to do with my present employer. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 09:50:57 PST From: Phydeaux Subject: Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed I just got the above mentioned phone. I'm looking for a way to outfit it with an RJ-11 jack. When you remove the battery there are some contacts that are obviously there for something (the battery connections are at the other end so they are not for power). Does anyone know what they are? I know there are some vendors out there who make attatchments for some of these phones. An address or telephone number would be helpful. Also, one functions on the phone is "CYCLE BATT" which I assume has something to do with the Ni-Cad batteries. There's nothing in the documentation about this. Anyone have an idea what this function is? reb *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* reb@ingres.com or reb%ingres.com@lll-winken.llnl.GOV ICBM: 41.55N 87.40W h:558 West Wellington #3R Chicago, IL 60657 312-549-8365 w:reb ASK/Ingres 10255 West Higgins Suite 500 Rosemont, IL 60018 708-803-9500 ------------------------------ Subject: Voice Actuated Phone Systems Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 9:06:54 EST From: John Boteler Barton F. Bruce typed: > Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend > Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone be > voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is > being refered to. Come on, we had this in the early part of this century. She was called "Central". She even provided Caller*ID! John Boteler bote@csense {uunet | ka3ovk}!media!csense!bote SkinnyDipper's Hotline: 703 241 BARE | VOICE only, Touch-Tone(TM) signalling ------------------------------ Subject: Can I Convert a Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 10:16:42 EST From: Daniel Wynalda Although I'm not a bad systems analyst, I wouldn't consider myself any kind of electrical engineer. I can, however operate a soldering gun. Here's my problem: I have a single line cordless phone that I want to work on several phone lines. Ideally, this is what I'd like to do: After a flash (hangup) on the phone, I'd like a box that will listen for a tone from the keypad on the phone. This tone will select the phone line that I wish to be connected to. This box doesn't seem like it would be that hard to build, and I'm surprised that no one else has done this and marketed it. Is there anyone out there who's attempted a project like this? It is not that important that the phone actually ring when calls come in on any of these lines. I just want to be able to pick up line 3 when I hear a page for "Line 3". Without walking a half-mile. I would think a tone decoder wired to three relays could do the logic for three lines -- just press 1 to flip relay 1 on (thus forcing 2 and 3 off). This would work for all three lines. My main question in the design would be how to DISCONNECT the phone from the phone lines on flash (hangup) but still supply voltage to the phone to decode the tones. I suppose I could monitor the phone line for voltage change when returned to hook. This could disconnect the phone from the lines -- but what voltage should I feed the phone so the decoder can watch for a tone? After the tone is heard, I'd want the box to drop off the line (or ignore more tones -- because I'll have to dial out sometimes). Any suggestions? Is this a project that is feasible for a near-beginner or is there someplace I can purchase such a device?? I have had some basic electrical classes including digital circuits in college. Any information is appreciated. Daniel Wynalda | (616) 866-1561 X22 Ham:N8KUD Net:danielw@wyn386.mi.org Wynalda Litho Inc. | 8221 Graphic Industrial Pk. | Rockford, MI 49341 ------------------------------ Subject: Seeking Comparisons on Cellular Equipment and Systems Date: Thu, 04 Apr 91 11:07:00 -0800 From: stehle@erg.sri.com I would like to receive comments from readers of this net on the comparative evaluations of cellular subscriber equipment (i.e., handhelds, transportables, mobile transceivers) and systems (i.e., cell sites, base stations, switches). The inquiry extends to products for both the US and international markets. The recent messages comparing the Motorola and Fujitsu are a good start in my search. I hope the traffic will concentrate on the relative technical merits of the product lines. I am not especially interested in the marketing approaches/restrictions, but I would be receptive to those comments as well. I am particularly interested in products of the following manufacturers: Motorola Fujitsu Oki Panasonic NovAtel Ericsson/GE Nokia NEC Mitsubishi AT&T Northern Telecom Comments are solicited on: Technological advancement (Innovative design, RF sensitivity, handoff algorithms, talk time, cell site equipment modularity) Reliability & Servicability Human Factors (Packaging, Ease of Use, Voice Quality) Completeness of the product line Future product announcements IN ORDER TO CONSERVE NET BANDWIDTH, please send e-mail to: stehle@erg.sri.com I will maintain a file of all messages received, if others are interested in the comments received. I am encouraged by the helpfulness that I have seen and received from the readers of this net. Let me express my appreciation in advance. Roy Stehle SRI International ------------------------------ From: "SheshaPrasad G. Kris." Subject: Information Wanted About Digital Switching Software Organization: Computer Science Department, Oregon State Univ. Date: Thu, 04 Apr 91 21:54:25 GMT I am looking for information in Digital switching (Telephone exchange) software. I have worked as design engineer for 3 years, developing softawre for Telephone exchanges in India. I am looking for some organisations or universities which are developing switching software. I am developing Digital switching software simulation module. If you can pass some e-mail addrees it would be great! Please reply by e-mail. Thanks, SheshaPrasad Krishnapura G. Internet: shesha@jasper.cs.orst.edu Computer Science Department UUCP : hplabs!hp-pcd!orstcs!shesha Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331 (503) 754-6313 ------------------------------ From: Mark McWiggins Subject: 56kbps Alternatives? Organization: Integration Technologies, Inc. (Intek) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 22:43:04 GMT My prospective employer is using a leased line for 56kbps service between two remote offices. I've read the blurb for UUNET's Alternet service, and I got an e-mail note saying that PSInet offers something similar. Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but what would one be giving up by changing from a leased line to Alternet or PSInet? Are there any other alternative services that one should consider? Thanks in advance for any insight on this. I'd be especially interested in hearing from someone who's made this switch. Mark McWiggins Integration Technologies, Inc. (Intek) +1 206 455 9935 DISCLAIMER: I could be wrong ... 1400 112th Ave SE #202 Bellevue WA 98004 mark@intek.com ------------------------------ From: "R. Steve Walker" Subject: Latest on Text-to-Speech Processing? Date: 5 Apr 91 01:06:58 GMT Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology I'd like to know what the latest (or current) technology is for the Text-to-Speech processing market. What is being used and what are the latest breakthroughs. I'm familiar with DecTalk, but I'm looking for equipment that can run on a PC or Mac platform & works w/ a voice mail system. Thanks for your help! Richard S. Walker Georgia Tech Research Institute GA Tech Box 35302 SWALKER@gtri01.gatech.edu (vm) Atlanta, GA 30332 swalker@vms62a.gatech.edu (vms) [404] 874-1886[W] gt5302b@prism.gatech.edu (unix) [404] 607-0958[H] 71021.1544@compuserve.com (cis) ------------------------------ From: Quinn Jensen Subject: Converting PCM to ADPCM Organization: Sanyo/Icon International, Inc., Orem, Utah Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 15:23:08 GMT I am looking for some routines, hopefully in C, to convert 8-bit companded PCM samples to ADPCM. I want to convert the samples in not-necessarily real time. If no software is available, I'll probably attempt myself to impliment a transcoder in fixed-point using C, with the TI app note as a reference ("32-kbts/s ADPCM with the TMS32010," _Digital Signal Processing Applications with the TMS320 Family_, Sect. 17). The code and documentation found on Dr. Bub for the 56001 should be helpful as well. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #268 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03138; 7 Apr 91 1:31 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa32269; 7 Apr 91 0:04 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09766; 6 Apr 91 22:59 CST Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 22:47:59 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #269 BCC: Message-ID: <9104062247.ab14873@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Apr 91 22:47:39 CST Volume 11 : Issue 269 Inside This Issue: DON'T FORGET! Set Clocks Forward Western Electric Power Cable [Larry Lippman] Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [David E. Bernholdt] International Tariff Expertise Sought [Carl Wright] Telemarketing Sleezoids [David Lesher] Two Wire vs Four Wire Subscriber Line [Gerald Peppers] Multi-Line Ringer Sought [Rod Erickson] I Have AT&T, and I Can't Call Home [Christopher Wolf] Caller-ID Specifications Needed [David Berman] "Hello, I'm Digit Dialing ..." [John Palmer] Auto Dialing Deskset? [Gary Delong] D-I-Y Slamming [David Barts] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Western Electric Power Cable Date: 6 Apr 91 00:24:11 EST (Sat) From: Larry Lippman In article DAN@gacvx2.gac.edu (Dan Boehlke) writes: > > A truly scary experience is to move a piece of old RH or RHW > > rubber-insulated power feeder cable, watch both the outer insulation > > and the rubber flake into dust, and see exposed conductor within a > > fraction of an inch of grounded metal! I could never understand > > why WECo continued to use potentially unstable rubber-insulated > > power cable for almost forty years after far superior plastic > > insulation was available following World War II. > It is my understanding that good real rubber products resist acid > better than even most of today's plastics. Acid resistance would be > very important around batteries. Synthetic rubber does have good chemical resistance to acids in concentrations likely to be found in storage battery electrolytes. In fact, common telephone industry practice for cable connecting directly to battery terminals is to use finely stranded welding cable with "SO"-type rubber insulation. However, WECo traditionally used type RH or RHW rubber insulation for ALL power cabling in gauges ranging from 14 AWG to 750 MCM. Chemical resistance to acids was not really an issue once outside of the battery room. As a somewhat interesting aside, WECo 750 MCM power cable had "non-traditional" uses. A sixteen inch length (which weighs about three pounds) makes an excellent "attitude adjustment tool" for telephone company personnel who have to work in crime-ridden urban areas. I once saw its effectiveness in deterring a car theft in the parking lot of a New Jersey Bell central office in Newark. The power cable section also had the advantage of not being an unlawful weapon. After all, it's an engineering sample, right? :-) Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: "David E. Bernholdt" Subject: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Date: 5 Apr 91 16:25:48 GMT Organization: Quantum Theory Project, Univ. of Florida In article I wrote: > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." After a couple more of these calls the next day, I finally found out what it was. A call arrived at roughly the interval it had been retrying at from the holder of my student loan -- the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. After discussing the matter of my continued student deferrment, I asked if they used such a computerized system as had been bugging me. They do. The system is called Voicelink, and is produced by a company of the same name in Seattle, WA. A computer dials the phone number in question and listens for an answer. If an answering machine answers (recognized by a long speech, I imagine), it leaves a computerized message saying that the ISAC is trying to reach you and will call back. If a human answers it connects you immediately to a human to take the call (this transfer was unnoticable to me). The place I got caught is that there were no humans available to take the call, so the computer tried for a little while to find one, then apologized and hung up. All in all, there are a bunch of humans takining a bunch of automatically dialed calls at the same time. The obvious utility of this system for the _caller_ is that human time is expended only in talking to a human. Several people who responded to my original posting say that this is also being used in telemarketing. Someone mentioned that you can also employ a human to dial the numbers and connect in the computer if there are (legal) problems with computer-dialed calls. (Boy, what a job!) The person managing VoiceLink for the ISAC said that her Visa company uses such a system as well. She said she appreciates it. Apparently she only gets calls when she's away, so there is a message on the answering machine. She claimed that situations like mine, where no human was available to take the call were quite rare (though it happened to me five times in two days). I suggested that the computer should identify the call as being from the ISAC in such situations, and she promised that she would talk to the vendor to see if it could be done. She reacted quite calmly when I said that I would hang up on future calls which didn't identify the caller -- her only concern was to be sure that I _would_ speak to a human if everything worked as it was intended to. Of course now that I know who the caller (probably) is when it happens again, things are somewhat less bothersome. I must say that it was rather disconcerting, having never met such a system before -- and everyone has to have a first experience with it _sometime_. David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365 ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: International Tariff Expertise Sought Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 18:07:54 GMT I am seeking individuals who can discuss how the revenues from international calls are distributed and determined. Any names are appreciated. Anywhere in the world. Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Telemarketing Sleezoids Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 19:48:47 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers We got hit by the {Miami Herald's} Telesleeze dialer yesterday. Seeing as we just got DID with about one hundred incoming numbers, it was a royal pain. I immediately asked the name of the man in charge of this verbal whorehouse. He actually accepted my call. (Gee - working for the people I do has SOME advantages ;_) I demanded he remove our entire trunk group from his machine. Time will tell if he does or not. But the real reason I write today was his claim that newspapers are immune to the law about telesleezi. He said it was a First Amendment issue. I pointed out that I had reread the First Amendment very recently, and sure did not see anything about newspaper telemarketing in it ;-} He backed off, and said it was a Supreme Court decision. I did believe THAT either, so I checked. Here's what I found: Florida Statute section 501.059 allows residential subscribers to get on a "no sales solicitation calls" listing maintained by the Dept of Agriculture Division of Consumer Services ($10 first time, $5 yearly renewal). Once you're on the list, unsolicited telephone sales calls can not be made to you except (1) in response to your express request, (2) primarily in connection with an existing debt or contract, (3) to any person with whom the solicitor has a prior or existing business relationship, or (4) by a newspaper publisher or his agent or employee in connection with his business. (This from a friend in the state gov't.) So I guess the newspaper lobbyist got their bonus paid this year. John Hignon, I suggest that you do NOT move to Florida. wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (305) 255-RTFM ------------------------------ From: Gerald Peppers Subject: Two Wire vs Four Wire Subscriber Line Date: 5 Apr 91 19:40:19 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL I have a question for which I hope that more knowledgable people in telephony can assist me with! What is the difference between a two wire subscriber line and a four wire subscriber line? That is to say, if I am a cellular switch owner and don't know a lot about cellular but my management staff does, how do I go about making an informed decision on the selection of two wire vs. four wire subscriber lines coming into and out of my switch? What are the advantages of using two wire subscriber lines coming into the switch? What are the advantages and disadvantages of using four wire subscriber lines? Is the decision made based on the direction of the trunk circuits (Inbound , Outbound or Two-Way Trunks)? Please advise, anyone! Thank you, Gerald Peppers usenet address: !motcid!void!peppers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 09:46:36 PST From: "Rod Erickson, x2505" Subject: Multi-Line Ringer Sought I'm looking for a ringer which can be connected to three or more phone lines, providing distinctive ringing for each. One could track down separate ringers which sound sufficiently different (any pointers on sources? many sound alike), but a single unit would make for a neater and more compact installation, and its rings might be more easily distinguished. Does such a device exist? P.S. What's the most tidy way to wire up three-line switching in a residential installation? Should I buy one of those five-button switches with a modular plug on one side and a 25-pair plug on the other? Roddy Erickson erickson@ingres.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Apr 91 13:23:28 EST From: CMWOLF@mtus5.bitnet Subject: I Have AT&T, and I Can't Call Home Here's the story. Any help someone could give me would be nice. My school has this wonderful little thing they started this year. Instead of phone bills being sent to the room, and quite possibly having a phone disconnected because one of several roommates didn't pay, each student has their own 'PIN' number that will work when calling long distance from any phone ON CAMPUS. This is the only place this number will work. Well ... Before break, I received a phone bill for $4-5. Being as it was small, I figured to wait till next month to pay it. When the next one came, it had a total of about $30 on it, and ... a warning saying that since I didn't pay the $5 from before, I'd be disconnected in several days if I didn't pay up. Well, I mailed off the check. Well, now my PIN had been disconnected. I don't know why. Funny thing is, neither does AT&T. I called and asked what's up. They put me on hold for about ten minutes listening to a tape about all this wonderful AT&T equipment I can't afford, but would make my life oh so much more easier, and when the gentleman came back, he said he didn't know why the code didn't work. He said maybe his information hadn't been updated. He said I should start contacting people around here. Campus telecommunications department. Local telco address to make sure a local computer isn't screwed up. Etc. I asked him for another number to contact, but he wouldn't give me one (like someone who would have up-dated info on me.) Anyone know something I can do to get this fixed? Christopher Wolf P.S. I can't call home but from a pay phone, and that's expensive. ------------------------------ From: @comspec.uucp (David Berman) Subject: Caller*ID Specifications Needed Organization: Comspec Communications Inc., Toronto Ontario Canada Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 13:22:08 GMT Northern Telecom has had their Maestro phones out a while, I think. And I also believe that the Caller*ID transmissions from the phone company are kind of standardized. I think. Question: Does anyone reading know what is sent out? How the phone number or alpha information is encoded on the ring cycle? Has it been done in a reasonable way so that decoding is sensible? (etc) Addresses the future? Or: Does anyone know where such information is published for reference? Further: Will Toronto (416)'s Caller ID transmissions be compatible with the ones in the United States, say, in AT&T territory? Or will they be similar, but different, so that Maestro phones in Atlanta, GA, won't work in Toronto, even though they have fixed the design flaw down there? (I have even more questions, but hope that I will be able to follow the thread as others ask in response to your answers ...) [thanks] Dave Berman 436 Perth Av #U-907 daveb@comspec.UUCP Computer at work Toronto Ontario uunet!mnetor!becker!comspec!daveb Canada M6P 3Y7 416-785-3668 Fax at work ------------------------------ From: jpp@tygra.UUCP (John Palmer) Subject: "Hello, I'm Digit-Dialing ..." Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing System, Detroit, MI Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 13:51:04 GMT I was in my car the other day and had my office line forwarded to my car. Got the following call: Me: "Hello, , can I help you?" Woman: "Yes, I'm digit-dialing and I was wondering if your company has any other numbers in this prefix?" Me: "What's digit dialing?" Woman: "I'm dialing all of the numbers that begin with 881-8" Me: "Why? Why are you doing this?" Woman: "I'm telemarketing." I go on to bawl her out for invading my privacy and tying up my business line. I hand her some line about how that is illegal and that she better not call me again or I'd call the police. She politly says, "Thank you. Goodbye" Hmmmm. Someone wrote a very bad telemarketing script for her. They actually told her to be *HONEST* about it!! E-MAIL Address: jpp@tygra.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 16:17:52 EST From: Gary Delong Subject: Auto Dialing Deskset Needed At this time I am assisting our local PBS station setup for their auction by installing the wireing and jacks for almost 50 phones. Two of them are going to be in a public area so that people can call into the auction. Those two lines have been ordered as toll restricted, however because they are "business" lines, the PBS station will be billed for ALL calls. Does anyone have any ideas how I can reduce the potential for misuse of these phones? In the past I have encountered telephones (with no dial) that when picked up dialed a pre-defined number. Any info out there on where one can obtain a couple of these and what kind of price I might be looking at? Or, would some of you close to southern NH be willing to lend us a couple in exchange for on-air credit? BTW: Its Channel 11, New Hampshire Public Television. Gary gdelong@ctron.com [Moderator's Note: I would suggest you just order a couple of ring-down lines from telco ... when they go off hook, they automatically start ringing at the other end, where they terminate in the ACD (to in turn get passed out to the call-takers on the floor as available) or on a phone on the desk of one of the call-takers, etc. That would prevent any calls from those phones at all except calls coming specifically to you. No need to take chances, and ring-downs would not be that expensive for a few days connected locally. You see a lot of phones like this in airports at the car rental and hotel reservation courtesy stations. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 12:18:15 PST From: David Barts Subject: D-I-Y Slamming > [Moderator's Note: No, it was not a joke. Well, the part about > converting you over to MCI was, but not the part about being able to > do it. One of the menu choices given was 'to set up your phone with > one plus dialing' ... and I am sure they did not mean with AT&T as the > default carrier! PAT] So, now I suppose we can all go around our neighborhoods looking for COCOTS that use sleazy AOS's and do a little 'de-sleazing'! Nothing like a little neighborhood improvement to make your town a more pleasant place to live. :-) :-) :-) David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #269 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07639; 7 Apr 91 4:38 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa22552; 7 Apr 91 3:12 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02646; 7 Apr 91 1:05 CST Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 0:00:51 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #270 BCC: Message-ID: <9104070000.ab23753@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 00:00:39 CST Volume 11 : Issue 270 Inside This Issue: DON'T FORGET: Set Clock Forward! Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Dik T. Winter] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [H. Peter Anvin] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Carl Moore] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Peter da Silva] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jim Budler] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jeff Sicherman] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [W. H. Sohl] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Heath Roberts] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Nigel Allen] Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) [Mark Henderson] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Donovan Wallace] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers (COCOTs Strike Again!) [Mark Anacker] Re: Interop 91 Conference Notice [Carl Moore] Re: Can I Convert A Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? [Doug Faunt] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dik T. Winter" Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Date: 6 Apr 91 12:52:26 GMT Organization: CWI, Amsterdam In article ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) writes: > This put Dublin in the unusual position of > having numbers both six and seven digits long in the same calling area > (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). Yes, there are very many places where that does occur. In Amsterdam it was only a month ago that all six digit numbers were changed to seven digit numbers. Many places in Germany and Italy have variable length numbers. For instance, in Muenchen numbers vary from four to eight digits. dik t. winter, cwi, amsterdam, nederland dik@cwi.nl ------------------------------ From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: Northwestern University Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 19:49:06 GMT In article Charles Bryant writes: > This put Dublin in the unusual position of > having numbers both six and seven digits long in the same calling area > (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). I don't know if you are referring to Ireland, but this is commonplace in my home country of Sweden. It is rather a rule than an exception that there are varying length local numbers, except in four-digit area codes (due to a nine-digit limit and a five-digit minimum for the number). Examples: Stockholm, 08, has seven-digit numbers if the number starts with 6 or 7, otherwise six digits. V{ster}s, 021, has six-digit numbers if the number starts with 1 or 3 (City of V{ster}s), otherwise five-digit numbers (surrounding areas). Actually, 020 (toll free) is the only exeption I am aware of. All 020 numbers have the maximum possible six digits. 071, pay-per-call (like U.S. 900) came after I left Sweden; it is likely to work the same way. P.S. 08 = +46 8, 021 = +46 21 etc. hpa = H. Peter Anvin (in case you wondered) * Heja Sverige! INTERNET: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu FIDONET: 1:115/989.4 HAM RADIO: N9ITP, SM4TKN RBBSNET: 8:970/101.4 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 18:12:24 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion I understood the London 071/081 split to be a part of number-length standardization; apparently, UK city codes are now to start with N where N is not 0 or 1 (this is ignoring the leading 0 used to call between UK areas). ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 03:55:22 GMT > [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the > informaiton by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing > said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. For what? The white pages? They still have to get the information into their database: the telco can just give them a phone book and say "have at it". Now how much are the *tapes* worth? peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com ------------------------------ From: Jim Budler Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: Silvar-Lisco, Inc. Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 04:27:52 GMT > [Moderator's Note: They are free to take the information, period. Yes... That's what the court said. > Telco cannot forbid them to rip off the information in the > directory, nor can they force them to pay for it. You say 'telco is > in the business of pleasing its customers' Yes, and maybe rationality will now set in. Scenario: I get a phone from the LEC. Customer Service: "Do you want your phone listing published? It will cost $xx.xx" Me: "No." Customer Service: "OK" Finally, the customer who wants more will pay more, and the customer who wants less, will pay less. Pat, I'm very happy with this decision, because it's very realistic. The phone numbers, once assigned, belong to the customer, not the phone company. At some point as a result of this decision, I will be able to stop bribing the phone company to keep my phone number private. Cheers, Jim Budler jimb@silvlis.com Silvar-Lisco, Inc. +1.408.991.6115 703 E. Evelyn Ave. Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 00:46:15 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) writes: > My last thought on this is that the competing directory publishers > have to get the information somehow. I would think that it would be > easier and cheaper to buy the information directly from the phone > company, probably in electronic form. I say this because of all the > different white page directories I have ever seen, I have never seen > one that wasn't reformatted to fit in more advertising. With that in > mind, I would imagine that the cost of buying the electronic info > would be small compared to the cost of working with a hardcopy or the > cost of scanning in the information. [deleted] > [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the > information by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing > said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. > They are free to take the information, period. Telco cannot forbid > them to rip off the information in the directory, nor can they force > them to pay for it. You say 'telco is in the business of pleasing its > customers' ... but what about the alternate directory people? Are they > trying to please anyone, or just make a fast buck show up even faster? > Since they no longer have to pay telco for the directory listings (for > to force them to pay if they were unable to do so would be denying > them what the court said they could have with no strings attached), > how many of those companies do you think will actually volunteer to > pay anything? Do you have money you wish to give away to telco? If I > was in telco's place, I'd suspend directory publishing at least for > two or three years and let the lucky benefactors of the Court's Wisdom > wind up bankrupt and out of business, *then* start publishing > directories again. PAT] This is unlikely and unproductive for a number of potential reasons: 1. Attempting to drive a competitor out of business is often frowned upon by various regulatory and securities and legal authorities. Can you say 'anti-trust' ? This doesn't give the competitor any guarantee of existence but unfair business practices are out. 2. The absence of directories would hurt both consumers and merchants and potentially the phone companies themselves (except for DA of course, and that might be looked upon badly by the PUC's). 3. The officers of the phone companies have a fudiciary responsibility to maximize profits, not act out of spite. 4. The issue raised by the poster is that it could be more cost effective for the alternative directory publishers to buy the information in an already computerized form at a cheaper rate per entry than capturing it via human or automated means. 5. Selling it would become a profit center for the telco's. If you have to provide it to outsiders with no protection from copyright, you might as well make some money on the deal. [Moderator's Note: Well then, I would hand them a phone book -- probably one removed from service after a couple months at a pay station with the cover defaced and half the pages missing and tell them to have at it ... :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: "24460-W. H. Sohl(L145" Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 21:12:45 GMT Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Reply-To: "24460-W. H. Sohl" Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Pat, our Moderator said: > [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the > informaiton by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing > said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. > They are free to take the information, period. Telco cannot forbid > them to rip off the information in the directory, nor can they force > them to pay for it. But, I believe, the court did not say that the telco MUST give away the directory listings in any readily available electronic form. The writer to which Pat responds had pointed out it was probably cheaper to buy the list than to "retype" or scan an existing hard copy. I tend to agree. Remember, the case on which the Supreme Court rule stemmed from the refusal of the telco to even consider selling the data. The plaintiffs then copied the data from existing directories. The plaintiffs were apparently willing (and I'd guess would have prefered) to buy an electronic list. This is my personal view and not necessarily that of my employer. Bill Sohl || email Bellcore, Morristown, NJ || UUCP bcr!taichi!whs70 (Bell Communications Research) || or 201-829-2879 Weekdays || Internet whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: Heath Roberts Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: NCSU CATT Prog Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1991 01:53:21 GMT In article ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) writes: (see earlier messages in this issue) >[Moderator's Note: (and likewise, see earlier messages) I think what the original poster meant was that as long as the telephone company is willing to sell directory information at a reasonable price, the third-party vendor is better off buying a magnetic tape containing white page information from the telco than if they read/scan the information directly from the phone book themselves. Heath Roberts NCSU Computer and Technologies Theme Program barefoot@catt.ncsu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 23:55 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario Reply-To: ndallen@contact.uucp Even if a directory publisher unaffiliated with the local telephone company is free to reprint listings from the local telephone book, those listings will still be somewhat out of date compared to those available in the telephone company's database. The telco directory is only published once a year, and has a cut-off date some months before the actual publication date to allow for typesetting, printing, binding, etc. So a reputable competitive directory publisher may well want the actual telco database in order to produce a relatively current book (and to avoid the expense of re-entering the information from the printed telco directory). In general, can competitive directory publishers get this information for a fee from the telco? (I suspect that this varies between the states, as I have not seen any references to U.S. federal policy on competitive directories.) Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp [Moderator's Note: I don't think telco has to sell them anything except phone service. I certainly don't think telco would have to sell them access to their data base or up to the minute mag tapes. I guess by this new rule telco can't stop them from copying the directory by hand, however. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Mark C. Henderson" Subject: Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) Date: 6 Apr 91 19:56:24 GMT Reply-To: "Mark C. Henderson" Organization: Computer Research Laboratory, Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton OR In article acf5!whitejon@cmcl2.nyu.edu (jonathan white) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 258, Message 9 of 11 > wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: >> Below is a list of carriers that offer no surcharged calling card >> calls: ITT/Metromedia does have a surcharge for access via their 800 number (1-800-327-9488, I think), so if you happen to be in a part of the U.S. where 950-0488 doesn't work, you still end up paying a surcharge. Mark C. Henderson, Computer Research Laboratory, Tektronix, Inc. MS 50-662, P.O. Box 500, Beaverton, OR 97077, U.S.A. INTERNET: markh@crl.labs.tek.com MCI MAIL: 378-4996 Tel: +1 503 627 6280 Fax: +1 503 627 5502 TELEX: 6503784996MCI UW ------------------------------ From: Donovan Wallace Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed Date: 6 Apr 91 18:16:08 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. There is a company in Austin that has what you're looking for. They have a product called "Caller ID+Plus". The complete interface is contained in a DB-25 connector housing (RS-232) and plugs into a serial port on a PC. They also have application software for the PC. Here's the info: Rochelle Communications Inc 8716 N. Mopac, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78759 Phone: (512) 794-0088 Fax: (512) 794-9997 By the way, the interface sells for $85. Donovan Wallace Mitel Corp. Kanata, Ontario CANADA ------------------------------ From: Mark Anacker Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers (COCOTs Strike Again!) Date: 3 Apr 91 17:34:34 GMT Organization: Digital Systems Intl., Inc. In article , dsinet!marka@quick.com (Mark Anacker) writes: > town, so we pulled up at one of the many, *OFFICIAL-LOOKING* pay > phones. It wasn't until it refused to complete her call, and ate her > quarter, that I went over and found it was one of those infernal coin I gotta admit, when I called to complain about the phone, they did finally send me a refund (a quarter taped to a form). The carrier of the COCOT is identified as Interwest Telecom. They may not know how to program a phone, but at least they paid up. I think I'll go use the GTE phone in that town from now on. Mark Anacker ...{!dsinet,!toybox}!marka Digital Systems International, Inc. Redmond, WA USA (206) 881-7544 [Moderator's Note: A COCOT proprietor here in Chicago answered my complaint one day by sending me a check for 25 cents!. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 10:08:07 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Interop 91 Conference Notice You put an extra digit after area code 415 in the Interop number, which is apparently 415-949-1779. [Moderator's Note: Shame on me! This is the second year in a row I have had a blunder with the Interop press release. I wonder if it is some kind of psycological hangup ... sorry. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 13:57:10 -0800 From: Doug Faunt N6TQS 415-688-8269 Subject: Re: Can I Convert a Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? The new Radio Electronics (May, 91) has an article on building a couple of units to use your house telephone system as an intercom, that could easily be adapted to your function. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #270 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09543; 7 Apr 91 5:55 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa01459; 7 Apr 91 4:17 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab22552; 7 Apr 91 3:12 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 1:40:41 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #271 BCC: Message-ID: <9104070140.ab14811@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 01:40:34 CST Volume 11 : Issue 271 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Clocks; Mail Backlog; A Personal Matter [TELECOM Moderator] Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone [Tad Cook] Your Remote Access Service is Neoowwwww Ownnnnn [John Boteler] What Fire?? Channel 2 Uses Criss-Cross [Jens von der Heide] Let's Get This Straight [Lars Aronsson] Congress Concerned About Elderly/Telemarketing? [Carl Moore] Cryptography Used in Network Security [Paul Dobrovolny] Fax Line "Managers" [Tim Stephens] Two Wire to In and Out Line Signals [Ashley Salisbury] Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers [Geoff Goodfellow] Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Randy Borow] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Tom Perrine] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 0:34:47 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Clocks; Mail Backlog; A Personal Matter Sunday, April 7 at 2:00 AM (your local time) marks our semi-annual tinkering with our clocks in the USA ... and as 'they' say, we spring ahead and fall behind (one hour each time). This is the last issue of the Digest you will see with a CST time stamp for a few months. Speaking of falling behind, the incoming rush of new mail to telecom has slowed down a little, and with some dedicated effort on my part and a few issues of the Digest on Sunday, everything should get cleared out. But this experience -- the past several days of *hard* work and *long* hours to get the Digest out to you has taught me one thing, or maybe two: Effective immediatly, I can no longer give any acknowledgement of what is sent other than the auto-ack which goes out to most of you. I can no longer return mail not used; nor will I be able to take the time to do a lot of editing work. You will have to do it. Save copies of your articles (which you send here) if you consider them valuable. I've been trying to publish at least half of what comes in; I receive, on an average, 60-80 items daily, but this past week there were a couple days with well over 100 items received each day. Combined with last weekend's fiasco, that created a huge backlog here. I still want to publish as much as possible -- to present as many wide and divergent viewpoints as I can within the limits placed on me as a human being who otherwise works 8-10 hours daily at a place of gainful employment, but *something* has to give! From the most prolific of you: please, only one or two items per week if possible. You know who I mean. To all of you: Please match up the subject threads correctly. When you REply, use the header as it appears in the original. Otherwise, I have to go back to the old issues and look for the correct matching word. Try to edit your text and check your spelling. If I must select only a few of the several *good* articles which arrive daily, I will pick the ones that: are short and to the point; require little editing; use a minimum of quoted text; and are not redundant two weeks after the fact. If you get behind reading, that's too bad, but don't send in REplies to articles which appeared here two or three weeks ago without reading everything in the thread to make sure your point has not been made by others since. The more YOU do to help, the more I can publish here. If the Digest winds up taking much more of my time than it takes now, then it won't take any time at all ... I'll close it down out of a desire to preserve my own sanity. Enough said. For next: my father is quite ill. Actually, he has been ill for some time, and this is his second stay in the VA hospital in two months. From all indications, he'll be leaving us soon. When that time comes, I'll be away for a few days -- perhaps a week -- and of necessity will have to suspend the Digest for the interim. I'll let you know, and ask you to hold submissions until I return. PAT ------------------------------ From: Tad.Cook@ssc.uucp Subject: Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 15:59:22 PST In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). > A group of us had dinner there a number of months ago and it was great > entertainment playing with the phone while waiting for our meals to > arrive! > [Moderator's Note: On I-55 from here to St. Louis all the food/gasoline > stops along the way have a similar arrangement. At each booth in the > restaurant, a wall-phone is hooked to a one-way outgoing line. All > calls from the phone must be zero-plussed or 10xxx zero-plussed with > billing on a collect, third number or telco credit card basis. PAT] I got a call recently from a guy who had purchased "a box" from a company in Florida that converted a standard cordless phone into a coinless private pay phone. He was planning on installing these in truck stops, where the weary trucker would request a handset from the waitress, who would bring it to him, and he would place credit card calls. The box allegedly had some credit card billing system where it would dial up some central AOS location. My caller was suspicious because this service was supposed to be provided by the distributor of the box, but the box seemed to let all calls go through. I told him that I didn't think this scheme was a good idea. Anyone with a VHF scanner could sit outside the truck stop listening to the 46 MHz signal from the base unit, and easily decode the credit card numbers. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET: ...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Subject: Your Remote Access Service is Neoowwwww Ownnnnn Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 23:05:39 EST From: John Boteler This CLASS offering in Florida is named 'Remote Access Service'. It provides a remotely-variable Call*Forwarding service to subscribers. This allows you to change the destination number to which your calls will be forwarded from any phone, not just your own. It uses the same prompts as the rest of the CLASS suite. Pretty useful to someone on the go. John Boteler bote@csense {uunet | ka3ovk}!media!csense!bote SkinnyDipper's Hotline: 703 241 BARE | VOICE only, Touch-Tone(TM) signalling [Moderator's Note: Just today, I bought a Radio Shack "Duofone Call Forwarding System (CFS-200). The local store had them on sale for $29.95! This model requires the use of two actual phone lines -- one for incoming calls; one to dial out -- but it is remotely programmable, which is a nice feature. The best part was the $29.95 :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jens von der Heide Subject: What Fire?? Channel 2 Uses Criss-Cross Organization: Motorola Inc. Software Research & Development, Rolling Mdws, IL Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 05:45:08 GMT The other day my roomate received a strange call: "Hi, I'm calling from Channel 2 News. Could you tell me if you see a building on fire next door ?? Are there a lot of fire trucks around?? Are you sure?? Could you look out your window ?? Well, OK, bye." Needless to say, there was no fire activity around. Later that night the mystery was explained. We recently moved, and, kept the same phone number. The apartment next door to our previous address was on fire. Apparently, the local news station looked up our phone in a phone directory that lists numbers by address and probably wanted to see if the activity was worth covering. I don't what eventually happened, except that some former neighbors are out of an apartment. jens@corp.mot.com Voice: (708) 576-3312 UUCP: uunet!motcid!jens ------------------------------ From: Lars Aronsson Subject: Let's Get This Straight Organization: Lysator Computer Club, Linkoping University, Sweden Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 16:51:38 GMT This is a size 6/6 modular plug: | | || | || Cord | || | +---------------+ /| Strain relief | + | | | | P i n s | | | 6 5 4 3 2 1 | | +---------------+ |/ / +----/ /----+ +-----+ This is one wiring scheme for an extension cord: 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, 4-4, 5-5, 6-6. Let's call it Scheme A. This is another wiring scheme: 1-6, 2-5, 3-4, 4-3, 5-2, 6-1. Let's call that Scheme B. If you're using your cords for telephones, then Scheme A and Scheme B cords are interchangable. For some other purposes, that might not be the case. I would like to call Scheme A cords "straight", since every pin is connected to a pin with the same number. Scheme B cords I would like to call "cross-connected". The Swedish subsidary of Inmac agrees with me. However, a local vendor uses exactly the opposite terminology, calling Scheme B cords "straight". The explanation is that when you look at a jack-to-jack (female-to-female) joint, Scheme A makes the wires physically cross while Scheme B has physically parallel (straight) wires. Scheme A is like shaking hands (right hand to right hand) with a person. If you face the person, your arms physically cross your eye-to-eye line (unless one of you is standing on her head!). (Along the same lines, your right hand is the one where the thumb points to the left.) This all makes me so confused. Please tell me who is wrong and who is right (!). We Europeans are not that familiar yet with modular jacks and plugs. Is there any standard that defines "straight" and "cross-connected" in this context? Or do you have a de-facto standard? Or is there equal confusion on both sides of the Atlantic? Do you even use the words "straight" and "cross-connected"? Lars Aronsson, Lysator computer club, Linkoping University, Sweden Aronsson@Lysator.LiU.SE Voice phone at home +46-13-17 2143 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 9:45:45 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Congress Concerned About Elderly/Telemarketing? Today, Senator H. John Heinz of Pennsylvania was to have held a hearing in Philadelphia regarding the elderly. One of the topics I heard of was telemarketing scams aimed at the elderly. I don't have further detail on this. (This comes to my attention via KYW news-radio in Philadelphia; Sen. Heinz was killed yesterday in a collision between his plane and a helicopter.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 14:08:24 -0500 From: Paul Dobrovolny Subject: Cryptography Used in Network Security I am researching the use of cryptography for authentication services. Please pass on any available information concerning practical methods that have been implemented. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Tim Stephens Subject: Fax Line "Managers" Date: 4 Apr 91 14:41:51 GMT Does anyone have any experience (other than bad!!) with a fax-recognition switch? I hope I am using the correct terminology. The idea is to be able to use a fax machine and voice on the same line, seamlessly, thus saving the cost of another line. Suggestions, product names anyone? tim stephens stephens@cs.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: Ashley Salisbury Subject: Two Wire to In and Out Line Signals Reply-To: Ashley Salisbury Organization: City University, London Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 11:25:44 GMT Does anyone have details of a simple circuit to convert from a standard two wire telephone current loop circuit to a pair of connections for signal in and signal out ... hopefully with a reasonable degree of feed through cancellation ... ie removal of the injected signal from the signal out from the line. No, I am not worrying about line protection, or echo cancellation just the conversion. Thanks in advance, Ashley Saulsbury ------------------------------ From: Geoff Goodfellow Subject: Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers Organization: Anterior Technology, Menlo Park, CA, USA Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 23:50:54 GMT I'm looking for line (two or four wire) multiplexers, that would allow me to evenly device a 9600 bps line into to two 4800 bps lines, or a 2400 baud line into two 1200 baud lines. I recall the good ol' Bell 209A modem used to have this capability. I CANNOT use Stat-MUX's because its flow control (XON/XOFF/whatever) would make the line non-transparent to the protocol(s) going over over it. I need to lines to appear as if they each had a dedicated circuit of their own. Any suggestions for such equipment appreciated. Thanks, Geoff Goodfellow Anterior Technology 415-328-5615 geoff@fernwood.mpk.ca.us ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Thu Apr 4 08:36:16 CST 1991 Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine Yes, Mr. Rolfs, there ARE more than one such digital answering machines. The newest one has the features I mentioned, since I throughly looked it over and tried it at the store. You may have to look around. Randy Borow Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ From: Tom Perrine Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls Date: 4 Apr 91 20:46:45 GMT Reply-To: Tom Perrine Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California In article bernhold@red8.qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 266, Message 4 of 16 > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." > After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your > call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) > This was repeated about four times, then it said "Are you still > holding?" and I mechanically answered "Yes". The voice said "I'm > sorry, but I have not been able to connect the call. I will try again > later," and hangs up. > It called again, perhaps 20 minutes later. Same drill, except this > time I didn't answer the "Are you still holding?" question. It said > nothing more, and held the line until I hung up. > The third time it called, I hung up after the first "I am trying to > connect your call ..." It didn't call back after that. > I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize > what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? I believe this is the latest in boiler-room technology. Instead of the incredible expense of making a real-live person (at minimum wage, no less!) make each and every annoying, unwanted call, they have a machine make the calls. This machine sequentially walks the phone-numbers for any set of prefixes. When it gets an answer, it *then* tries to connect you to a real (?) sales-thug. It saves the incredibly valuable time of the sales-thugs, at only a major annoyance to the victim. In your case, (un?)fortunately, all the sales-thugs were busy annoying other people. Tom Perrine (tep) Internet: tep@tots.Logicon.COM Logicon - T&TSD UUCP: sun!suntan!tots!tep P.O. Box 85158 GENIE: T.PERRINE San Diego CA 92138 Voice: +1 619 455 1330 FAX: +1 619 552 0729 [Moderator's Note: As he explained it in his message in the last issue, it turns out the calls were from a collection office somewhere trying to reach him regarding his student loan. I think it really takes a lot of brass for those outfits to use a device like that to waste *my time* on hold until *they* get someone free to talk to me. When I've received automated voice calls before, I always just hang up, and everyone should take that approach, to end this latest phone nuisance once and for all. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #271 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13312; 7 Apr 91 7:03 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31145; 7 Apr 91 5:23 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab01459; 7 Apr 91 4:18 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 3:20:34 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #272 BCC: Message-ID: <9104070320.ab00057@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 03:20:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 272 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [R. Kevin Oberman] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Robert E. Novak] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Tad Cook] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Fred R. Goldstein] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Ken Abrams] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Syd Weinstein] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Peter da Silva] Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are [J. Covert] Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are [Carl Moore] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Macy Hallock] Re: Some Callers and Answering Machines [Robert E. Zabloudil] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 4 Apr 91 19:30:19 GMT In article , SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? This one just won't die. Back a year or so ago the FCC considered an increase on rates charged for X.25 lines used by Compuserve, Tymenet and other data carriers. This class of service gets a VERY favorable rate. While the proposal was dropped fairly quickly, several news stories talked about an FCC proposal to raise the rates on phone lines used for data. Many readers (who wouldn't know about what X.25 was even if the news story used the term) assumed that this meant modems. An urban legend was born! Now someone sees some reference to that proposal and the whole thing starts again. I see lots of postings on a wide variety of newsgroups about every six months. If you doubt this, call the FCC. They do have a listed number. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman@icdc.llnl.gov (415) 422-6955 Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing and probably don't really know anything useful about anything. ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Novak" Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 4 Apr 91 21:31:51 GMT Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Sunnyvale, California In article SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? I only have negative information. I tried the FCC Docket Information section (202-632-7535) and asked for any docket concerning modems. After about a ten minute wait, they said that thier database search came up empty. I then contacted the Common Carrier Office (202-632-6910). The woman I spoke to there said that they had nothing concerning modems in any proposed Common Carrier Tariffs. Robert E. Novak Mail Stop 5-10, MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!rnovak 950 DeGuigne Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 rnovak@mips.COM (rnovak%mips.COM@ames.arc.nasa.gov) +1 408 524-7183 ------------------------------ From: hpubvwa!ssc!Tad.Cook@cs.washington.edu Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 15:23:38 PST No !!! NOT AGAIN !!! In article , SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? You're KIDDING, right? Is this urban computer legend coming back to haunt us AGAIN? Well, there never was a modem tax ... but just like with the phoney rumor that the FCC is about to ban religous broadcasting, the FCC receives LOTS of mail on it. Funny thing ... the folks promoting this rumor can never supply me with and NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) number! Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 5 Apr 91 16:04:43 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes... > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? That's one of the worst "chain letters" in telecom. PLEASE IGNORE IT! To summarize: Around 1987, the Reagan FCC proposed a change in telco billing practices that would have cost on-line services about $5/hour. The idea drew huge protest and was dropped under strong congressional pressure. The Bush FCC, to the best of my knowledge, disavowed the whole mess. The idea keeps popping up because old messages get forwarded and people don't keep track of the age, and 1987's news loses its date and looks new. That's a problem with E-mail; dates can get edited out. Fred R. Goldstein Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice: +1 508 486 7388 Do you think anyone else on the planet would share my opinions, let alone a multi-billion dollar corporation? ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 4 Apr 91 18:10:10 GMT Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois In article SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? I assume that this YET ANOTHER re-hash of the proposal that died about four years ago. At that time, a file was being passed around on all the major nets. It usually began something like "I heard this on radio station WXYZ in Los Angeles yesterday.....". Things like this seem to NEVER die since the originator didn't put a date in the file. Some well meaning user stumbles across the thing years later and starts passing it around again. I even saw the Craig Shergold (cards to a dying boy) story crop up again last month. A plea to the original poster: Please provide us a little more detail on the situation you are asking about. If it does turn out to be the old story making the rounds again, please get back to your source and try to stop it. Ken Abrams uunet!pallas!kabra437 Illinois Bell kabra437@athenanet.com Springfield (voice) 217-753-7965 [Moderator's Note: And my thanks to everyone who wrote to debunk this old UL (Urban Legend) *hopefully* one last time. No modem tax, no surcharge, nothing. Please! Post these messages far and wide, and help bring a halt to this story. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Syd Weinstein Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Reply-To: syd@dsi.com Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc. Huntingdon Valley, PA Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 21:20:52 GMT Mark McWiggins writes: > My prospective employer is using a leased line for 56kbps service > between two remote offices. I've read the blurb for UUNET's Alternet > service, and I got an e-mail note saying that PSInet offers something > similar. > Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but > what would one be giving up by changing from a leased line to Alternet > or PSInet? Ok, as a user of a 56KB leased line to connect to PREPnet (our local NSFnet), I don't understand something here... If your employer has a 56KB leased line as DDS or DDS-II service between two offices, what is he running over it? (What protocol?) Is it a proprietary protocol between to multiplexers? an X.25 link? A TCP/IP link running SLIP?, TCP/IP running PPP? TCP/IP running something proprietary for the link? Straight sync data? The thing that Alternet and PSInet sell is a TCP/IP long haul service. You still need a 56KB leased line (or faster) to go from the local office to the nearest Alternet/PSInet Point of Presence and from the remote office to its nearset POP. The only savings I can see is if the link is long haul (remote offices are far away) and the cost of the PSI or Alternet is cheaper than the price of the direct 56KB line. Note, you would need a router at each end of the circuit, and the delay time would be longer under PSInet or Alternet, as in a private 56kb the delay is just two routers, with the network in place its your two routers + as many more as they use in making up their network. Now there is a big gain in connectivity outsite of the two offices, but just for a private link, its not apples and apples we are comparing here but apples and oranges. If you are looking at PSInet, Alternet, et al, time to also look at all the other long haul data networks, such as Sprintnet (nee telenet), Tymnet, Compuserve, and many many others. Sorry to be so long, but you are opening up an entire new direction to explore, not just replacing a simple 56kb data circuit. Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP Elm Coordinator Datacomp Systems, Inc. Voice: (215) 947-9900 syd@DSI.COM or dsinc!syd FAX: (215) 938-0235 ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1991 06:12:00 GMT intek01!mark@uunet.uu.net (Mark McWiggins) writes: > Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but > what would one be giving up by changing from a leased line to Alternet > or PSInet? About 46 kilobaud. Dialup service over a V.32 modem at 9600 bps doesn't begin to keep up with a 56 kb leased line. If you're doing UUCP, you could get an extra 6-8000 bps with a Trailblazer, but if you're currently using a 56 kb line you're probably not doing UUCP. peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 06:30:22 PST From: "John R. Covert 05-Apr-1991 0904" Subject: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are >> The Washington, DC, area has the best plan: 7D is local within your >> own NPA (whether that be 202, 703, or 301); 10D is local to one of the >> other two NPAs; and 1 + 10D is toll, either within your own NPA or to >> one of the other NPAs. 1 + 10D is accepted for local calls to other >> NPAs, and the call gets routed and billed the same as if you had >> dialed just 10D. > This will never be possible in at least one place -- the 516 NPA is > within the LATA from the 212 NPA, and a call carried by NY Tel. > Dialing without the 1+, however, would lead to some sort of time-out > scheme to decide whether one was dialing 516 as an NPA, or just the > 212-516 exchange in 212. From 212, incidentally, all out-of-NPA calls > are dialed 1+, and all 0+ calls, even within 212, are dialed 0+212+7d. > Talk about a full NPA ... It is most certainly possible there -- today. You should have checked before writing: There is no 212-516 NPA. Just as in the DC area, New York has been careful to avoid assigning exchanges that would make this not work. You only lose a few exchanges; in DC there are three that can't be used, and that's it. BTW, "LATA" has nothing to do with it; the only thing that matters is "Local Call." Since nothing in 516 is local to 212 (only to 718), 212 could have a 516 exchange, but they still avoid nearby area codes in order to prevent confusion. The requirement that 0+ calls within your own area code must be dialled 0+10D is in effect not just in 212, but in all the places I mentioned. That requirement is necessary as soon as an area code goes to interchangeable codes. john ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 10:00:17 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are When it was announced in this Digest that 215 area (which includes Philadelphia) was going to 7D (this refers to intra-NPA long distance), there was also a note that 412, which includes Pittsburgh, already has such calling instructions (but 412 has no N0X/N1X that I know of). 215 not only is near NJ, it's right next door to it! (There are local calls between 215 and NJ, at Trenton and some points further north.) Since when has it become necessary to consider bringing N0X/N1X to Massachusetts? The 617/508 split was done only 3 years ago without N0X/N1X being in use. Yes, I know that many calling instructions will have to change later to accommodate areacodes being generalized from N0X/N1X to NXX. How soon would this begin happening (i.e. change calling instructions for this reason, NOT because that particular area is running short of NNX)? And once areacodes become NXX, would the rule still be NOT to use N0X/N1X prefixes unless NNX prefixes started running out? For those who haven't noticed: If your area has changed its calling instructions to accommodate N0X/N1X prefixes, it should already be able to accommodate NXX area codes, not just N0X/N1X area codes. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 08:05 EST From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I > was wondering what is still available today. These are commonly available used now. Seems as though a lot of them were installed behind 1A2 systems that have now beem removed from service. Several brokers list them for $10-20 each. Be sure you get the power transformer with it. You might also want replacement priviledges ... Demon Dialers could be damaged by lightning comparatively easily in many cases. I just had two older ones I've had for years zapped. Guess I should take my own advice and put high speed solid state protection on my phone lines ... even three element gas tubes don't always cut it. For a listing of used equipment brokers, your best source is "Telecom Gear" listings. Last time I checked, you could still call 1-800-LIBRARY and get put on the list if you acted like a telecom equipment seller/user. (This is the number for Telecom Library ... and the publishers of Teleconnect, LAN, Inbound/Outbound magazines and other items of interest) (Be sure to ask them to send you a book list, too, when you call ... Harry and Jerry stock some decent titles ... and those guys are fun at a party, too.) Anybody have any used Mitel Smart One dialers they'd like to sell cheap? Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Zabloudil" Subject: Re: Some Callers and Answering Machines Date: 5 Apr 91 20:33:29 GMT Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus In article bill@eedsp.gatech.edu writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 227, Message 8 of 13 > Ever since I got Caller ID, I've noticed that some callers will call, > Call -- CALL, and will never leave a message. I can understand why > telemarketing creatures would not leave a message - they don't want to My answering machine is sort of rinky dink (fixed length OGM, and as a holdover from my radio days, I hate dead air, so I filled the w-h-o-l-e OGM tape), and I tell 'em "we don't really like answering machines ourselves, but we didn't have any choice right now, we had to put it on, so...". One day, someone who thought it was urgent called and hung up, called and hung up, over and over, and filled up the whole tape while we were out of town for the day. She's fairly intelligent; you'd think she would know that we would either pick up the phone and talk to her if we were just monitoring calls (not paranoid, just can't always get there quickly to pick it up, you know), or we would call her back as soon as we could, or maybe we were being antisocial (after the eighth hangup, a different adjective comes to mind). Like you, I wonder sometimes ... I might call back a second time, if I thought they'd forgotten me ... by the time we got back that evening and called her, she was not home, and talking to other people we found they had handled the situation anyway. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #272 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28444; 7 Apr 91 16:32 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13916; 7 Apr 91 14:30 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa28918; 7 Apr 91 13:25 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 12:48:04 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #273 BCC: Message-ID: <9104071248.ab19623@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 12:48:01 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 273 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Info Wanted on B_ISDN [Rodney Van Luinen] Re: Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: MCI Around Town followup [Brian Crawford] Re: End of the [Party] Line [Tom Coradeschi] Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Al L Varney] Re: 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct [John Higdon] Re: Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed [John R. Covert] Re: INTEROP 91 Conference Notice [Ole J. Jacobsen] Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [John Higdon] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 10:12:03 +1000 From: rodney@pico.qpsx.oz.au Subject: Re: Info Wanted on B_ISDN. Jim Niemann writes: > What research is being done in broadband ISDN? Is it possible to > purchase a prototype switch that supports it? > Where should I look for more info? Others have written various things about primary rate access etc. Well, that's incorrect. Primary rate is for normal ISDN. B_ISDN or Broadband ISDN is a connection oriented service at very high data rates. Most people regard it as having data rates in excess of 50 Mbits/sec, up to at least a couple of Gbits/sec. It uses what is known as ATM switching, or Asynchronous Transfer Mode Switching, based on small data units referred to as cells, which are a fixed length. It operates on point to point links between ATM switches, and carries anything, for example, packet switched and isochronous data. Routing is performed using VCI (Virtual Circuit Identifiers). So, the short answer is: A hell of a lot of research is being done. Most of it in development of ATM switches that work well. A lot of work is being done in deciding just what services should be offered, and people are working on standardization. You could possibly find someone who knows someone who has a prototype ATM switch, and it is possible (after AT&T's announcement of the BNS2000 cell switch) that AT&T might have something. Don't hold your breath though, because as I understand it, AT&T has started and stopped work on ATM switches at least twice, and the BNS2000 *is* a fast packet switch than can (might?) use ATM. I would guess that you don't have lots of options in getting a prototype switch. As for more information, well, a lot of papers have been written on this, and there are a couple of standards, published by CCITT. The reference numbers elude me at present....... In the meantime, there's always our 802.6 ;-) Any more queries, direct them to me at rodney@pico.qpsx.oz.au If that doesn't work, tack @munnari.mu.oz.au on the end. Cheers, Rodney Van Luinen QPSX Communications Pty Ltd 33 Richardson St WEST PERTH WESTERN AUSTRALIA. ------------------------------ From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US Date: 5 Apr 91 01:15:55 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan thuermel@ztivax.siemens.com (Dr Sabine Thuermel) writes: > We at Siemens, Munich are doing research on intelligent networks. I > would like to get into contact with US universities working in the > same field. I am grateful for any pointers. Have you considered the risks inherent in an intelligent network? I for one don't want to have an uppity switch tell me that it doesn't think it's a good time to call mom! And what if it gets upset with you and routes all your calls to a beachside resort in Fiji? ;^) Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ From: Brian Crawford Subject: Re: MCI Around Town Followup Date: 5 Apr 91 13:16:51 GMT Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ In article , FLINTON@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Fred E.J. Linton) writes: > In response to a recent query, the ITT "Longer Distance" > service-questions 800 number *was* 1 800 221 4064 (ages ago, when they > sent me my ITT LD card). Hope that's still valid. When I picked up ITT calling card service three years ago, their rates did not include a fee (monthly or per call). In addition, their rates were the same as the direct dial 1+ people had, and those were cheaper than anyone I knew (ATT, MCI, Sprint, Western Union, etc.). The rates, if I remember for cross-country were about 12 or 13 cents/minute back then. But, alas, the firm has been caught up in a merger/buy-out fever since then: ITT was bought out by some company I can remember, kept the "New Name"-ITT. Then, Metromedia bought them out, and it was called Metromedia-ITT, now this month's bill dropped Metromedia completely. Their calling card rates are now higher than their direct dial, at 18/19 cents night rate cross-country, as opposed to 12 cents/minute 1+. Still, in comparison OK. Did someone post an even less expensive alternative to this for residential use? Please pass this on, as I can't find the old message here. Thanks. Brian Crawford INTERNET (current): crawford@enuxha.eas.asu.edu PO Box 804 (permanent): crawford@stjhmc.fidonet.org Tempe, Arizona 85280 FidoNet: 1:114/15.12 USA Amateur: KL7JDQ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 9:09:26 EST From: Tom Coradeschi Subject: Re: End of the [Party] Line Organization: Electric Armaments Div, US Army Armament RDE Center Lars Poulsen writes: > TELECOM Digest vol 11 issue 264 msg 1 reprinted an AP wire service > story submitted by Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 > about the end of party line service in Woodbury, Connecticut. > I enjoyed the story, but would like to make a couple of technical > comments. I wish there were a way to get them back to Ms Cappiello of > AP. >> By JANET L. CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writer [...] > problems. It disturbs me when businesses deliberately tell lies to > regulatory agencies. (It also disturbs me that we set up regulatory > agencies that aren't technically competent to see through such fibs). [...] While not explicitly telecom related, this certainly relates to those wonderful regulatory agencies we've all come to know and love. I have a good friend whose wife is a lawyer with the Texas Public Utilities Commission (or whatever they call it there). She works telecom issues, and was putting together a document relating to a case she was on. The PC she uses does not have the ability to use symbolic typefaces, and she had to use the Greek mu as a modifier to a quantity (like mu-volts). Not being able to use the symbol itself, she intended to use the word micro-, instead, which she was _pretty sure_ meant the same thing. Now, she's a lawyer, so Greek symbols are, well, Greek to her, and she really wanted to be sure that mu really meant micro-. So, she called one of the engineers on the PUC staff. He's there to provide the legal staff with technical support. His response when asked just what mu is used to signify, ran something like "Well, I'm not really sure that they've standardized that yet.". [Insert look of disbelief here.] Needless to say, this lawyer found his statement a little difficult to believe. She ended up ringing her husband (a real engineer) at work, and asking him. Makes you kind of wonder what kind of engineers work for public utilities commissions, doesn't it? For the record: I too am an engineer (ME by education, holding an EE position). Mu means micro- means 1E-6. tom coradeschi <+> tcora@pica.army.mil ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 13:26:52 CST From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories To block presentation of calling number, > Jim Gottlieb writes: >> Dial *67 from almost any Pacific Bell ESS-served line and you will >> hear a confirmation tone followed by dial tone. And yazz@prodnet.la.locus.com (Bob Yazz) responds: > On my DMS-100 line in San Diego, I get a CPC disconnect and the > DMS-100 "catch-all" recording -- "We're sorry, your call did not go > thru". A couple of times the equipment got confused .... But ... Jim specifically said "ESS-served" line. Strictly speaking, ESS(tm) is a Trademark of AT&T, and it is unlikely the DMS-100 can legally be called an "ESS". On the other hand, Jim probably meant an "Electronic Switch-served" line or a SPC (Stored Program Control) switch. > Could be because I'm on DMS-100 or because I'm in San Diego and the > CLID trials are planned for LA and SF. All of the above; the DMS probably doesn't have the right "BCS release" to support the feature, and you are not located in one of the two "test" areas. Even with the right software, the assignment of "*67" to a feature is office-specific. It should not confuse the equipment in any case.... Two other comments: Someone asked if No. 1 ESS(tm) could do CallerID. No. Nor does it speak SS7 (it will do CCIS6 however). Nor does it do Cancel Call Waiting. Note that SS7 (or CCIS6) is only needed to make CallerID work between switches. CLASS capabilities within a single switch are certainly possible in an "island" environment, sort of like single-switch ISDN. There are several non-SS7 single-switch CLASS offices in small single-switch communities. Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems Disclaimer: I don't speak for AT&T or any part thereof, nor am I part of the "Trademark" compliance group. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 12:51 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct portal!cup.portal.com!fleming@uunet.uu.net (Stephen Fleming) writes: > Just called local information (411) in northern Virginia. Got a new > recording: "You may be connected to this number for an additional > charge of 30 cents. The number is: xxx" > Nice. Very nice. Especially when I'm in my car trying to juggle > pencil and paper. Should get some use. (Disclaimer: for all I know, > NT invented this service, but *I've* never encountered it before!) That was precisely my initial reaction when I got that identical message on my cellular phone while negotiating traffic in downtown San Francisco. While under siege from assault taxis and attack MUNI vehicles, it was very convenient to press one key and be connected to the party I was calling (in this case, a restaurant to make reservations). But there is a side effect. Remember how telcos admonished and implored DA callers to WRITE IT DOWN so that additional calls to DA would not be necessary? That was back in the days of free DA. Now that the service apparently pays its own way, why not add (at extra cost, mind you) a little convenience feature that virtually assures future inquiries for the same number? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 20:41:39 PST From: "John R. Covert 06-Apr-1991 2334" Subject: Re: Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed > I just got the above mentioned phone. I'm looking for a way to outfit > it with an RJ-11 jack. When you remove the battery there are some > contacts that are obviously there for something (the battery > connections are at the other end so they are not for power). Does > anyone know what they are? Forget it; there's no way to produce an RJ-11 jack on that phone. The contacts you are referring to provide two functions: They connect the phone to the external car booster unit, and they connect the phone to test equipment. You can get options that allow you to hook up an external speaker and mike, but nothing that will simulate an RJ-11. Even when you hook Motorola phones up to the external 3 Watt unit, you still do all control functions using the buttons on the phone. The Ultra-Classic is a nice phone. Selling for $495 here in Boston. In fact, I'm planning to buy one if I can find someone in the Boston area to buy my Nokia P-30 (real cheap) and take the 4 month service contract. I'll even buy the P-30 back at the end of the contract if whoever buys it decides cellular isn't worth keeping. john ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 7:36:59 PDT From: "Ole J. Jacobsen" Subject: Re: INTEROP 91 Conference Notice The poster is correct about the extra digit after the area code, but please note that the number in error is the *FAX* number, so don't try calling it to speak to someone! Once again: 1-800-INTEROP or 1-415-941-3399 ;voice 1-415-949-1779 ;FAX Also, in case anyone cares, the conference is always in CAPS, i.e., INTEROP 91, while the company is always in mixed case, i.e., Interop, Inc. Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions -- The Interoperability Report Interop, Inc., 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040, USA Phone: (415) 941-3399 FAX: (415) 949-1779 Email: ole@csli.stanford.edu Direct:(415) 917-2215 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 00:57 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) "David E. Bernholdt" writes: > She reacted quite calmly when I said that I would hang up on future > calls which didn't identify the caller -- her only concern was to be > sure that I _would_ speak to a human if everything worked as it was > intended to. At the risk of sounding exceedingly arrogant (too late, Higdon, the time for that concern is long past), I usually give very short shrift to people whose SECRETARIES place calls for them. Nothing, but nothing, is more annoying than, "Mr. Higdon, please." "Speaking." "Mr. Smith is calling. Can you hold please? [thunk/elevator music]" In such cases I hang up as quickly as possible. In my work it is a fact of life that a number of very busy people on very tight schedules call me routinely and somehow manage to place the calls using their own fingers on their own dials. Sometimes they even use their own voices to leave messages. Using a secretary to waste the time of the CALLEE ranks up toward the top of the rudeness scale. I might accept such a call from the President of the United States. Short of that, my time is just as valuable as that of anyone else. And on a related note: David Lesher writes: > We got hit by the {Miami Herald's} Telesleeze dialer yesterday. > Once you're on the list, unsolicited telephone sales calls can not be > made to you except ... by a newspaper publisher or his agent or employee > in connection with his business. Since I called Pac*Bell, threatened the {San Jose Mercury} with legal action, and generally promised a stink that would not clear for a long time, there have been no more calls from Harassment Central. But you can believe that if one single call does come in, I will do everything I can think of (including a few things that may not be mentioned here) to put those people out of business. > John Hignon, I suggest that you do NOT move to Florida. While I did some communications work in Jacksonville and had a very pleasant time, there are a number of reasons I would not move to Florida. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #273 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01698; 7 Apr 91 18:10 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14958; 7 Apr 91 16:41 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15889; 7 Apr 91 15:31 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 14:39:23 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #274 BCC: Message-ID: <9104071439.ab14261@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 14:39:12 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 274 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination [A. E. Mossberg] Re: Internet <-> Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions [Nigel Allen] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Dealing Aggressively With Phone Harrassment [Randy Borow] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [Kevin Brown] Re: Eight-Party and Ten-Party Ringing in the Bell System [Nigel Allen] Return to the Land of Selective Ringing [Nigel Allen] Cellular Phones for $29 [TELECOM Moderator] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "a.e.mossberg" Subject: Re: Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination Reply-To: aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu Date: Sat, 06 Apr 91 20:09:31 GMT Organization: University of Miami Department of Mathematics & Computer Science In kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > Needless to say, loop checker test lines have *NO* utility in the > detection and location of eavesdropping devices on a telephone >line. > The human imagination has no bounds, eh? :-) One time someone told me, in the strictest confidence, if I swore not to reveal the number to anyone else, that they would give me a number that I could call and it would let me know if my line was tapped. Well, I was very dubious and had a strong suspicion what it would turn out to be, but played along anyway. "Okay, here it is. Now you call and if it cycles through a bunch of frequencies your line is okay, but if the number is busy, that means your line is tapped!" This person, in Miami, had regularly been calling this number in California to check his line. No, I didn't call it, and no, I didn't tell him he was an idiot. aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 21:50 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Internet<->Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions. Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue Forwarded from newsgroups can.general and can.uucp. Any questions should be directed to the original poster, smd@lsuc.on.ca (Sean Doran). From: smd@lsuc.on.ca (Sean Doran) Message-ID: <302039400900@lsuc.lsuc.on.ca> Subject: Re: Internet<->Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions. Summary: Please be careful of NASAMAIL/Internet gateway usage Reply-To: smd@lsuc.on.ca Organization: Telecom Canada ICS User Group, Envoy 100/iNet 2000 In an article (Message-Id: <1991Apr1.200044.8839@eci386.uucp>), woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) wrote: Agreed, although the damage done was in can.general, and this probably also belongs there. > In article <1991Mar28.162214.25930@shl.com> phil@shl.com (Phil Trubey) writes: >> to post the following info. I've used it a couple of times and it >> seems to work. The fact that this gateway is known at all is generally my fault (I "discovered" that the NASAMAIL <-> Internet gateway could also handle Envoy 100 traffic, and brought it to the attention of the NASAMAIL people and to Telecom Canada. The latter don't care (or understand) while the former is edgy that there are so few controls on the gateway's use, and I expect that wide knowledge of the gateway could lead to overuse or misuse of it. Either of those two problems will force NASA to stop mail travelling to Telecom Canada from the gateway, just like Sprint Mail did. However, the normal variety of shortish Internet-acceptable mail (excluding mailing lists and UUENCODED anything) is generally considered OK. >> To reach someone with an Envoy account, send your message with the >> following address in the "To:" field: >> /ID=envoy_id/S=last_name/G=first_name/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ >> @GEMINI.ARC.NASA.GOV Neither the GivenName field nor the Initial field is necessary, and the Surname field need not always correspond to reality. For example, my signature records the ICS.TEST/ICS.BOARD/ICS.USER.GROUP account, which is my 'home' on Envoy 100. > This looks like some form of X.400 address. It is a NASAMAIL address, and NASAMAIL is a PRMD within the SprintMail/TELEMAIL ADMD. Both NASAMAIL and TELEMAIL use a mutant X.400(84) MTA, and Telecom Canada uses an old but real X.400(84) MTA. Neither Telecom nor TELEMAIL are presently reachable from COSINE, RARE or the other "Experimental" X.400 "networks" that can speak to the Internet. > We have had > mail bounce when sending to gateways into Banyan systems, because > Banyan Id's have '@'s in them (i.e. "/ID=xyz@dept@corp"). I have not > yet experimented with possible ways of quoting the mailbox field. See RFC 987 et prec, the various lists like mhsnews or talk to Steve Kille at UCL. "Quoting" of non PrintableString characters is commonplace, and can be done through the NASAMAIL gateway using standard RFC 987 encodings. >> 1) Send their Envoy message to the following address: >> [INTERNETMAIL@NASA]NASAMAIL/TELEMAIL/US No. It's [Internet Mail@NASA]NASAMAIL/TELEMAIL/US. The "Internet" part is the Given Name, and is optional. Using the one word will cause an expensive (ca. 45 cents U.S. per kilocharacter, with at least one unit) bounce to you and to the gateway's Admin. > So, does NASA pay for this gateway, or are the charges propogated back > to the Envoy user? Both. CCITT-regulated commercial X.400 traffic is billed to the originator. Therefore, sending mail outbound from Envoy via the NASAMAIL, ATTMAIL or SprintMail gateways costs only the Envoy user. Inbound traffic to Envoy from the Internet via the NASAMAIL gateway is paid for by NASA, with a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation. All traffic must meet "acceptable purpose" guidelines set out by the NSF, and anything else is in violation of both American and Canadian Law. That means that if you send "commercial" or generally non-research- related material through the Gateway, and you are caught, you will be talked to by both Nasamail and Telecom Canada. Given the amount of money that NASA is spending on the Gateway, and given that it is generally meant to be a gateway exclusively between the Internet and the NASAMAIL PRMD, I think the restrictions are reasonable, and urge you to respect it. If you are using the gateway and want to make sure that what you are sending through it to Envoy is OK, ask postmaster@gemini.arc.nasa.gov _before_ you send it. > If this gateway was actually run by Telemail or Telecom Canada, I > would expect something smarter that could look up envoy_id's from the > user's full name, just the same as smail can with fullnames. The Gateway is run by NASA and the NSF. The gateway between SprintMail's and Telecom Canada's ADMDs does not follow CCITT specs, and has difficulty with Probe MPDUs, PN lookups and so forth. > Any other way, IMHO, is just a hack! Envoy 100 is just a hack. The gateway is certainly a hack, and an ugly one. (It is loosely based on the CMR, which is described in an RFC.) The fact that the gateway can be used to send Internet messages to and from Envoy 100 is a BUG, not a feature, and will be squashed if it causes problems. >> 2) The first line of text in their message must be: >> To: your_user_id@your_address > Ah-ha! Hand-crafting the essential part of the RFC-822 header! Exactly. The To: line is fully RFC-822, and can handle anything that the average sendmail can, including multiple recipients on multiple lines. > Greg A. Woods > woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP ECI and UniForum Canada > +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] VE3TCP Toronto, Ontario CANADA Sean Doran The Law Society of Upper Canada also seand@ziebmef.mef.org Young Liberals of Canada/Parti Liberal du Canada and /C=CANADA/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/ID=ICS.TEST/S=TESTGROUP/@nasamail.nasa.gov ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Date: 7 Apr 91 11:34:42 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , intek01!mark@uunet.uu.net (Mark McWiggins) writes: > My prospective employer is using a leased line for 56kbps service > between two remote offices. I've read the blurb for UUNET's Alternet > service, and I got an e-mail note saying that PSInet offers something > similar. > Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but Using Alternet or PSI get you Internet connectivity, but WILL cost you enough monthly with the necessary telco lines that you can buy a coast to coast DDS-II lines for less. The DDS-II line will let you put ANYTHING ove it that fits. You can put several compressed voice channels and assorted data. You can use an Enet bridge that includes a compressor. You can bridge ALL the protocals on your Enet, but you sure can't if you use the TCP/IP only PSI or Alternet. I am not so sure PSI or Alternet do this, but NEARNET here in Boston gets you to PAY for ALL the necessary Cisco equipment, and THEY get to OWN it. Watch your local Internet peddler's contract carefully - That is ~$10k you just gave away. With two sites, go with point to point DDS-II, and play cute and order 56kb with secondary channel, get good CSU/DSUs that also do 64kb, flip the knobs to 64 kb, and use it. If you want internet connectivity, add it at ONE site, but beware of contracts that may try to prohibit you from using it elsewhere or sharing news with your UUCP dialup friends. Read the fine print in anything PSI sends you. FRAME RELAY is here, and I am about to post a note about it. I doubt that for two sites it makes any sense, buy just maybe you should check it out. ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Fri Apr 5 08:46:11 CST 1991 Subject: Re: Dealing Aggressively with Phone Harassment Mr. Riba ought not to think my comments were ageist or homophobic. As Pat remarked, I was indeed VERY surprised that a person of his age would stoop to such childish phone games. I honestly expected the perpetrators to be some immature college students; instead, it was an immature middle-aged man. And no, it wouldn't be different to me if it WAS a 20-year-old female who was behind it. The type of harassment would probably just have been slightly different. Regardless, it was perverted and annoying. The only reason that I believed it was someone of a different persuasion was primarily because down on campus, I was active in certain organizations which basically were diametrically opposed to what his type espoused. Thus there were some people who thought the best way to make their point was to harass the hell out of me. Well, it was I who had the last laugh that time. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ From: Kevin Brown Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service Date: 6 Apr 91 14:14:37 GMT X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 247, Message 4 of 6 > Bell of Pennsylvania's Guardian Service ($2/mo for basic jack > repair) has always struck me as being a blatant attempt to take > advantage of people who just aren't aware of certain information. The I believe you are the one not aware of that "certain information". Basic jack repair is covered under the wire maintenance plan, $ .50 /month. The guardian service you're speaking of includes offering a loaner set if the problem is in your CPE. > [As a quick side note, a local television news team discovered that if > the cause for trouble is your phone, and not the line or the jack, > customers will get whacked $56 [$40 for the visit, $16 for 15 minutes > of lineman time] for the service call. No where in the ad does it > mention this.] It doesn't mention it in the add because it's not true. Under the Guardian plan there is no charge regardless of where the problem is. If it's in the jack, Bell of Pa. repairs it free of charge, If it is in your equipment, Bell will leave you a loaner set until yours is repaired. The only time the $56 charge is given is if you do not have a maintenance plan or just have wire maintenance plan and the problem is in YOUR equipment. I'm not saying the plan is a good idea, it's pretty easy to determine if the trouble is in your phone set or in the lines. Please, before you start flaming the local telco's make sure your story is accurate. Kevin Brown Box 72 Moravian College, Bethlehem PA 18018 CSNET/INTERNET: brownK@moravian.edu UUCP...!rutgers!liberty!batman!brownK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 21:40 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Eight-Party and Ten-Party Ringing in the Bell System Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto Larry Lippman writes in telecom11.257.1: > It's not at all a bit of lore. While it is indeed true that > the Bell System maintained a wide diversity of non-WECo CO > apparatus in telephone companies which they had acquired, this > has little bearing upon the present discussion. I thought that the Bell System stopped taking over independent telephone companies in 1913 or so, pursuant to something called the Kingsbury Commitment, essentially a letter from an AT&T executive or lawyer named Kingsbury to the anti-trust officials of the U.S. Justice Department. Were there exceptions to this rule that allowed the Bell System to continue to acquire independent telcos, or am I just confused? In Canada, most small telephone companies were eventually swallowed up by Bell Canada or one of the other large telephone companies, so that several provinces only have a single telephone company. Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp [Moderator's Note: There have been various court cases involving AT&T over the years, and there was one case (I forget the year) which said AT&T could not buy any more independent telcos except under certain strict conditions: if the independent telco was bankrupt or otherwise unable to provide service and about to suspend operations then AT&T *had* to take over ... nice fair arrangement, eh? About twenty years ago, the Chicago City Council was trying to talk IBT into purchasing the Chicago portion of Centel, a mostly suburban telco serving only a tiny slice of Chicago on the northwest side. IBT was inclined to do so, but the earlier court ruling forbade it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 00:10 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Return to the Land of Selective Ringing Organization: Contact Public Unix BBS. Toronto, Canada. A further note about party lines: Bell Canada offers two-party service within urban areas for somewhat less Bell Canada offers two-party residential service within urban areas for somewhat less than regular service. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) requires Bell Canada to offer two-party service as a lower-priced alternative. Anybody can get it, unlike lifeline service in some U.S. states, which is only available to specific low-income groups. However, I suspect many people would quickly get frustrated with having to share a party line with someone else. (A footnote: A while ago, someone in Toronto was running a rather juvenile BBS that he called "The Party Line". I use a different password on each BBS I call, and I try to link it in some way to the name of the BBS. So for a password on "The Party Line", I chose the acronym of the Party of Labor of Albania. I doubt that the sysop recognized it.) Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 14:31:59 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Cellular Phones for $29 Has the bottom dropped out of the cellular phone market? I cannot imagine it has, yet consider these pending offers in Chicago from Ameritech and Cellular One: Cellular phones for $29 at the Ace Hardware chain. Or, should you want something a little more fancy, the Motorola bag phone, with an Ameritech label on the front of it for $49. Minimum commitment to Ameritech is six months. And what do you have to pay per month? For $29, you get 40 minutes of time to use day or night as you wish ... additional non-prime minutes are 4 (yes, four) cents each! Prime minutes are 40 cents each. Cellular One has the same offer, and in theirs you get the first thirty days of non-prime time free. All the non-prime usage you want at no charge. In both the Cellular One and Ameritech offers, the $29 also gets you two months of custom calling free. Those guys must really be scraping for new customers! PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #274 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20617; 8 Apr 91 4:16 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24416; 8 Apr 91 2:47 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12047; 8 Apr 91 1:42 CDT Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 1:18:04 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #275 BCC: Message-ID: <9104080118.ab21746@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Apr 91 01:17:53 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 275 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Jeff Sicherman] FRAME RELAY - You Can Order Today [Barton F. Bruce] Deposit Five Cents Please! Recording [Clint Fleckenstein] Residential ISDN Survey [Steve Gaarder] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 00:50:35 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Organization: Cal State Long Beach April 1 at 2 PM I attended the California PUC hearing held in the Anaheim city council chambers. Another hearing was held at 7 PM which I did not attend. The official representatives at the hearing included a member of the PUC, an administrative judge (I think), representatives of the phone companies seeking authorization to provide the CLASS services (Pacific Bell, Contel of California, and GTE California), and one from TURN (Toward Utility Rate Normalization - a consumer advocacy group). The latter sat as a panel in front of the PUC officials and were there to answer questions from the public and not as advocates for the organizations they represented. [In fact, a minor disagreement erupted between the PacBell and TURN persons after an answer to a question resulted in the TURN rep addressing the PacBell rep who then complained that this was not an evidentiary hearing ... Now children :-) ] All the represented parties had material describing and defending their positions which were handed out upon entering the hearing. The contents were predictable: the phone companies wanted only per-call blocking and the consumer groups wanted free per-line blocking. The latter was based upon the already existing privacy afforded by the current arrangement of no Caller-ID. The phone companies' view was that per-call blocking guaranteed everyone's rights, including the call recipient's. PacBell presented a rather intricate argument to the effect that per-call blocking signalled to the callee that the caller is intentionally withholding his identity whereas per-line blocking only tells that the caller 'happens' to subscribe to per-line blocking and that the callee cannot discern anything about the caller's intent and must answer the call to determine if it is a party who he wishes to speak with. [ Ignoring what it does say: the caller has a strong desire for privacy ] it's really the old economic issue: prevalent call blocking lowers the value of the service to potential Caller-ID subscribers. PacBell also claimed that five years of market research showed that per-call blocking met the needs of _all_ its customers and that studies showed that per-call blocking satisfied the concerns of nine out of ten of customers and that per-line blocking only increased satisfaction by one percent. No details of the studies to gauge validity were given. They also claimed that a Rochester, NY Caller-ID trial appeared to support their contentions about the sufficiency of per-call blocking. The PUC itself has a Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) whose purpose is to represent the interests of utility customers both within and before the PUC. It had its own handout describing the basic CLASS services, blocking options, proposed schedule for implementation by the companies, proposed rates, and its position on the offering of CLASS services. Briefly, though it has not issued a report or completed an evaluation, it protested the PacBell application and proposed that public participation hearing be held (hence this one) and that market trials be held for six months including the various blocking options to be followed by a survey of the services and blocking options: per-call with no charge, per-call unblocking (blocking default), per-line blocking with no unblocking, and per-call blocking with operator assistance. Note that there is a 1989 law in California requiring that callers be allowed to block the display of their numbers on an individual basis (individual subscriber, not individual call, I think). Also, the California constitution explicitly cites a right to privacy. I will not recount all the issues that were addressed since all have been advanced at one time or another during the discussions here and in the privacy group. However, it was interesting what tone and focus the speakers took. About half the individuals who spoke were senior citizens. This probably reflects the time of the meeting - early afternoon. Many did not have a firm grasp of the more technical details of Caller-ID or the other CLASS services but had well thought out views on the privacy issues and the costs involved. They also pointed out that many of the benefits of Caller-ID would not be available to the public at large, including those on fixed and small incomes who could not afford either the monthly charges or the necessary equipment. In particular, those on Lifeline service - a minimal rate, subsidized form of service for low-income subscribers - could not obtain any advanced service features, CLASS included, without losing their lifeline status. Many of the more dire possibilities were not of interest to most speakers, though there were featured in the consumer group position papers. The major objection to Caller-ID in general was that it would give telemarketers and other commercial 'consumers' and publishers of phone number information access to their phone numbers. This would be true even though many had PAID for unlisted phone numbers precisely to reduce this. Per-call blocking would require them to take extra action every call to enforce a protection they had already paid the phone company for. Many pointed out that it was impractical to expect many of the most vulnerable - children and some elderly or impaired - to remember to dial the blocking code every time. A major argument of the phone companies was that harassing phone calls had declined significantly in areas which had Caller-ID and it was widely known to the public. Speakers pointed out that the proposed Call Trace would provide many of the same protections afforded for that purpose without the liabilities. Nearly all speakers were outraged that the companies were proposing a $10 per use charge for call trace. Most pointed out that since this information is made available to law enforcement only (at customer's request only) and is not made available to the customer, it should be free as other harassment-prevention services are now. PacBell's position is that the high charge is necessary to prevent overuse [Why would someone overuse something they can't get any direct benefit from?] One speaker spoke in defense of the phone company position with a long list of statistics from studies and experience in other parts of the country that minimized most privacy concerns. At the beginning of his presentation he said that he had no connection with either the consumer groups or the companies. After he was through, the administrative judge questioned him further at which time he revealed he worked for a company that developed/marketed Caller-ID type devices (potentially?). I'm not sure whether this reflected knowledge or just suspicion on the part of the judge; at least two previous hearing were held in northern California on March 27 and 28, 1991. The issue of existing ANI-delivery to some 800 and 900 services was brought up and was a surprise to many. The PacBell rep pointed out this was a matter under the control of long distance carriers and governed by FCC Tariff. I and another individual proposed that both per-call and per-line blocking be denied to business line subscribers as a way of discouraging annoying and anonymous telemarketing; which would defeat many of the potential benefits of Caller-ID. An analogy to third class (bulk/junk) mail was made by some. [ Note that third class mail must have a return address.] Block-blocking came up only once but it was getting late (near the five o'clock end to the three-hour hearing) and was confusing to some. I would be interested in hearing about the content of other hearings. BTW: After the hearing adjourned for dinner time, I went up to talk briefly to the PacBell reps about some of the issues and the fact that bill inserts were not adequate means to inform and stimulate public discussion (perhaps they know that !) and that news media needed to be used, especially TV where everyone gets their information suited to modern attention spans. OB John Higdon type comment: In the discussion with the PacBell reps the issue of their (company, not personal) credibility and public-interest arose. I raised the example of the long delayed removal of touch-tone fees and ZUM extension LONG after the rate ruling that went in their favor in return for such changes. She at first tried to claim it was due to regulatory requirements and then backed off this when challenged and then more-or- less shrugged. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: FRAME RELAY - You Can Order Today Date: 7 Apr 91 11:36:50 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. At last! there is now a signigicant and different way to connect ALL your company's scattered LANs into a big WAN. Frame relay is here and you can order it. Some thought Sprint would be first later this year, but WilTel has been beta testing it with some LARGE customers, and has now announced its general availability. The actual switches are not yet in all their POPs, but they will bear the expense of back-hauling your access lines from a switch to the POP near you. What is frame relay? Think of a FAST efficient and cheap (and no packet charges) x.25 network. Your sites will all be part of a CUG (Closed Users Group) so, though you are on a public net, you traffic is on your virtual private net. You need Enet routers that can handle frame relay. Cisco's CAN today. You need an approved T1 CSU (Datalink's is today). You get to use the rest of the T1's DS0s for any other leased line type access they can sell you, since you won't be using all of it for frame relay. Note well that this is distance insensitive, and look at the pricing! They are offering two 'port connection' speeds - 256 kbps, and 1024 mbps. These are obviously four and sixteen DS0s out of the T1 access pipe. The approved CSUs let you gain access to the other DS0s on a seperate port. Their service is provided in PVCs (Permanent Virtual Circuits) between your sites. These PVC have a nominal speed, BUT can support bursts up to the Port Connection speed. The idea here is that you are paying for some average amount of transport, but can get peaks that will be carried. Many companies buy leased lines that vastly exceed their average load just to cater to the bursty needs of their WAN. This *may* solve some of these problems at lower cost. The 'Port Connection' (the ONE physical connection to your cisco box ) supports various lower speed PVCs to many remote sites. Each nominal PVC speed is also some number of DS0s (64 kb - 1 T1 time slot) of bandwidth. I am making a N x DS0 column below, because that number does figure into pricing. Port Connection PVC speed N x DS0 256 Kbps 56/64 Kbps 1 128 Kbps 2 1.024 Mbps 56/64 Kbps 1 128 Kbps 2 256 4 512 8 This is per site pricing, NO local access lines, etc included. It is based on the Port Connection speed, and the total of N x DS0s of PVC bandwidth terminating there. N.B. that you need not subscribe to PVCs between all possible nodes, and that, depending on traffic, you may implement anything between a simple star to a full mesh topology. Each PVC can be whatever speed is needed. Port Connection Size: 256 K 1.024 Mbps ----- ---------- Total DS0s of PVCs $ $ 1 635 1535 2 920 1820 3 1062 2105 4 1176 2390 5 1262 2675 6 1347 2960 7 1404 3245 8 1461 3530 As an example, three nodes A, B, C with A being the central site with very little traffic between B and C could all use 256 K Ports; A would use two 64k PVCs ($920), and the two other sites would only have a 64k PVC to A for $635 each or total for all 3 sites of $2190. If there needed to be a PVC between B and C, each site would pay $920 for $2760 total. If your sites are Boston, NYC, and Albany, these prices are terrible compared to leased 64kb DDS-II lines, but with greater distances, many more PVCs, and enjoying the benefits of the burst capability, this sort of offering could look very attractive. Remember also that each site ONLY needs one high speed serial port into their cisco, not one for each remote served by a PVC. This is a big savings in cisco hardware. This is based on my phone notes after talking to a WilTel sales critter, and could easily contain many errors, but does give some feel for the offering. I think this was officially announced last Monday. Friday I let my Sprint saleswoman go on in detail about how they were going to be first with frame relay much later this year. I then told her about WilTel ... Usual disclaimers: I have NO $ connections to any above companies (not even as a customer - yet). This is just good stuff we all will need to know soon. WilTel is at 1.800.642.2299 - tell them the price is still too high. ------------------------------ From: Clint Fleckenstein Subject: Deposit Five Cents Please! Recording Date: 8 Apr 91 00:41:34 GMT Organization: AlterNet RELAY Network I used to know this, but lost my Post-It note. Anyone know this? There is a number (I think it's in the 313 area code) that you can dial, free of charge, which connects you to the recording that instructs you to deposit five cents. If you know this number (or other such numbers) please leave me E-mail. Clint Fleckenstein fleckens@plains.nodak.edu Meyer Broadcasting Corp. uunet!plains!fleckens KFYR TV-5, Bismarck ND fleckens@PLAINS (Bitnet) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 21:30:22 EDT From: Steve Gaarder Subject: Residential ISDN Survey This evening I got a call from Columbia Information Systems, who are, it seems, conducting a survey of interest in "new telecommunications services." As the survey person described them, it was clear that she was talking about a residential version of ISDN, though she did not recognize the term. (ISDN provides two bidirectional digital data/voice channels on one pair.) Basically, what the unknown commissioners of the survey seem to be assessing interest in are four flavors of ISDN: a basic service, which provides two voice line capability and all sorts of special features for $40 "more than you are paying now." A version with a digital data interface would be $50. There were two other versions: one which would let you control your home "energy management" (heating, lighting, etc) remotely for $50, and the same thing for a security system for $45. A version encompassing all of the above would be $60 (more than POTS). ISDN requires an interface unit at the demark; it would lease for $22/month or sell for $700. I'm not sure whether the lease price is included in the rates quoted above, but I think so. I asked her what geographical area was being surveyed; she didn't know, but said that was calling numbers all over the eastern time zone. Steve Gaarder gaarder@theory.tn.cornell.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #275 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21427; 9 Apr 91 3:29 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa18113; 9 Apr 91 1:59 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20269; 9 Apr 91 0:54 CDT Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 0:00:24 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #276 BCC: Message-ID: <9104090000.ab18265@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Apr 91 00:00:02 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 276 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [Julian Macassey] Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [Tom Reingold] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [John Slater] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [David E. A. Wilson] Re: I Have AT&T and I Can't Call Home [Randy Borow] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Randy Borow] Re: Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers [Mike Johnston] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Barry Margolin] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Paul S. Sawyer] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [H. Peter Anvin] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Date: 8 Apr 91 14:05:56 GMT Reply-To: Julian Macassey Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article John Higdon writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 273, Message 9 of 9 > At the risk of sounding exceedingly arrogant (too late, Higdon, the > time for that concern is long past), I usually give very short shrift > to people whose SECRETARIES place calls for them. Nothing, but nothing, > is more annoying than, "Mr. Higdon, please." "Speaking." "Mr. Smith is > calling. Can you hold please? [thunk/elevator music]" > In such cases I hang up as quickly as possible. In my work it is a fact > of life that a number of very busy people on very tight schedules call > me routinely and somehow manage to place the calls using their own > fingers on their own dials. Sometimes they even use their own voices to > leave messages. Using a secretary to waste the time of the CALLEE ranks > up toward the top of the rudeness scale. I couldn't agree more. My opinion of these people who inflate their self importance by having minions dial is way down there with pimps. I once did some work for a quadraplegic business executive. He dialled his own calls. He lays on his back and with a head set on his head, uses a "suck and piff" tube to select lines and dial numbers. But for me the final indication that people waste everyone's time by getting minions to dial was witnessed at Paramount Studios. An, "Entertainment Industry Executive", shouted from his office to the secretary's ante-room to "Call Harry Dash". The secretary dialed the call and put the poor bugger on the other end on hold. Then she told Mr. "Executive" that the call was "On line three". So what did Mr. busy, important executive do? He stopped playing with his yo-yo and picked up the phone. I could go on for days about waste, stupidity, ignorance and bad manners on the phone but won't bore anyone further. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: Tom Reingold Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1991 06:50:33 GMT Here are two anecdotes, if you care to read them. I worked at Bellcore where someone had built an experimental phone switch that ran on a UNIX system and was therefore programmable in the way I know best. For outgoing calls, it could read a text file and speak through a DECTALK. I used this to deal with a bureaucracy: I needed to call the state Department of Motor Vehicles, and as is so in every state, the line was eternally busy. After 5:00 pm on the dot, there was no answer. So I had the switch retry every three minutes or so. When it got through, it said, "Hello, hello? Is this the department of motor vehicles? I have someone on the line who wants to talk with you." Then it connected me. I usually find this practice -- even with secretaries -- rude, but I feel less guilt in dealing with the DMV. Everyone in my workgroup got an automated ad, saying that if we called a certain 800 number, we would win a free vacation. It was really obnoxious. This was before 900 numbers existed, though. So I had the phone switch call the 800 number every 90 seconds for about 90 minutes. I had it say something to the effect that the purpose of the call was to make them realize how annoying automated phone calls are and that I sincerely hope that the proprietor consider another line of business. I also implied that his offer was not legitimate. After the 90 minutes, I called and got a woman's voice. She sounded tired. I asked, "Have you been getting my automated messages?" She paused silently, then said sharply, "Hold on a minute." I got a man who cursed me out in the most vile and obscene language you can imagine. He claimed that his business was legitimate and that he was having the phone company trace the calls. Wouldn't it have been funny if he had found out that the "phone company" had made the calls? He also tried to point out that I had only been called once. Of course I pointed out that the total accumulated inconvenience he had caused to many people was probably quite large, so his argument wasn't very strong. It's sort of like stealing a tenth of a penny from everyone's bank account and making millions of dollars. Can you argue that it cost no one a significant amount therefore your deed is insignificant? Anyway, nothing was resolved, and my mean streak was satisfied, for better or worse. Tom Reingold tr@samadams.princeton.edu OR ...!princeton!samadams!tr [Moderator's Note: Would it have been funny if he found out the phone company was making the calls? No, I think not. Your employer might well have gotten sued and you might well have gotten fired, especially if your employer got sued. Out the door on your ass in a manner of speaking. His individual calls to individual phone numbers might well have been obnoxious; they were most likely not illegal. Your repeated telephone calls, intended to harrass, were illegal. People who do these things always lose in court. Do you remember the case involving the very hostile fellow a few years ago who set his computer and modem to call Jerry Falwell's 800 number once a minute for about a month? Once a minute, around the clock, Falwell's automatic call distributor would hand out a call to a 'counselor standing by to speak with you' which was nothing but dead silence. Modems, after all, have nothing to say to anyone, and they don't even start squealing until they hear another of their kind on the line. Some 43,000 calls and about $12,000 - $15,000 later, when the problem was identified (the local Bell and the director of telecom for Falwell's organization both originally thought the problem was a faulty circuit in the ACD or a piece of bad equipment in the CO), they traced the calls and caught the turkey .... he got sued for $50,000 (actual plus punitive) and Falwell won the case. Telco wound up writing it off as goodwill, but they were screaming for blood also where the 'mad dialer' was concerned. I'd take care if I were you. It could get messy. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 12:44:33 BST From: John Slater Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion In article Charles Bryant writes: > It makes me wonder why British Telecom split London from 01 into 071 > and 081. Why not just add a digit? And if eight digit numbers are too > long, why not split into 017 and 018 leaving more room for expansion. > Or even split 01 DXX XXXX into ten areas 01D DXX XXXX removing the > need for the tables to convert old number to new area. And why didn't they split it several dozen other ways too? My favourite would have been north and south of the river, which would make it a lot easier to find the new number as most people know which side of the river a given address is on, from the postcode. Still, they did it and that's an end to it. Except that it isn't: there are medium-term plans to add an extra digit to every phone number in the country, and longer-term plans to rehash the entire system, with lifetime phone numbers (see an earlier thread) and other wondrous things, no doubt. I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet unspecified future use. This might well include implementation of some of the schemes mentioned above, I speculate. John Slater Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office My email address is John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM, despite what it might say above. ------------------------------ From: David E A Wilson Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 00:04:49 GMT ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) writes: > (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). Yes - Sydney Australia. Up until last year we had five, six and seven digit numbers in the 02 area code. For example - from the Government page of the phone book: 2 0521 Trafficking-Law Enforcement 29 2622 Bus Travel 240 2111 Boat Moorings With the closure of the old Dalley exchange (205xx) Telecom also deleted the last five digit numbers (according to a newspaper article). More usually - if the STD area code is 0xx then numbers are nx xxxx and in capital cities (STD code 0n) the numbers are nxx xxxx. David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 8 09:49:09 CDT 1991 Subject: Re: I Have AT&T and I Can't Call Home I experienced the same problem while I was a student at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign years ago. The campus had just converted their telecommunications system to their own private network, so to speak, with PIN codes, etc. When my PIN went kaput, I called AT&T and got the same befuddled response you did Chris. I couldn't really blame them, though, since I found out that it was the University itself which controlled such things. Apparently, the school did so to enable them to be able to control their network. I would suggest you press your university's telecommunications department for assistance. They SHOULD be the ones who can help you. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 8 14:27:50 CDT 1991 Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Jim Bubler wrote that a phone number once assigned belongs to a customer. While I am on his side, his statement isn't true. Telephone numbers remain the property of telco and can be changed at their whim, etc. Sorry, Jim, but we basically have no rights, so to speak, when it comes to "our" phone numbers. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. [Moderator's Note: You are quite correct. Every phone book says it in these words, more or less, "Whenever, in the conduct of its business, the Company finds it desirable to change the number, etc ..." PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Johnston Subject: Re: Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers Organization: Lehman Brothers Date: 7 Apr 91 15:54:34 In article fernwood!geoff@decwrl.dec.c om (Geoff Goodfellow) writes: > I'm looking for line (two or four wire) multiplexers, that would allow > me to evenly device a 9600 bps line into to two 4800 bps lines, or a > 2400 baud line into two 1200 baud lines. I recall the good ol' Bell > 209A modem used to have this capability. > I CANNOT use Stat-MUX's because its flow control (XON/XOFF/whatever) > would make the line non-transparent to the protocol(s) going over over > it. I need to lines to appear as if they each had a dedicated circuit > of their own. You *can* use Stat-MUX's or at least Micoms. The Micombox 2's we used to use were configurable enough to where you could just disable XON/XOFF flow control along with about a zillion other parameters. We used about 20 of them to remote field locations. Each could be upgraded to 16 ports apiece and all ran up to 9600 baud. I ran into my problem when I attempted to use GNU Emacs remotely over the multiplexed lines. As you may know Emacs doesn't like XON/XOFF *at all*. Never mind that I was the only person out of 80 who used Emacs. I changed all the units over. (It's good to be the king). All of our tubes ran fine without it. These boxes where, if I recall correctly, four wire units and supported RTS/CTS flow control. Michael R. Johnston mjohnsto@shearson.com || mjohnstonn@mcimail.com System Administrator UUCP: uunet!slcpi!mjohnsto Lehman Brothers Inc. Phone: (212) 640-9116 ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 05:44:46 GMT In article Barton.Bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) writes: > I am not so sure PSI or Alternet do this, but NEARNET here in Boston > gets you to PAY for ALL the necessary Cisco equipment, and THEY get to > OWN it. Watch your local Internet peddler's contract carefully - That > is ~$10k you just gave away. It's not quite that bad. I believe that if you cancel your NEARnet membership the equipment you paid for is transfered to you. NEARnet retains ownership while you're a member so that they can consolidate all the maintenance and management issues. Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar ------------------------------ From: "Paul S. Sawyer" Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 16:23:27 GMT In article Our Moderator comments: > When I've received automated voice calls before, I always just hang > up, and everyone should take that approach, to end this latest phone > nuisance once and for all. PAT] I usually put them on hold, so as to waste THEIR time and money; sometimes (when things are REAL dull ...) I put them on the speaker, with the transmitter muted, with varying amusing results ... once during a party someone called and asked for the "head of the house" (whatever that is ... B-) so I said "I'll get him", and put the speakerphone on while we all told anecdotes about companies that use telemarketing while the speaker kept yelling for attention. Come to think of it, that's the only good use I've found for the speakerphone! Paul S. Sawyer {uunet,attmail}!unhtel!paul paul@unhtel.unh.edu UNH CIS - - Telecommunications and Network Services VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 FAX: +1 603 862 2030 ------------------------------ From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers Organization: Northwestern University Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1991 15:37:27 GMT In article the Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: A COCOT proprietor here in Chicago answered my > complaint one day by sending me a check for 25 cents!. PAT] That isn't something just COCOT proprietors do. I have at least two friends -- also here in Chicago (suburbs) -- that have had the same experience with Illinois Bell: a refund check for $0.25! hpa = H. Peter Anvin (in case you wondered) * Heja Sverige! INTERNET: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu FIDONET: 1:115/989.4 HAM RADIO: N9ITP, SM4TKN RBBSNET: 8:970/101.4 [Moderator's Note: Well, but at least with the IBT refund coupons (I refuse to call them checks!) you can redeem them with your phone bill. They say that on the front of the piece of paper. I would be embarassed to send them a COCOT refund coupon along with my phone bill payment, although I guess I could. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #276 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23519; 9 Apr 91 4:29 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31373; 9 Apr 91 3:04 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab18113; 9 Apr 91 1:59 CDT Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 1:05:21 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #277 BCC: Message-ID: <9104090105.ab31524@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Apr 91 01:05:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 277 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson "Rube Goldberg" CO Installations and Colored Telephones [Larry Lippman] Albania: Privatization Plans? [Nigel Allen] Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones [Carl Moore] My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [TELECOM Moderator] International Misdialing [David E. A. Wilson] Billed Busy Signals [Jack Rickard] Another Kind of Selective Ringing [Mike Coleman] Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? [Michael P. Deignan] Telecom Humor (Lawyers) [Douglas W. Martin] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: "Rube Goldberg" CO Installations & Colored Telephones Date: 8 Apr 91 23:30:54 EST (Mon) From: Larry Lippman In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > As to frequency-selective ringers, I came along late in the territory > of an Independent that seemed to have bought its equipment from > wherever there was some that week. You could go into one house and > find and Automatic Electric phone; a WECo in the next, and a Stromberg > in the third ... plus assorted cats and dogs from time to time. Ain't that the truth! Some of the Rube Goldberg installations I have seen in small independent operating telephone companies boggle the mind. A common source of telephones, components and wiring supplies during the 1950's was World War II surplus! In the early 1970's I did some consulting work for an independent telephone company who had a variety of troubles, not the least of which was trouble between some N1 carrier that they had installed between two of their CO's several years earlier. They had excessive transmission loss between the CO's and were unable to maintain line equalization for any period of time. It turns out that to save money, they had run some of the carrier circuit using buried "spiral-four" cable that was war surplus from 1945. The cable was rubber-insulated and its dielectric was badly deteriorated. They sure were upset when I told them it was the source of their trouble and had to be dug up and replaced with a more "state of the art" cable! One of the more memorable independent telephone companies which actually used war surplus telephone apparatus was the Germantown Telephone Company in Germantown, NY (located along the Hudson River somewhat south of Albany). The telephone company was owned by the Bohnsack family, who also owned quite a bit of Germantown (or so it seemed). :-) In all fairness, I must first point out that in 1978 they obtained REA financing, axed their old CO apparatus and installed Stromberg-Carlson electronic Crossreed apparatus. Their old CO was a sight to behold, however, put together by Walter Bohnsack over the years using an extensive amount of war surplus. The first clue that his CO was "different" was the use of grocery store-variety light bulbs as ringing lead ballast lamps! Obtaining copious quantities of war surplus was easy for Walter Bohnsack since he also ran a used telephone apparatus company called Bohnsack Equipment Company (BECO). Some readers may recognize this name from their surplus catalogs from years past. I usually don't mention on the Net the names of specific people and telephone companies I have known and dealt with, but I have made an exception here since I don't believe the Bohnsacks would mind and since some readers may have heard of their used telephone apparatus sales company. > Reminiscent of that time, when WECo built a pink Princess telephone, > AT&T was so proud, they ran an double-page color ad about how modern > they were in {Life Magazine}. One of my neighbors remarked to their > chum who worked for "the phone company" how classy that looked. ... > But then, it was a different time and a different society, wasn't it? Ah, yes, colored telephones. When one now considers the logistics and expense of maintaining stocks of appropriately colored components and cords, it does seem a little silly. I remember how disappointed I was in the early 1970's when colored 500-type sets starting arriving with "neutral" slate station cords instead of those with the matching color. Horrors! - what American tradition will they eliminate next? :-) > And, thanks Larry, for telling me what a "pole-changer" was for. I > saw old references to them, but never in a context that explained what > their function was. They must have been very archaic, for by the time > this kid came along, all the offices I saw had motor generators for > ringing current. I guess they were more maintenance free. I can only > guess pole-changers went out before WW II. In my travels with independent operating telephone companies during the early 1970's, I saw still in service a few ancient AC line operated 20 Hz ringing power plants that used pole changers. They were used with 1A key telephone systems and were manufactured by a company under the tradename "Tele-Ring". I can't remember the name of the manufacturer, though. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 01:13 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Albania: Privatization Plans? Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada A two-paragraph news story from Reuters says that Albania's Communist government is planning to privatize some government-owned companies, but does not explictly mentioned telecommunications operations or telecommunications manufacturing. I expect that telecommunications will remain in government hands unless the communists lose power. Here's the story, as it appeared in {The Globe and Mail}, April 6, 1991: Albania Reveals Plan to Privatize TIRANA (Reuters) -- Albania's Communist rulers, struggling with Europe's pooest economy, said they will announce an extensive privatization plan before the end of the month and legalize joint ventures with foreign companies, the Community daily Zeri i Popullit said yesterday [April 5]. It said the move will permit the creation of co-operative enterprises, joint ventures and joint-stock companies financied either by private capital or by loans for the state. Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 16:26:14 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones I recently noticed a city code 836 in the UK for mobile phones. How long has this been around? In country code 1, area code 917 is proposed to serve only cellular and mobile in New York City area (at least part of such cellular and mobile are currently in area 212). Bronx had been proposed to go into 917, then that got changed to Bronx-proposed-to-go-into-718, leaving 917 with no proposed land-lines. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 14:23:50 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Over the weekend I bought a CPS-200 Call Forwarding System from Radio Shack. At the local store here, they had one left, marked down to $29.95, and I thought that price alone made it worthwhile. This unit does require two actual phone lines; one to accept calls, and the other to forward the call. Since I have 'genuine' call forwarding from Illinois Bell, I won't need it a lot, but one good use came to mind: I'll use it to remotely turn on call forwarding on my main line! The device takes calls on (relative to it) 'line 1' and forwards the call on (relative to it) 'line 2'. You call on the device's 'line 2' to remotely make changes in the forwarded number and turn the device on or off. Device line 1/2 < = > 2/1 on my phones. So I call on device line 2 (my phone line 1) and it answers after 17 rings. I tell it to 'forward' my calls to 1172-new-number. I hang up and call back on device line 1 (my phone line 2) and my call forces the device to dial out on phone line 1 '1172-new-number'. Presto, forwarding has been established, and subsequent calls to my phone line 1 go to wherever the forwarding (1172) said to go. The only problem is I cannot change that number or cancel forwarding since after forwarding has been established, telco controls my line and I can't get near the device (via phone line 1 / device line 2) until I come home and kill it with 1173. Let me work on this scheme a little longer. PAT ------------------------------ From: David E A Wilson Subject: International Misdialing Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 23:13:55 GMT From the {Sydney Morning Herald} (Column 8), April 8: The other morning, about 4 o'clock, Philippa Holly, of Oatley, was woken by the phone. The caller, in Spain, was trying to get a company in Minneapolis, Minnesota. After persuading the caller that Oatley wasn't in Minnesota, she went back to bed, but five minutes later he came on for the same number. Philippa has since found out that the area code for Minneapolis is 612 - the caller had omitted the 1 for the United States, so 61 got him Australia, the 2 the Sydney area, and the rest the Oatley number. Column 8 can report having been continually called by someone in Boulogne trying to dial a number in Manchester, whose code on the British system is 61. As always with this sort of wrong number, the calls came in the dead of night. Are there any other area codes, when wrongly dialed, start bells ringing out here? (Then in the same column on April 9): There are more possibilities of mis-dialed calls coming to Australia than we thought. Australia's international code is 61, and a 2 after that puts the caller into the Sydney network. There are, according to Paul Gray, of Woollahra, 235 places in the US with area codes starting with 61, including all Minnesota starting with 612. Tom Hubbard, of Girraween, lists Basle, Benghazi, Brasilia, Ljubljana (Yugoslavia), Ottawa, Patrai (Greece), Posnan (Poland), Windhoek (Namibia), Limerick and Madan (Indonesia), as well as Manchester, as having local codes starting with 61. David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au [Moderator's Note: I think the columnist meant to say 'there are 235 places in the world with area codes starting with 61' ... there certainly are not that many area codes in the USA like that. Even so, is his comment correct? ... I've not counted them all to see. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Apr 91 14:22:38 GMT From: Jack Rickard Subject: Billed Busy Signals I've had continuing problems with both Sprint and Telecom*USA over the past year regarding multiple billing entries for busy signals. I use a modem and automated mailing software to contact other systems through Fidonet. If the modem receives a busy signal, it makes another attempt a minute or so later. On the bill, I routinely find a series of calls to the same number, spaced two minutes apart, each billed for a minute. The final call of the series of course, is several minutes in duration indicating I did finally connect. I've monitored the system and it is working perfectly. But in the course of a month I accumulate forty or fifty of these one minute billed entries at twelve cents each. I recently spoke with a gentleman from Telephone Express. He avows that this is a by-product of software switching and that their use of DMS-250 switches would eliminate these billing entries. Anyone know the straight scoop on this little problem and how I can eliminate it? Jack Rickard IDIC Fan Group Net 104 UFGate: 1:104/2@FidoNet 14249 E Kansas Pl. #203 UseNet/FidoNet Gateway for Net 104 Aurora, CO 80012 AKA: z200.n5000.f400.metronet.org (303)755-1681 (data) (303)752-9060 (voice) [Moderator's Note: You can't eliminate it by yourself. Only your long distance carrier can do so. The problem you describe is common with any telecom organization unable/unwilling to obtain 'answer supervision' from the serving local telco. The 'supervision' detirmines when a call has been answered, or if it was answered. AT&T and the Bells have it, most of the others do not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Coleman Subject: Another Kind of Selective Ringing Organization: Twin Sun, Inc Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 01:16:29 GMT In alt.privacy, greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) writes: > These already exist. You dial, then must supply a code sequence before > the phone will ring. The caller's name appears on a display so you can > decide whether or not to answer. I'm not sure when it was I saw heard of > this device, but it was long before all this talk about Caller ID. Does anyone know if these are available in any kind of affordable form (i.e., not part of a huge phone system)? This sort of thing strikes me as being considerably more useful than Caller ID. In its simplest (but still useful) form, it could just ring a bell (or something) when hearing a short touch-tone sequence. An outgoing message would be nice, too. The technology of telecommunications seems to excel at dreaming up capabilities which irritate the hell out of the little guy (Caller ID included here). How about something that works in his favor? Mike Coleman ------------------------------ From: "Michael P. Deignan" Subject: Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? Organization: Small Business Systems, Inc., Esmond, RI 02917 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1991 23:32:26 GMT tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) writes: > This is why there is a "normal" output ... that is the one you > hook your telephone to, and it only rings when someone dials > your "normal" phone number. Maybe I'm confusing the issue here. In my area, you can have three phone numbers ring at the same locale: NET Gives Me: I use it for: -------------------- --------------- a. Short-Short ring -> fax b. Normal ring -> dial-in modem c. Long ring -> voice Of course, I can switch the [b] and [c] usage around if need be. However, Hello's device only allows you to split [a] and [b]. Now, I've also got [c] ringing ... But, since Hello only splits the line twice, I have to split the line coming from the wall ... ie: /-- fax (short-short) /----> hello direct box --- wall -- 2-in-one splitter \-- modem (normal) \----> voice phone (long) So ... regardless of which ring I'm actually getting, the phone will ring. Very annoying, especially if it is three in the morning, and it is just a fax. What I need to do is "block" the phone from ringing unless its a "long" ring. Or, I could use a three-way call director, if anyone has one of those. The above setup is tenative, so I can always play around with it more (ie: make the "voice" the short-short if I really had to.) But, that in itself makes more problems. I COULD switch the modem and the voice phone, but then the modem will "answer" the phone unless I get to the phone in time, since the modem just detects a ring and picks up as needed. That's why I've got the fax and modem on the ring detector, so the wrong device won't pick up. Clearer, or did I just make it more confusing? Michael P. Deignan Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd Telebit: +1 401 455 0347 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 15:53:41 PDT From: "Douglas W. Martin" Subject: Telecom Humor (Lawyers) After successfully passing the bar exam, a man opened his own law office. He was sitting idle at his desk when his secretary announced that a Mr. Jones had arrived to see him. "Show him right in!" our lawyer replied. As Mr. Jones was being ushered in our lawyer had an idea. He quickly picks up the phone and shouts into it "..and you tell them that we won't accept less then fifty thousand dollars, and don't even call me until you agree to that amount!" Slamming the phone down he stood up and greeted Mr. Jones; "Good Morning, Mr. Jones, what can I do for you?" "I'm from the phone company" Mr. Jones replied, "I'm here to connect your phone." Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: Thanks for a delightful close to this issue! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #277 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01343; 10 Apr 91 13:46 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12726; 10 Apr 91 12:00 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa07864; 10 Apr 91 10:52 CDT Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 10:12:21 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #278 BCC: Message-ID: <9104101012.ab04853@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Apr 91 10:12:12 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 278 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Michael Coleman] Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Tim Irvin] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Andy Jacobson] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Robert E. Zabloudil] Re: Multi-Line Ringer Sought [Julian Macassey] Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [Mark D. Studebaker] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Alex Pournelle] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Tim Oldham] Re: Cellular Phones for $29 [Randy Borow] Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta [David Gast] Re: Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants [Darren Alex Griffiths] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Coleman Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department Date: 9 Apr 91 19:21:46 GMT telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: > So I call on > device line 2 (my phone line 1) and it answers after 17 rings. I tell > it to 'forward' my calls to 1172-new-number. I hang up and call back So... What's your phone number, Mr. Townson? ;-) [Moderator's Note: Many people know my number -- and some say they've got my number (!) :) ... but the catch is, if anyone answers within 17 rings the deal is off, and when it does answer, you need my password. Then, it would help if you knew the number of the second line so you could dial it and activate the first line. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tim Irvin Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Date: Tue, 09 Apr 91 09:18:15 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V11 #277, Moderator writes: > The device takes calls on (relative to it) 'line 1' and forwards the > call on (relative to it) 'line 2'. You call on the device's 'line 2' > to remotely make changes in the forwarded number and turn the device > on or off. Device line 1/2 < = > 2/1 on my phones. So I call on > device line 2 (my phone line 1) and it answers after 17 rings. I tell > it to 'forward' my calls to 1172-new-number. I hang up and call back > on device line 1 (my phone line 2) and my call forces the device to > dial out on phone line 1 '1172-new-number'. Presto, forwarding has > been established, and subsequent calls to my phone line 1 go to > wherever the forwarding (1172) said to go. The only problem is I > cannot change that number or cancel forwarding since after forwarding > has been established, telco controls my line and I can't get near the > device (via phone line 1 / device line 2) until I come home and kill > it with 1173. Let me work on this scheme a little longer. I can see only one way around this, and that requires that IBT and NET have the same features. If you get a distinctive ringing feature on your "phone line 1/device line 2", and have IBT Call Forwarding activated to only work on your Main number (not your distinctive ring number). Then to cancel Call Forwarding, call your distinctive ring number, which will ring through to the Ripoff Shack box and your off and running. And since your distinctive ring number will "ring-ring", you will only have to wait nine rings (actually 8-1/2 :) -- an added bonus. Tim Irvin [Moderator's Note: Bravo! You found the solution, and yes, I do have a distinctive (short double-ring) number attached to my first line and no, it is not set to forward when the main line is forwarded. I have not yet tested to see if your theory of it 'answering in half the time' is valid. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Apr 91 14:04 PDT From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable It would appear to me that the LEC makes no money on the distribution of white pages, as they cost nothing to the local subscriber, and contain no paid advertising. To the contrary, the LEC apparently does so as a public service to the users of their service. Perhaps initially upon the introduction of charge for DA, the LEC might have argued before the PUC that the availability of white pages would keep directory service free for those not too lazy to use them. Aside from that, and the introductory information on service ordering, etc. I don't see the LEC having a whole lot of use for them. Certainly the availability of white pages cuts DA revenue somewhat, but I doubt that much regular traffic would be lost without the directory. I know some LEC's are very stingy with the distribution of the directory, perhaps to limit publication runs, or increase DA use. (Especially GTE!!) Although I would hate to see it happen, perhaps Pat's suggestion about LEC's stopping their white pages publication might be taken seriously by some LECs facing stiff competition in the yellow/white business. The various retreads would _have_ to buy the white tapes from the LEC, providing revenue there, and the directories would still be made available through those other publishers. Here in LA we are hit with I believe at least four different yellow pages ripoffs, one of which is PacBell including white pages, covering neighborhoods that aren't their own turf. I wonder if there is some regulation requiring the LEC to publish directories. For if not, I can see some LEC's dropping the white pages as soon as someone else shows up to take up the slack. Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Zabloudil" Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 9 Apr 91 14:20:25 GMT Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus I suppose what the phone company could arrange to do is copy their database as of the closing date of the directory, and then "sell" competitors copies of THOSE tapes when requested. Assuming, of course, that the price would be set to cover "postage and handling" only, in keeping with the court decision. Our newsfeed was down, so I didn't see the original posting. I imagine, though, that the above would comply with the letter of the court's ruling. Opinions, of course, strictly my own. ------------------------------ From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: Multi-Line Ringer Sought Date: 10 Apr 91 02:16:45 GMT Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article , erickson@ingres.com (Rod Erickson, x2505) writes: > I'm looking for a ringer which can be connected to three or more phone > lines, providing distinctive ringing for each. > Does such a device exist? Yes, it does. One such device is the Viking Electronics PA-2A. It takes up to six incoming CO lines and emits an "adjustable loud Warble" Cost about $86.00 at your local telephone parts distributor. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: "Mark D. Studebaker(813" Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? Reply-To: "Mark D. Studebaker(813" Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 17:41:56 GMT The new "Notes on the Network" is just out from Bellcore for $395. "Over 1050 pages and 385 graphic depictions, including ... CCS, CLASS, updated numbering plan considerations, and synchronization. Over 80% of the material is presented for the first time in this issue." Order from Bellcore: 800-521-CORE or 908-699-5800. "BOC Notes on the LEC Networks - 1990" SR-TSV-002275. mark ------------------------------ From: Alex Pournelle Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 05:24:20 GMT dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > In article , TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony > Harminc) writes: > The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten > digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no > sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls > intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an > exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- > friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an > area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a > 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) At least in Pac*Swell's southern area, this isn't QUITE true: there *IS* a 213-213 exchange; actually, a "psuedo-exchange"; the Big Book of Prefixes (Higdon will doubtless give out the real name:-) for the L.A. LATA lists 213-213 as "Pseudo-POTS for local 800 service" or something. The indication I got was that it wasn't a "public" exchange, but one for phones the Great Unwashed should never see. Yes, there was also a 213-818, an 818-818 and an 818-213 as I recall. I think they had the same kind of designations. Not a phone-weeny, just leafing through my roommate's stuff, Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; BIX: alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 24/12/3 BIX: alex ------------------------------ From: Tim Oldham Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 15:35:19 BST Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: BT Applied Systems, Birmingham, UK In article John Slater writes: > I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that > they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet > unspecified future use. This might well include implementation of some > of the schemes mentioned above, I speculate. I believe (and I don't speak for my employer on this) that as 01 is already the international dialling sequence (eg the USA is 0101), 017 and 018 were out of the question, or just plain confusing. London was split as it was (Central/Outer) because Central London has a much higher growth rate of demand for numbers. For example, there is a high concentration of companies in Central London, and a lot of them are extending their fax and direct-dial facilities as they grow and/or replace their PABXs. Mercury were also demanding more numbers. While BT put forward the recommendation, paid for the advertising to make it a success, and in so doing provided more numbers for Mercury to use, Oftel (the UK Telecomms regulator) had to approve the plan. I would also dispute John's claim that most people know which London districts are North or South of the river. I don't speak for BT on any of this. Tim Oldham, BT Group Computing Services tjo@its.bt.co.uk ...uunet!ukc!its!tjo ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 8 16:48:32 CDT 1991 Subject: Re: Cellular Phones for $29 Now, Pat, do you really think Cellular One and Ameritech Mobile are truly scraping for customers? On the contrary, I believe they are simply trying to rope the customers in: make great offers (short-term, they're great deals), but make subscribers commit to a time period of service (long-term, costly to customers but $$$ for the cellular companies). I've noticed here in Chicago's suburbs that within the last 12 months, I have seen more and more cars with those recognizable cellular antennas protruding from the back of their vehicles. It's obvious that mobile phones are no longer considered a luxury for the rich only, but a necessity or desired tool for the not-so-rich (like myself -- do you know how many times my old car has broken down and the phone has saved the day?). Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 21:44:06 -0700 From: David Gast Subject: Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta Robert Jacobson wrote: > The "alleged horrors" which Bill Berbenich has not yet experienced as > a result of one month of Caller ID have to do with duration and > penetration. The telcos commonly pass off one month tests of small > service populations as scientific surveys and are always relieved for > their customers when alleged horrors do not occur. The point is to > wait a couple years when a few tens of millions of more people are > forced into Caller ID and the files have started being built up. Then > let's see if the horrors happen, Bill. The Moderator moderated: > What about in places like New Jersey, where Caller*ID has been a > reality now for about a year? I was at one of the CPUC Caller ID hearings. Sure enough one of the phone companies was there spouting off information from a small test in rural Kentucky (this is LA!) that lasted about one month. Of course, when one of the people in the audience asked to see the test questions, the test results, and the like to verify that the test actually proved what the company said it did, he was told that the information is not available to the public. (It is apparently available to participants in the formal hearings, however). Mr Jacobson, of course, is correct. Most businesses do not have devices to trap the incoming phone numbers at the present time, but per other messages "Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed" we know that they are available. Additionally, the value of the information will come as companies know not just one call, but hundreds of calls. When they can say "Oh, it's just Bill, he never buys, let's not answer the phone" or "It's Sam from redlined area Y, no need to answer," etc. Additionally, these people will not necessarily be calling you from intra-LATA phones, so if you have been ignoring out of area calls during dinner, you don't know if Radio Shack (or someone Radio Shacked disseminated the information to) has been calling you. Finally, you should not necessarily expect that these people will only call you up, they can also send junk mail, send you junk mail with different prices/specials, or adjust the prices at the store. In most respects, you cannot know how the information about you was used. David Gast gast@cs.ucla.edu [Moderator's Note: There was one thing I was mistaken about. In New Jersey, Caller-ID has not been around a year; it has been around for about three years. Still, no horror stories. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Darren Alex Griffiths Subject: Re: Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants Date: 9 Apr 91 22:01:35 GMT Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA In article kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > I don't know if they are still in business, but during the > 1970's in Hartford, CT there was a tavern called "The Dialtone Lounge" > that had a telephone at every table and booth. While there was no > outside line access, one could call in orders and call from one table > to another. Calling from table to table was a great way to initiate > conversations with the opposite sex, and probably accounted for the > popularity of the establishment! :-) Maybe it's just me, but I don't think calling up a pretty girl who happens to be sitting across from me is a great way of picking her up. I suppose if I already knew someone and was intimidated to see her in person I might call her at home (although I've never been in that situation of-course :-) ) but other than that I think I would just walk up an say hello, buy her a drink or "accidently" spill chocalate ice-cream on her new white blouse as a way of starting a conversation. Perhaps someone could comment on why people feel more comfortable talking on the phone in establishments like that, I can certainly understand preferring to talk to someone on the phone, but when there in the same room it's wierd. There is a similar place in a central California town called King City (also known as speedo trap alley) on highway 101. An old girlfriend once called me from there (I was in Berkeley not at the bar) but it took me about a year to find it on my trips down to Santa Barbara afterwards. I haven't been there in quite awhile but the last time I visited it all the phones were GTE (ick!!) and it was designed for truckers, which means it had a four acre packing lot for all of the 18 wheelers. Darren Alex Griffiths (415) 708-3294 dag@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #278 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29592; 11 Apr 91 2:43 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa10442; 11 Apr 91 1:10 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21711; 11 Apr 91 0:03 CDT Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 23:32:16 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #279 BCC: Message-ID: <9104102332.ab19373@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Apr 91 23:32:08 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 279 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones [John R. Covert] Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones [Spyros C. Bartsocas] Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing [John Higdon] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jim Budler] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Andy Jacobson] Re: Cellular Phones for $29 [ROMANSKI@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu] Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta [Scott Alexander] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Mark Walsh] Re: Billed Busy Signals [Cristobal Pedregal-Martin] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Colum Mylod] WXYZ (was Re: New FCC Modem Tax?) [Robert E. Zabloudil] Phone Audio to RCA Jack [James Blake] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 11:36:37 PDT From: "John R. Covert 09-Apr-1991 1436" Subject: Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones > I recently noticed a city code 836 in the UK for mobile phones. How > long has this been around? This is the way it has been done since the advent of cellular several years ago. 0836+6D is Vodaphone, 0860+6D is BT Cellnet. In Germany, 0161+7D is C-Netz. In Australia it's 018+6D. All cellular numbers, regardless of location in the country, are assigned numbers within the cellular prefix. Cellular phone users do not pay for incoming calls; the caller, regardless of location, pays for the call to the cellular customer. There is a special rate for calls to cellular phones from within the country; when calling cellular phones from outside the country, only the normal international rate applies. This creates the interesting situation that it is cheaper to call German cellular phones from outside Germany than from within Germany. Warning: Both Vodaphone and BT as well as Telecom Australia Mobilenet charge you for reaching the "it has not been possible to connect your call" recording. I believe this violates CCITT Recommendations, but I don't know how to get it fixed. Germany does not have this problem. john ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 14:17:03 -0400 From: "Spyros C. Bartsocas" Subject: Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones > I recently noticed a city code 836 in the UK for mobile phones. ... > In country code 1, area code 917 is proposed to serve only cellular > and mobile in New York City area (at least part of such cellular and Although Greece does not have cellular phones, there is a similar setup for beepers. All beepers are in area code 921. As until a few years ago 9 was used to call Cyprus, there no other area codes starting with 9. About this special setup between Greece and Cyprus: Until a few years ago you could call Cyprus as a long-distance call instead of an international call. The calling sequence was [long distance] - 9 - [Cyprus areacode] - [telephone number]. I do not know if there was a similar setup from their side. Now the setup is similar as to most other places in the world ([international] - [357]- ....). Spyros Bartsocas scb@cs.brown.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 20:20 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing Mike Coleman writes: > In alt.privacy, greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) writes: > > These already exist. You dial, then must supply a code sequence before > > the phone will ring. The caller's name appears on a display so you can > > decide whether or not to answer. > Does anyone know if these are available in any kind of affordable form > (i.e., not part of a huge phone system)? > This sort of thing strikes me as being considerably more useful than > Caller ID. Oh yes, these little boxes are quite available and are relatively inexpensive, and will become more so as CLASS services become more widespread. But as to your assertion that the device is more useful than Caller ID, not only do I disagree but counterassert that the device is rude to callers. First, you insist that a caller must have a DTMF-capable phone to aspire to the higher levels of your graces. No entry of digits would, I assume, be construed as an "unknown caller" or worse, "withholding of ID". Second, this wonderful device answers your phone every time, charging the caller for all attempts, successful or not. So your [fill in the relationship of someone close to you] is stranded and calls you from a COCOT that disallows DTMF after call completion. Not only has that person been unsuccessful, but has lost coin in the process. As a person who potentially would be rejected by Call Block (tm), I can assure you that I would rather have the line not answered or a rejection recording come from the CO at no charge than face one of those Rube Goldberg boxes, knowing that I had just paid for the privledge. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Jim Budler Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: Silvar-Lisco, Inc. Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1991 09:03:50 GMT In article rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com writes: > Jim Bubler wrote that a phone number once assigned belongs to a ^_ that's a /d/ > customer. While I am on his side, his statement isn't true. Telephone > numbers remain the property of telco and can be changed at their whim, > etc. Sorry, Jim, but we basically have no rights, so to speak, when it > comes to "our" phone numbers. > [Moderator's Note: You are quite correct. Every phone book says it in > these words, more or less, "Whenever, in the conduct of its business, > the Company finds it desirable to change the number, etc ..." PAT] I agree we have no rights. 8^( But whether the phone number belong to the phone company or not, the right to associate that number to my name should not belong to the phone company. What I tried to articulate was that now that the Supreme Court has taken away their right to claim copyright on an expression of that association of name to number, they will chose to replace the income by charging people who wish their name to number association to be public. Thus everyone listed in white pages will have paid for that publication and the phone company will have made their bucks, and the copying will be an extension of their customer's desire of that name to number association being public information. And therefore my desire to be non-published will become free. jim P.S. Bubler isn't bad, I usually get Butler, of course, but I've also been called Butter, and Budder. 8^) Jim Budler jimb@silvlis.com Silvar-Lisco +1.408.991.6115 703 E. Evelyn Ave. Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086 ------------------------------ From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 9 Apr 91 21:04:00 GMT It would appear to me that the LEC makes no money on the distribution of white pages, as they cost nothing to the local subscriber, and contain no paid advertising. To the contrary, the LEC apparently does so as a public service to the users of their service. Perhaps initially upon the introduction of charge for DA, the LEC might have argued before the PUC that the availability of white pages would keep directory service free for those not too lazy to use them. Aside from that, and the introductory information on service ordering, etc. I don't see the LEC having a whole lot of use for them. Certainly the availability of white pages cuts DA revenue somewhat, but I doubt that much regular traffic would be lost without the directory. I know some LEC's are very stingy with the distribution of the directory, perhaps to limit publication runs, or increase DA use. (Especially GTE!!) Although I would hate to see it happen, perhaps Pat's suggestion about LEC's stopping their white pages publication might be taken seriously by some LECs facing stiff competition in the yellow/white business. The various retreads would _have_ to buy the white tapes from the LEC, providing revenue there, and the directories would still be made available through those other publishers. Here in LA we are hit with I believe at least four different yellow pages ripoffs, one of which is PacBell including white pages, covering neighborhoods that aren't their own turf. I wonder if there is some regulation requiring the LEC to publish directories. For if not, I can see some LEC's dropping the white pages as soon as someone else shows up to take up the slack. Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 14:34:10 EDT From: ROMANSKI@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu Subject: Re: Cellular Phones for $29 Speaking of scraping for customers; here in west central Florida, we have a price war going on between some "trunkers" for phone jack installs. I've been following this saga in our local paper for a few months now. (Abbreviated classified ads): Trunker 1: jacks= $25.00. Next day; Trunker 2 enters picture: jacks= $24.95. Two weeks later; Trunker 1: jacks=$20.00. Trunker 2: jacks= $19.95. One month later; Trunker 3 enters picture: jacks= $20.00, catv outlets= $30.00 and up. Trunkers 1 & 2: remain the same. Two days later; Trunker 1: jacks= $19.00, catv= $30.00. Trunker 2: jacks= $19.95, catv= $30.00. Trunker 3 remains the same. One week later; Trunker 1 remains the same. Trunker 2: jacks= $15.00, catv= $30.00. Trunker 3 remains the same. What are other Trunker prices like in other parts of the country? I have lots of IBM type II cable outlets to be installed here. I'm thinking of calling the $15.00 per jack guy! Or, maybe I should wait until the prices drop more? BTW, our definition of a Trunker down here is generally someone who went to a certain "un-named" electronics chain, bought their book on "HOW TO INSTALL YOUR OWN PHONES", and works out of the trunk of his bomber. This guy will on occasion try to add jacks to Key Systems and hose everything up. ** BEWARE OF THE TRUNKER, HE'S EVERYWHERE!!!! ** PS: Hope I haven't offended any of you on the net. (Disclaimer) ------------------------------ From: Scott Alexander Subject: Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 11:24:12 PDT In the latest {Unix Today}, there was an article saying that HP is coming out with software for capturing Caller ID information. (Unfortunately, in a fit of insanity, I threw that issue out. Perhaps someone else can come up with more details.) Apparently they believe that the availability of Caller ID is getting to the point where they can market such a product. I would expect to start seeing other companies making similar offerings until there is a cheap turn-key system for the PC. That's when I expect the horror stories to start. Scott Alexander salex@devvax.jpl.nasa.gov ------------------------------ From: Mark Walsh Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls Date: 9 Apr 91 17:10:27 GMT Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA From article , by paul@unhtel.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer): > sometimes (when things are REAL dull ...) I put them on the speaker, > with the transmitter muted, with varying amusing results ... once > during a party someone called and asked for the "head of the house" > (whatever that is ... B-) so I said "I'll get him", and put the > speakerphone on while we all told anecdotes about companies that use > telemarketing while the speaker kept yelling for attention. Which brings up an interesting question that I have had. Yes, I too find these most annoying. When the automated solicitors prompt you to leave information on their machine, I leave a message consisting of an incoherent diatribe of grotesque words and concepts. (The last one had something to do with sexual activity.) Anyway, I know that obscene phone calls are illegal, but what if you are not the originator of the phone call? Mark Walsh, KC6RKZ ------------------------------ From: Cristobal Pedregal-Martin Subject: Re: Billed Busy Signals Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 10:50:41 EDT Reply-To: Pedregal@cs.umass.edu In Article 15305 in comp.dcom.telecom, Jack.Rickard@f555.n104.z1.fidonet.org (Jack Rickard) writes: > I've had continuing problems with both Sprint and Telecom*USA over the > past year regarding multiple billing entries for busy signals. And our esteemed Moderator remarks: > [Moderator's Note: You can't eliminate it by yourself. Only your long > distance carrier can do so. The problem you describe is common with > any telecom organization unable/unwilling to obtain 'answer supervision' > from the serving local telco. I have noticed a similar phenomenon calling Spain this last month: I get a busy signal and soon thereafter the characteristic high-pitch short tone (forgive my ignorance of the technical terms here) which one usually hears when international calls are answered. I do a bit of international calling, and this never happened to me before; plus, I remembered seeing a sign in a German PTT cautioning customers that "calls to Spain - due to equipment in Spain - start being billed after a few seconds regardless of whether there is an answer there". I remember it distinctly (this was about two years ago) because it annoyed me :-) So I called AT&T (my LD company) and described (in my layman's terms) the phenomenon. They assured I won't be billed for these "calls". I'll keep an eye on my next bill, and report what happens. Has anyone had a similar experience? And, what are the appropriate terms here (for the synch tone, etc.)? Cristobal Pedregal Martin internet: pedregal@cs.umass.edu || phone: +1-413-549-5137 (home) postal: LGRC - COINS Dept. --- UMass/Amherst, MA 01003 --- USA ------------------------------ From: Colum Mylod Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Date: 10 Apr 91 09:00:55 GMT Reply-To: Colum Mylod Organization: Oracle Europe In article ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 266, Message 3 of 16 > With our bills Telecom Eireann customers have got a leaflet giving > the first stages of the 01 area number expansion plan. [...] > From April 8th all numbers starting with 69, 8 will have a 2 added > to make them 269 XXXX and 28X XXXX. Lucky you getting some info, even if they stick in a bill too! Those of us dialling from overseas (where publicity on the changes is zilch) are just getting tri-tone for the numbers that changed on 8 April. Can Telecom Eireann not afford some message machines to tell us what has changed, instead of playing do-da-de and putting more work on enquiries services? Does any other telco not put out a message on changed numbers? London is still doing so for calls to 1 or for incorrect 71/81 numbers, as is the Dutch PTT. Colum Mylod cmylod@nl.oracle.com Above is IMHO ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Zabloudil" Subject: WXYZ (was Re: New FCC Modem Tax?) Date: 10 Apr 91 14:11:05 GMT Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus In article kabra437@pallas.athenanet. com (Ken Abrams) writes: > radio station WXYZ in Los Angeles yesterday.....". Yes, I know what he meant, but there really is a WXYZ in Detroit, isn't there? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 18:36:20 PDT From: James Blake Subject: Phone Audio to RCA Jack Has anyone ever come across a device which would allow one to take the line level out from an RCA jack to a telephone line and to take the audio from a phone to a RCA jack? james ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #279 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01708; 11 Apr 91 3:46 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15730; 11 Apr 91 2:16 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab10442; 11 Apr 91 1:10 CDT Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 0:22:43 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #280 BCC: Message-ID: <9104110022.ab10247@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Apr 91 00:22:21 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 280 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed [Al L. Varney] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [Scott Hinckley] Re: Apple Data-PCS Petition for Rulemaking [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: International Tariff Expertise Sought [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [John Higdon] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Bob Goudreau] Per Line Blocking? [John Higdon] RS-232C to Commodore 64 User Port [Alain St-Denis] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 09:06:45 CDT From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article @comspec.uucp (David Berman) writes: > Northern Telecom has had their Maestro phones out a while, I think. > And I also believe that the Caller*ID transmissions from the phone > company are kind of standardized. I think. Depends on who/what you mean by the "phone company". Bellcore client companies have a standard. Canada may have another. Independents could have a third. PBX vendors can do all kinds of "secret" transmissions, etc. > Question: Does anyone reading know what is sent out? How the phone > number or alpha information is encoded on the ring cycle? Has it been > done in a reasonable way so that decoding is sensible? (etc) Addresses > the future? Yes. Yes. Yes, it's expansible. It's in there. > Or: Does anyone know where such information is published for > reference? OK ... One more time, with feeling: The information is published FOR PROFIT by Bellcore, and is periodically updated by them. The interface specification for the actual Customer Premises interface for analog telephone lines is in: TR-TSY-000030, "SPCS Customer Premises Equipment Data Interface", Issue 1, November 1988 + Bulletin 1, April 1989 {may be at Issue 2 by now.} This is the electrical interface, at about the level of describing how to build a 1200-baud modem with FSK signaling. The actual messages sent to the interface are in ASCII, detailed in each speification that describes a particular feature using the interface. Refer to: TR-TSY-000031, "CLASS(sm) Feature: Calling Number Delivery", Issue 2, June 1988, + Revision 1, January 1990 TA-NWT-001188, "CLASS(sm) Calling Name Delivery and Related Features", Issue 1, March 1991 {Waiting for Industry Comments} These are two relevant documents, but there are no real limits imposed by TR-30 on the usage of the interface. Use of the interface during Call Waiting is under study. The requirements for ISDN interfaces are documented in other TR's (many). Bellcore documents can be ordered by calling (201) 699-5800, (Mon.-Fri. 8 am to 6 pm) Visa, Mastercard, American Express FAX orders: (201) 699-0936 Telex orders: (201) 275-2090 Mail (with payment in U.S. funds, or credit card information): Bellcore Customer Service 60 New England Avenue Piscataway, NJ 08854-4196 All this and more is available as SR-TSY-000264, "Catalog of Technical Information" and updates/etc are detailed in the monthly periodical, "Bellcore's Digest of Technical Information." Prices (in an old catalog): TR-TSY-000030, $25 (includes Bulletin) TR-TSY-000031, $23 Revision 1 $12 (may be included in new orders?) SR-TSY-000264, No Price stated! Bellcore Digest $60/year, includes the SR-TSY-000264 yearly catalog! (Prices do not include sales tax, Canadian/Mexican or Foreign surcharges, multi-year discounts, etc.) > Further: Will Toronto (416)'s Caller ID transmissions be compatible > with the ones in the United States, say, in AT&T territory? Or will > they be similar, but different, so that Maestro phones in Atlanta, GA, > won't work in Toronto, even though they have fixed the design flaw down > there? Who knows? Depends on Canadian requirements. > (I have even more questions, but hope that I will be able to follow > the thread as others ask in response to your answers ...) [thanks] Well, ask away, but don't expect to be able to construct an interface of understand the messages from the Net, any more than you could construct a real telephone from information only from the Net. Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems ------------------------------ From: Scott Hinckley Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers Date: 10 Apr 91 17:01:58 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com > [Moderator's Note: Well, but at least with the IBT refund coupons (I > refuse to call them checks!) you can redeem them with your phone bill. > They say that on the front of the piece of paper. I would be > embarassed to send them a COCOT refund coupon along with my phone bill > payment, although I guess I could. PAT] When I was in Atlanta (back in the days of the $.10 pay phone) I was connected to a wrong number by one of the bandits. When I called the operator to try and get through to the correct number (I did not have another dime) she would not connect me, but took my name and address. A couple of weeks later I recieved a check (not coupon, real honest-to-goodness check) for $.10 ... which was sent in an envelope with a $.22 stamp on it! That seems like a pretty expensive way to deal with it (operator's time + envelope handler's time + envelope cost + check cost + stamp cost + amount of check.) Internet:scott@hsvaic.boeing.com|UUCP:...!uunet!uw-beaver!bcsaic!hsvaic!scott DISCLAIMER: All contained herein are my opinions, they do not|+1 205 461 2073 represent the opinions or feelings of Boeing or its management| BTN:461-2073 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 03:01 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Apple Data-PCS Petition for Rulemaking Continuing a thread about Apple Computer applying to operate a radio LAN product with the FCC [last commented in Digest v11, iss153], there was rather expectable news reported in this week's trade press. The following is from {CommunicationsWEEK} for April 10: "TELCOS OPPOSE APPLE SPECTRUM" "By Kathleen Killette" "WASHINGTON - In comments submitted to the FCC, telcos, utilities and others have said Apple Computer, Inc. has not justified a separate spectrum allocation in its petition for personal communications services." "In addition, Apple's critics say the company's petition should be folded into the FCC's broader PCS inquiry, which has been under way since June." (1990, of course.) "This week, the agency will receive more comments on a petition submitted in January by Apple" ... "for data-only PCS. The computer industry's growing interest in wireless technologies is pressuring the FCC to carve out spectrum fpr over-the-air local area data networks." .......... "Apple asked the FCC to allocate 40 megahertz of spectrum in the 1,850-MHz to 1,990-MHz radiofrequency band for `Data-PCS.' Data-PCS would let PC users `access files, peripherals and the gateways of wired and wireless data networks,' within a local area of between 50 and 150 meters, Apple stated." "Data-PCS would use a maximum of 1 Watt of output power and directional antennae, which would let different antennae use the same frequency simultaneously for transmitting and receiving packetized data." "But AT&T opposed Apple's petition, stating that PCS spectrum allocations should not be limited to data-only applications." "Southwestern Bell Corp., St. Louis, agreed, and added that, `Apple's request should be considered, if at all, solely within the context of' the FCC's current PCS inquiry. Apple also wants too much spectrum for Data-PCS and has not proposed and compensation for the existing users of the 1,850-1,990 MHz band, stated Southwestern." "That spectrum currently is allocated to commercial, fixed microwave users that operate private network, such as utiliteis and large corporations. Many of these users are licensed as Operational Fixed Service users and providers." "The Utilities Telecommunications Council" "also objected to Apple's petition, noting that water, gas and electric utilities have invested more than $360 million in radio equipment to operate in the 1,850-1,990 MHz band." "That investment - which supports roughly 2,000 licenses" "-could be stranded if private microwave users are relocated to other frequencies, resulting severe economic hardships, according to the council." (end quote) So, it looks like Apple is getting the typical treatment: Overstated tales of woe from the poor, beleagured utility companies -- who for the most part still enjoy just sticking more capital in their rate bases the way Telcos did for decades. If any argument makes more sense, that put forward by AT&T does...simply to say that PCS should be for both voice and data. But to cry the blues about what is a rather insignificant portion of the total investment of the utility industry just doesn't seem to fit. What could possibly motivate the utilities, who want all the excuses they can find to stick more capital in their rate bases, to jump into this fray? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 02:18 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: International Tariff Expertise Sought In Digest V11, Iss269, Carl Wright asks: > I am seeking individuals who can discuss how the revenues from > international calls are distributed and determined. Any names are > appreciated. Anywhere in the world. When the story that follows appeared, it brought to mind the the thought that international telecommunications settlements have many participants, but NO experts. Shrouded in a cloud of apparent sophistication, rates are bargained between the telecomm operators of nations, then converted to an artificial unit of currency called a "gold franc." Then, settlements are _supposed_ to be made. However, as the following article suggests, it's "get the rich capitalists" time when it comes to negotiating a split for circuits from the US. But, it gets worse than AT&T would have you know in the article. The other side then sets their outgoing price sky high, which discourages outgoing traffic from their end, thus they have even less to pay. Meantime, your outbound originations go way up, and you owe them most all the time. But to top it all, when they do owe you, they never do pay, just running up the tab for years and years. The "book" way it works is all in the CCITT's Recommendations, but the CCITT carefully avoids any rules about what constitutes a fair division of revenue and how often the bill _will_ get settled. That in mind, see AT&T's latest story about what has been another foreign trade drain on the US economy for decades: "AT&T NEWSBRIEFS "Friday, April 5, 1991 "FOREIGN TRADE - According to the FCC, out of every $1 that U.S. phone customers pay to make international calls, American phone companies keep an average of 25 cents for their share of the connection. The rest - 75 cents - is paid to the foreign phone company in the country where the call is received. At the same time, some foreign countries keep international calling rates for their own residents high to encourage their citizens and businesses to keep out-going calls to a minimum - since the country makes more money from incoming calls. ... In the topsy-turvy world of international phone calling, AT&T gets to keep only 8 cents per minute during peak calls, and it actually loses 14 cents a minute in off-peak calling. ... Today direct dialing is the standard way to phone most countries and the cost of international voice circuits has decreased as much as a hundredfold - but accounting rates have not fallen proportionately. ... "I don't think there's still enough critical mass [of concern] to be able to make a fundamental reform yet," said AT&T's [Tom] Luciano [of international setlements]. Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? "Mark D. Studebaker(813" writes: > The new "Notes on the Network" is just out from Bellcore for $395. Be sure to save your receipt in case someone busts into your house accusing you of stealing it! According to the formula apparently used by SBT and the Federal Government, you might be charged with a crime involving $2,400,000. I believe this is in conformity with the prosecution's standard markup of Bellcore documents, no? :-) John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 17:33:03 edt From: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion In article , tjo@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (Tim Oldham) writes: > > I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that > > they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet > > unspecified future use. > I believe (and I don't speak for my employer on this) that as 01 is > already the international dialling sequence (eg the USA is 0101), 017 > and 018 were out of the question, or just plain confusing. Beg your pardon? I thought (and your own example seems to prove) that the international prefix was "010", not "01". So where's the ambiguity for 017, 018, or indeed any 01x (as long as x != 0)? Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 20:34 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Per Line Blocking? There has been much talk of the hearings concerning CLASS features in California. A widely debated issue at each hearing so far has been the matter of per line vs per call blocking. Many, including some on this forum seem to prefer per line blocking. To me, the term 'per line blocking' would be synonymous with 'no Caller ID'. Why? A customer calls the telco business office to establish service. After the vitals are exchanged, the rep asks, "And which long distance carrier do you want? Measured or unmeasured? Listed or unlisted? Any Custom Calling features? Blocked or unblocked?" "What?", you say. "Do you want your line to always reveal your number to any person you call that subscribes to Caller ID, or do you want it to never reveal it?" Now realistically, what do you think 99.999% of all telephone customers are going to answer at this point? Now as a customer, you order Caller ID. However, the rep becomes uncharacteristically candid with you and points out that ten people in your area have "unblocked" lines and suggests reconsidering your order. So come on now, all you per line blocking advocates. Isn't per line blocking just the new code for "no Caller ID"? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 10:49:07 -0400 From: Alain St-Denis Subject: RS-232C to Commodore 64 User Port Organization: Environment Canada I would like to interface an IBM compatible with a Commodore 64 through serial ports. Anybody out there know the pin layout of the Commodore 64 user port? Please e-mail. Thank you. Alain St-Denis Centre informatique de Dorval Environnement Canada astdenis@cid.aes.doe.CA (514) 421-4697 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #280 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03328; 11 Apr 91 4:57 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12256; 11 Apr 91 3:22 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab15730; 11 Apr 91 2:16 CDT Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 1:50:12 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #281 BCC: Message-ID: <9104110150.ab13342@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Apr 91 01:50:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 281 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Major U.S. Telecom Manufacturer For Sale [Jim Blocker] New Bellcore Area Code Directory [Subodh Bapat] Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? [Leryo Malbito] Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted [Leryo Malbito] Request For Information on Hard Network Problems [Marc Riese] Performing a Party Line Identification Test in the CO [Larry Lippman] Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [Steve Forrette] Sprintmail's Gateway [Robert Ashmore] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 22:17:08 CDT From: Jim Blocker Subject: Major U.S. Telecom Manufacturer For Sale On April 5, Rockwell International Corporation announced that its Network Transmission Systems Division is for sale. The full text of the press release follows: EL SEGUNDO, California (April 5, 1991) -- Rockwell international Corporation announced today that it intends to sell its Network Transmission Systems Division (NTSD), an industry leader in communication transmission equipment. "The Network Transmission Systems Division has achieved a well deserved reputation for innovative, high quality products that have earned it a leadership position in the telephone lightwave and microwave transmission products markets it serves," said Donald R. Beall, Rockwell Chairman and chief executive officer. Beall added "For many years NTSD has been a significant participant in both domestic and international telecommunications. The significant investments we have made in NTSD position this business well to sustain and grow its long-term value." "The sale of NTSD, which we expect to consummate by the end of this calendar year, will help us to achieve our goals for long-term growth in earnings per share and return on equity by allowing us to focus further resources on continued strengthening and growth in our businesses and other actions to enhance shareholder value," Beall noted. The Corporation has retained Dillon, Read & Co., of New York City as its advisor in selling the Network Transmission Systems Division. The Network Transmission Systems Division, with annual sales near $500 million, supplies leading edge products for telephone communication networks including fiber optic transmission systems, microwave transmission systems, digital multiplex products, and digital cross-connect systems. Its customers include both domestic and international long distance carriers, local exchange carriers, and cellular telephone companies. The Division has approximately 3,600 employees, primarily at its principal offices in Richardson, Texas. Other operating locations are in Longview and El Paso, Texas; San Jose, California; Nogales, Mexico; and Georgetown, Ontario. Beall also commented on current fiscal year earnings, stating, "We will be reporting our second quarter earnings about mid-month. As we anticipated earlier this year, we expect earnings will be somewhat below 1990's strong second quarter of 70 cents per share. Even with the uncertainties of the current economic environment, we continue to believe our 1991 earnings per share will be somewhat higher than in fiscal 1990." "Looking further ahead," Beall noted, "our preliminary assessment is that we may see 1992 earnings per share from our on-going operations being similar to the current fiscal year. Our longer term goals for improved earnings per share and return on equity remain unchanged." Rockwell International is a $12 billion, multi-industry company applying advanced technology to a wide range of products in its electronics, aerospace, automotive and graphics businesses. END OF PRESS RELEASE And that's all that I really know at this point, folks. Rumors have it that at least one European company has shown an interest in acquiring NTSD. I have no facts to back this up, though. Jim Blocker KF5IW rwsys.lonestar.org!kf5iw!jim ------------------------------ From: Subodh Bapat Subject: New Bellcore Area Code Directory Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 17:23:25 EDT For those interested in NPA administration, the latest Bellcore catalog has a listing for Technical Report TR-EOP-000093, the 1990 Telephone Area Code Directory. Thus spaketh the blurb: " ... provides all customer-dialable locations in the North American Numbering Plan and their Numbering Plan Area Codes. All major NPA splits are included. {Ed. comment: Not sure if there is any such thing as a minor NPA split.} ... Features ... Alphabetical Listing of Carrier Identification Codes, Numerical Listing of Carrier Identification Codes, Maps showing NPAs with codes, Alphabetical Listings of states with Corresponding Codes, Numerical Listing of codes with Corresponding States, Listing of localities within a state and corresponding codes." This may be ordered for $25.00 from 1-800-521-CORE. This is for information only - I have no affiliation with Bellcore. Subodh Bapat bapat@rm1.uu.net OR ...uunet!rm1!bapat Racal-Milgo, Ft Lauderdale ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 02:02:13 -0400 From: Leryo Malbito Subject: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? Would anyone know how one could set up a data conference using three-way calling? This seems like an idea that would be not too difficult to implement, although a friend and I have unsuccessfully tried several times. The most logical way is for him and I to be on the phone, then I go off-hook and dial the bbs (or whatever), then once we come back we somehow connect. Since the bbs will always return an Answer tone, the only variables we have control of are my modem and his ... and the possibilities for both are only originate and answer. One of us two MUST do an originate. It's very confusing and we haven't had much success at all ... although it seems we have exhausted all of our options. The best we got was the first line of the intro screen, then six or seven pages of trash. Oh well, if anyone can help please respond. In addition to fun possibilities this would present the option of remote telecommunications tutoring. [Moderator's Note: You cannot do what you want. The modem has only two conditions: originate and answer. It cannot talk to another modem set in the same mode. Any two of the three can communicate if one is set to receive and the other to transmit. The third one will be (possibly) able to talk to one or the other, but not both. What usually happens is the third modem, in generating its own originate or answer carrier makes the connection so cluttered with noise that none of the three can communicate, as you have found out. I said modems have only two modes: this is not entirely true. My US Robotics Courier 2400 has a third mode called 'transmitter off', allowing it to sit there and silently monitor what is happening otherwise. So with such a modem, you could bring a three-way data connection up successfully provided the third party sat there silently and did not throw carrier at the other two. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 02:02:13 -0400 From: Leryo Malbito Subject: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted A totally unrelated topic: Does anyone have ANY idea where to get those strange screwdrivers that fit screws with two holes in them? I assume the screwdriver looks like some sort of fork with two prongs in it. Does anyone know if they sell these screwdrivers to the general public? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 13:36:00 +0000 From: "(Marc Riese)" Subject: Request For Information on Hard Network Problems I am a student working on network diagnosis and I am looking for descriptions of difficult network problems whose diagnosis involved some degree of reasoning about time and/or space. That is, in order to solve the problem, the diagnoser had to reason explicitly about when and/or where certain events happened that led to the problem. For example, a common problem on data-comm networks is `broadcast storms', where unanticipated or unintended transactions cause multiple broadcasts which get out of control and swamp the system. Udi Manber described other examples in "Chain Reactions in Networks" (IEEE Computer 10/90). I am looking for other examples, datacom or telecom, generic or specific. Any information or pointers much appreciated. Discussion welcome. Marc Riese Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ------------------------------ Subject: Performing a Party Line Identification Test in the CO Date: 9 Apr 91 08:17:06 EST (Tue) From: Larry Lippman In article john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > > While I have not dug too deeply into this aspect, one advantage of at > > least the two party Bell method was ANI. While the trick with the > > tapped ringer coil added some noise, it DID allow the CO to figure if > > Mr. Tip or Ms. Ring was calling Fargo without a "numberpleeze." > So how in the hell did that actually work? I remember that before > party lines were abolished in metro areas in the state, the sure-fire > way to tell that a friend had a party line when using his phone was by > the "tick-kunk" that came immediately after dialing and just before > the originating register dropped. Those of us with private lines had > no such noise. We all knew that sound had something to do with > identifying the tip or ring party, but to this day no one has ever > explained what was going on. The "tip party" on a two-party line has a balanced connection to earth ground using a portion of the ringer and network circuitry. Since the effective connection has approximately equal impedance from both the tip and ring of the line to ground, there is (or *should* be) little longitudinal imbalance and therefore little 60 Hz hum and noise. In addition, the impedance at voice frequencies should be high enough to cause little shunt attenuation at voice frequencies. The rotary dial is placed in the circuit "ahead" of the ground, so there is little effect that could cause dial pulse distortion. The "ring party" on a two-party line has no such balanced ground. The "party test" is therefore concerned with ascertaining the presence or absence of this balanced ground. Electrically, the test is performed while a station is off-hook through comparing the current flow on the tip side of the line with that on the ring. The conditions for the test are those of resistance battery on the ring side of the line and resistance ground on the tip, with the resistance usually being supplied through a dual-winding supervisory relay. If the current is equal (less some small allowance for cable leakage resistance) then there is no balanced ground and the station is the "ring party". If the current is significantly less on the tip side than the ring, the station is the "tip party". In an electromechanical CO, such as No. 5 XBAR, the differential current measurement described above is simply provided using a dual winding 280-type or equivalent polar relay. If the relay operates, then there is sufficient current unbalance to indicate the "tip party". If the relay remains non-operated, then it is the "ring party". In some ESS offices the party test is made though current measurement across tip and ring series resistors using differential ampliers and a comparator circuit. The party test is usually made in the originating register in a XBAR or ESS CO, and in an outgoing ANI trunk in a SxS CO so equipped. With respect to the "sound" made by an originating register during the party test, I suppose this is possible if the party test relay were switched in and out of the circuit. However, in originating registers that I have seen, I seem to recall that the party test relay was a polar differential type that was always in the circuit. The relay was sensitive and had little series resistance, so there was no need to switch it in or out of the circuit. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 14:52 GMT From: Steve Forrette Subject: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones I was at Oakland International last week, and took a closer look at the Pacific Bell "airport" payphones. You know, the special ones, that accept coins or mag stripe cards, and have the LCD display (the ones that were in "Die Hard 2," supposedly in DC). Not only does the mag stripe reader take RBOC and AT&T calling cards, but it takes Visa, MasterCard, American Express, Diners, and JCB. This is the first RBOC payphone that I know of that takes commercial credit cards. When you use it, it's quite a Mickey-Mouse setup. If you use a calling card, the phone simply dials the number, waits for the ka-bong, then sends the card number and PIN via DTMF. It would take me longer to get the card out of my wallet then dial the numbers myself. And of course, that's assuming that I wanted to waste space in my wallet for the calling card anyway. But for the credit cards, it is even more silly. The phone dials a seven digit number into some computer verification system somewhere. The remote system answers with a short tone, then the phone sends the dialed number. Another remote tone, then your credit card number is sent out. This is all via DTMF and with the caller hearing the whole process. The credit card procedure takes many seconds to complete. Now, let's say I wanted to have some phun, and recorded the process at the payphone. At home, I could decode the digits by playing them to my voicemail board, or by using a test device of some sort. Then, from any phone, could I not call the seven digit number that the payphone did, enter the number I wanted to call, then my credit card number, and have the call billed to my credit account? Presumably, the charges wouldn't be too outrageous, since I'd be "using" a Bell payphone to complete the call, right? And as long as I used only my own credit card, would this even be considered phraud? This assumes that the number that the payphone called does not have Caller ID. Since Pacific Bell has SS7 mostly deployed in the Bay Area (although CLASS features aren't offered yet), it is conceivable that they can tell if the calling phone is really the payphone at the airport, since this use of Caller ID would clearly be for internal telco use. But, for some reason, I don't think that this is the case. I'd bet that I could use the above procedure to call from home. Here's a scenario for you: Let's say I were far away from the airport, and called the secret number it calls for credit card calls, send-paid from some other payphone. If I entered my credit card number and called someone, it would establish a pretty good alibi that I was at the airport at the time of the call, would it not? You know, sometimes I'm thankful that most of us Digesters aren't crooks! :-) :-) And since when did Pacific Bell get in the business of accepting major credit cards for phone calls, anyway? Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: Robert Ashmore Subject: Sprintmail's Gateway Date: 9 Apr 91 16:20:13 GMT Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS A friend of mine works at TRW in El Segundo. He says that he gets email from Sprintmail. Does anyone know what the gateway to Sprintmail is? What sort of mail address do I use? Thanks in advance for any help! Robert B. Ashmore III ashmor@labpca.mscs.mu.edu 362LASHMORER@mucsd.bitnet ashmor@studsys.mu.edu [Moderator's Note: Never the sort of organization to make things *easy*, Sprintmail, nee Telemail is accessed from the Internet thus: '/pn=first.lastname/o=us.sprint/admd=telemail/c=us@sprint.com'. And yes, you put all those slashes and attributes=equal.whatever as you see them above, terminating the address with '@sprint.com'. When I did a lookup from the name server just now, I see that sprintf.merit.edu is doing the honors. There may be others. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #281 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12820; 11 Apr 91 10:10 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04144; 11 Apr 91 8:29 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24585; 11 Apr 91 7:23 CDT Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 7:11:09 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #282 BCC: Message-ID: <9104110711.ab29388@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Apr 91 07:10:42 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 282 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: International Misdialing [Bob Frankston] Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing [Leryo Malbito] Information Needed About Cellular Modems [Bill Woodcock] Rochester Telephone CID [Jeff Wasilko] Entire Network Off Line - No One Knows What's Wrong [Jeff Wasilko] How Were Large Call Volumes Handled Long Ago? [Jeff Wasilko] 900 Discussion on CNN [Bill Woodcock] Two Email Addresses Needed [Andy Lim] Convenience of Phone System? [David Gast] 10XXX Questions [Chris Kerstiens] 10XXX May Yet Work! [John Higdon] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 12:42 GMT From: Bob Frankston Subject: Re: International Misdialing I've had the reverse experience of explaining to a secretary that 617 (without an international prefix) was Massachusetts and not Australia. In this case it was a FAX and I call transferred the call to a nearby FAX machine. The problem is compounded by calls placed by automatic dialers, forwards and all sorts of means that do not allow for a reality check by a human caller. Has CCITT given any consideration to a sparser dialing space (or a check digit) or some means that would decrease the probability that a wrong (as opposed to invalid) number would be treated as valid? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 21:03:42 -0400 From: Leryo Malbito Subject: Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing In Telecom Volume 11 Issue 277, on the subject of a device that would prompt for a DTMF passcode before allowing the call to go through, Jim Coleman writes: > Does anyone know if these are available in any affordable form > (i.e., not part of a huge phone system)? The other day while browsing through a store called The Spy Shop in New York, I picked up a flyer on the counter. I will retype here the entirety of this flyer. 'New' 'Improved' (Snicker - Leryo) LineMinder(tm) ... complete control of your telephone! Now you can take complete control of your telephone. With LINE MINDER(tm):A compact, electronic device that connects to your telephone and automatically screens all incoming calls. When your four digit security number is entered by the caller from a touch tone phone, LINE MINDER(tm) will alert you that an authorized call is waiting. SIMPLE TO SETUP LINE MINDER(tm) is powered by your phone. No special batteries or AC * power adapters are needed. To set it up, you simply switch to the PASSWORD mode and create your own security password using the telephone's keypad. You can use any four numbers, including the * key. LINE MINDER(tm) signals you when your password is accepted. EASY TO OPERATE Once you've entered your password, just turn LINE MINDER(tm) to the ON mode to begin operation. That's all. LINE MINDER(tm) does the rest. Automatically. The LINE MINDER(tm) voice prompts the caller for the password. When the incoming caller enters the correct password, LINE MINDER(tm) signals you with a pleasant, distinctive, intermittent beep. When you lift the receiver, LINE MINDER(tm) stops beeping. And you can begin your conversation. If a wrong password is enteres, LINE MINDER(tm) disconnects the caller. Since LINE MINDER(tm) is password protected, you only get calls from people who have your password. To cease operation, simply switch LINE MINDER(tm) to the OFF mode and all calls will be unscreened and ring the phone. HOME SECURITY LINE MINDER(tm) is phone security that lets you mind your own business -- and stops unwanted callers or intruders from doing the same. LINE MINDER(tm) eliminates: *nuisance calls *obscene calls *threatening calls *wrong numbers *unwanted calls *the need or expense of an unlisted number What's more, this telephone device will never tell strangers that you are not home. LINE MINDER(tm) FEATURES: 1) Voice Response 2) Easy set-up and operation 3) Lightweight, compact, durable construction 4) Manual security set 5) Industry Ringer 6) ON/OFF/Password switch 7) Telephone line powered LINE MINDER(tm) PACKAGING 1) FCC Registered 2) Line cable 3) Password number notices (pad of 50) 4) Approximately 3" x 5" x 1" 5) Weighs less than one pound 6) 100 days of warranty 7) Now with AC/DC power source Whew. As always 'New, Improved!' make me laugh, but this looks like an interesting idea. A major benefit is the idea of never telling strangers that your not home, although I don't personally know any burglars who use this method of calling random numbers then finding out the address, or whatever. A downside: Should Uncle Jaime call from his vacation in Nigeria and enter 7363 instead of 7364, he would be disconnected and charged for the call. According to the flyer, Spy Shop can be reached at: 889 First Avenue, New York, New York 10022 212-755-4900 (and I THINK 800 SPY-Shop ... but I'm not sure.) In general Spy Shop sells bug-detection equipment and will only sell 'bugs' to authorized law enforcement personnell. But they also have various other bizarre stuff, pretty expensive. Should anyone pursue this, please respond here with whatever info the salesman gives you, especially about price, etc. (Which is not given on the flyer). Disclaimer: I am in no way, shape, or form affiliated with 'The Spy Shop'(tm?) and am receiving no reimbursement for this, only hoping to be an aid to fellow netters out there. ------------------------------ From: Bill Woodcock Subject: Information Needed About Cellular Modems Date: 10 Apr 91 01:51:36 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz I'm looking into cellular modems. Does anybody out there know the names of vendors? Is anyone working toward terminal adapters for digital cellular, that would fit in a laptop? bill.woodcock.iv woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu 2355.virginia.st berkeley.california 4709.1315 ------------------------------ From: Jeff Wasilko Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 21:49:30 EDT Subject: Rochester Telephone CID Paraphrased from the {Democrat and Cronicle} Rochester Tel hasn't decided whether to offer CID under new privacy guidlines laid down by the NY Public Service Commission. The PSC ruled out CID proposed by Rochester Telephone and NY Telephone because their services included per-call blocking, and not per-line blocking. The commission also requires all unlisted lines to be blocked by default. The PSC also issued a rule that bars resale of numbers gleaned from incoming 800 calls. Jeff Wasilko BITNET: jjwcmp@ritvax INET: jjwcmp@ultb.isc.rit.edu INTERNET: jjwcmp@ritvax.rit.edu UUCP: jjwcmp@ultb.UUCP ------------------------------ From: Jeff Wasilko Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 21:49:30 EDT Subject: Entire Network Offline - No One Knows What's Wrong Our building's telephone and data service has been out since late Sunday night. We are served from our campus' System 85 by a microwave link, and something broke -- and AT&T is apparently baffled. We've finally got a few cellular phones in, but the AT&T microwave folks are madly swapping components, and have no idea when things will be working again. One of the perils of being your own telephone company, I guess. Jeff Wasilko BITNET: jjwcmp@ritvax INET: jjwcmp@ultb.isc.rit.edu INTERNET: jjwcmp@ritvax.rit.edu UUCP: jjwcmp@ultb.UUCP ------------------------------ From: Jeff Wasilko Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 21:49:30 EDT Subject: How Were Large Call Volumes Handled Long Ago? ACDs have been mentioned a few times this week, which got me wondering: What did recipients of large volumes of calls do before ACDs? Did someone manually distribute calls? Also, there was a mention some time ago of an ACD that can periodically announce your position in the queue, and the average wait time from that point. Does this actually exist? I've never heard one do that ... as someone who seems to spend a lot of time on hold, I'd love to know how much longer. Jeff Wasilko BITNET: jjwcmp@ritvax INET: jjwcmp@ultb.isc.rit.edu INTERNET: jjwcmp@ritvax.rit.edu UUCP: jjwcmp@ultb.UUCP [Moderator's Note: The Chicago Transit Authority (312-MOHawk 7200) has an ACD in their customer service unit which periodically announces your position in the queue ("there are two calls ahead of you"). My first knowledge of ACDs was about 1970. Diner's Club and Amoco Credit Card had one in their sales authorization unit which pumped several hundred calls per hour -- about 10,000 calls daily -- to representatives who would authorize sales over the floor limit. Most calls took about twenty seconds to handle, and came in on 800 numbers. Prior to such systems, incoming calls were handled by large banks of operators at cord switchboards, just like the ones telco used. When I worked at the University of Chicago about 1960, they had 19 operator positions for incoming calls. (Outgoing local calls were made by dialing "9". Long distance went through the switchboard.) With an ACD for incoming calls they were able to cut back to about six operator positions. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Woodcock Subject: 900 Discussion on CNN Date: 10 Apr 91 02:49:59 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing I just watched a short interview with Robert Abrams on CNN. (2:10pm-2:15pm, PST) Abrams is the Attorney General for the state of New York. He and a group of Attornies General from other states with harsh anti-900- number legislation have formed a committee to pressure the federal government to pass restrictive legislation dealing with the 900 issue. It sounded as though his organization had successfully lobbied the FCC. He said that the FCC had proposed a plan with two major goals: 1) Require every 900 number to air a "preamble" including three things; a brief discription of the nature of the service, a clear statement of the cost or charges involved, and the opportunity to hang up without incurring any charges. 2) Require all telcos to provide free blocking to any customer on request, and make parents of children who make calls to 900 numbers not liable for the charges. This last seems somewhat problematic to me, from an enforcement point of view. But then I'm sure the telcos can just contact Lotus and Equifax to find out whether you _really_ have kids. :-) He went on to describe 900 number operators as "The worst sort of scam artists and snake oil salesmen," and quoted several statistics: total income of 900 services in 1990 was between $800 million and $1 billion; projected income in 1991 is likely to be $1.5 billion; more than 30% of the "victims" of 900-based "scams" are over 65. He made quite a point of most of the "victims" being minorities, unemployed, or otherwise disadvantaged. bill.woodcock.iv woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu 2355.virginia.st berkeley.california 94709.1315 ------------------------------ From: Andy Lim Subject: Two Email Addresses Needed Date: 10 Apr 91 02:44:52 GMT Organization: Telecom Research Labs,Melbourne, Australia Hi, Is there anyone out there who knows the email addresses of the following persons? Akab Taffel of US Sprint Brian Button of Stratacom Please email me. Hui H. (Andy) Lim, PhD | Ph: +61 3 541 6313 Switching Section, SNRB | FAX: +61 3 543 1944 Telecom Research Laboratories | +61 3 543 3339 P.O.Box 249, Vic. 3168, Australia | Email: a.lim@trl.oz.au ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 20:32:48 -0700 From: David Gast Subject: Convenience of Phone System? Barton.Bruce@camb.com wrote: > Phone numbers are a crude temporary necessity they have imposed on us. > Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend > Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone be > voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is > being refered to. Sometimes I am really amazed at the suggestions that are made to improve convenience. To some extent the above may be convenient. On the other hand, do we really want the phone company (and every COCOT sleeze since the example above includes a pay phone) or the government to recognize our voice on a routine basis? Our every move would be tracked. Additionally, this particular scenario has a huge security hole: I call someone, they record my voice, then they call someone, but pipe their input through a device that simulates my voice. Now they can easily represent themselves as me. Perhaps we should close some the existing security holes before we make new giant ones. David [Moderator's Note: And what, pray tell, is the difference between this and sending someone a written letter who then forges my handwriting and signs off on some fraudulent documents for me? Maybe we should stop allowing handwritten communication between people (or individuals and companies) before this 'existing security hole' gets worse. How inconvenient do you want things to be just to accomodate your fears about 'what might happen'? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Chris Kerstiens Subject: 10XXX Help Organization: NIA - Network Information Access Magazine Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 01:44:36 GMT Does anyone out there have a list of companies that own/operate the various 10XXX codes? The question was raised as to if someone could commit toll fraud by dialing a 10XXX that did not exist, or that had no connections in that city/state, and I was curious as to the validity of this idea. Thanks, Chris Kerstiens : Editor - NIA Magazine macduff@nuchat.sccsi.com : Subscriptons/Submissions to: : elisem@nuchat.sccsi.com [Moderator's Note: The only 10xxx codes allowed by your local telco switch will be those having some recognized and acceptable destination by your telco. And if your telco *does* have contact with some LD carrier via 10xxx then your telco is required by law to provide the LD carrier with the billing name and address associated with the line used to place the call, even if it is a non-pub number. Any single 10xxx code will only work if your local telco switch authorizes it. All 10xxx codes are not in service from every switch by default. Listings of all known 10xxx codes are in the Telecom Archives, and available by anonymous ftp from lcs.mit.edu. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 11:55 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: '10XXX' May Yet Work! "AT&T NEWS BRIEFS ...Separately, the [FCC] proposed allowing long-distance carriers access to local telephone companies' credit card validation data and billing information. ... Wall Street Journal, A11. ... The operator service companies ... would be prevented from blocking callers from either 800 or 950 access numbers and require that" And here is the good part... "equipment manufactured from April 17, 1992, and after be capable of providing equal access to long distance companies through "10XXX" access codes. ... AP. " So it looks like AT&T, the lone voice in the 10XXX wilderness, will get its way after all. But a lot of this seems like dejavu all over again. I thought that this was supposed to be the way it worked all along. Every year, it seems, the FCC or some state agency is proposing to make the system work the way it is supposed to, laws and rules are passed, and then everything stays the same. Regardless of the signage, the vast majority of COCOTs in my area violate at least several of what we telecomers consider to be minimum service attributes. 10XXX is usually denied; 950 is frequently denied (or charged heavily for); 800 is sometimes denied; as well as DTMF turned off after dialing which in itself nullifies two of the above. Are our regulators powerless in this matter of COCOTs and AOS? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: *They* may be powerless, but *we the people* are not. Keep on stickering those COCOTS which are technically out of order; keep on demanding refunds and compliance when you talk to the owners. When possible, boycott them, and let shop-keepers know about your displeasure in their choice of public telephone instruments. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #282 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15852; 11 Apr 91 11:26 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa30389; 11 Apr 91 9:34 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab04144; 11 Apr 91 8:29 CDT Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 7:51:29 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #283 BCC: Message-ID: <9104110751.ab06729@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Apr 91 07:51:14 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 283 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson New Tower, But no Service? [Douglas Scott Reuben] Time Restricted Connection to Phone System [Jeff Sicherman] Calling all Bell Canada Caller-ID Customers [Eric Skinner] Cupertino's CATV Commission Seeking New Member [Mike Wincn] Wanted: Worldwide List of Telcos and Addresses [Rop Gonggrijp] Provisions of CONSO Over a Connectionless Network [Andy Lim] Radio Reception on Telephone [Kyler Laird] Seeking 9600/4800/2400 Voice CODEC's [Monty Andro] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10-APR-1991 02:24:04.55 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: New Tower, But no Service? I was driving yesterday through Northwestern Connecticut, mainly along US-202 from New Milford (just north of Danbury) through Washington, Litchfield, and Torrington, and noticed that there was service there with SNET, the "B" carrier. This is something new, since the area has always been dead before on both the "A" and the "B" carriers. Yet everytime I tried to place a call (to *611 or to my home number or whatever), I got the "re-order" which the PHONE puts out when it can't grab a channel (NOT a "real" telco reorder or one from the MTSO or cell site). This usually happens to me when all frequencies are busy, and there is no way to connect with the nearby cell tower. Now anyone familiar with the area knows that it isn't all that populated, and thus even if there are only a few channels allocated to the tower which serves the area, there should be a FEW of them vacant from time to time. Moreover, the terrain, which is quite 'hilly' was not a factor, as I drove right by the cell tower. (SNET's have flat, green plated panels in a triangular pattern around the top of the antenna, while Metro High-Bill's are more like a bunch of UHF antennas with other, smaller antennas extended out from the main grid, which then surround the pole on two or three sides. You can easily see the tower from US-202 heading North, just after leaving the "downtown" area of New Milford. You can even see the tower from US-7, right before the JCT with US-202, if you look JUST a bit to the right.) So I got to a payphone, called SNET, and explained what was going on. The service rep who I spoke with checked this out (made a few quick calls) and said that the antenna was just put up in New Milford, and that they were sending out a carrier (or whatever) signal, but it would not allow calls to be placed from it, which is why I got the "re-order" signal. He said service should be in place by month's end, and that coverage will include Kent, Sharon, and Cornwall, which are rather remote areas near the NY/CT/MA border. He said this was part of SNET's plan to cover the entire state, and that new towers were also being installed in Norteastern CT, where there is little service unless you travel along I-84 to the Masspike (I-90). It's nice to see my cellular bills going towards expanding the system, rather than to who-knows-what with some other (ahem) companies in CT! :) Speaking of Metro Mobile :), I called them and asked them what THEY were doing about Western CT, and got an interesting answer. It seems that when the FCC handed out licenses, some individual won the lottery for Northwestern CT, but failed to find financing to actually build a system. So Metro is at this time negociating with this guy to get the license, so it can expand its service into this area. Metro already serves most of CT, Rhode Island, Western and Southeastern Mass. It has service in Pittsfield, MA, and along the Masspike until Cell One takes over near Charlton (60 miles out of Boston). It makes a LOT of sense for Metro to get service in Northwestern CT, as when this is done, a motorist with Metro can drive from Northern New Jersey, up to Danbury, then along US-7 all the way to northern Mass, and be reached at the same number with no roam ports or roaming charges. (Presently, you can do this from New Jersey to 30 miles south of Boston, but it would really be neat to drive practically up to Vermont and be covered the whole way.!) I wonder how much Metro is willing to pay for the license ... *I* should have applied for one. Who knows? I could have actually won one and soaked Metro the way they presently soak me ... darn! :) Or stipulated in the contract that any future owners of my licensed service areas may NOT charge airtime or double airtime for call-forwarding, three-way-calling, or call-waiting. Hmmm ... Speaking of licenses, I wonder if any readers know about this: NYNEX/New England *used* to serve Western Mass, ie, Springfield. (Metro Highbill serves the same area, even though it was/is a CT company.) About 1 1/2 years ago, NYNEX seemed to have "abandoned" Springfield, and SNET took it over. This seems more natural, since I think there is more traffic North/South between Springfield/Western Mass and CT than there is between Eastern and Western Mass, by why would NYNEX give up a potentially lucrative market to SNET? Did SNET buy this from NYNEX? Or "trade" the rights to some other area? NYNEX has a rather large service area in New England, and I am still surprised that they didn't retain Western Mass since it is an inconvenience to have to roam on SNET every time you crossed from Eatern to Western Mass if you already are a NYNEX customer (at least *I* would think so). There is no DMX or "automatic roaming" between these two systems. As it is now, SNET indicates on their maps that they plan to have all of CT, and all of Western Mass in the near future (a year?), with extensions planned to Vermont in the future. (I think some other company owns the VT license, but perhaps SNET will try to get it like Metro is trying to do with Western CT? ) One final thing that I heard about recently, which is unusual in the area: Cell One in Boston has two plans with FREE nightime airtime. One plan, for $59 per month, gives you 60 minutes of FREE peak airtime (after which 61+ minutes will costs $.43 per minute), and ALL airtime is FREE *off-peak*. I am not sure if all local calls are free - I have heard complaints before that local calls DO cost something, but this may have changed. (I know in NY that local calls do cost something like twelve cents for five minutes, in addition to airtime.) Overall, not a bad plan. I pay $25 for GTE Mobilnet/SF right now, and that gets me free *NOTHING*! (Well, except Custom Calling and Voicemail, but of course you pay airtime for these :( ). GTE does have other plans, but none with free OP airtime. Oh well ... (BTW, Cell One/Boston has truly EXCELLENT coverage - one can be in downtown Boston or any of the nearby suburbs and not hear ANY static!. Nor are the handoffs "messy" like they can be at times with GTE during peak/heavy usage hours.) Ok ... ok ... enough with the New England Cellular review. If anyone has any info on the Springfield "switch" which I noted earlier, please let me know. I have never received a satisfactory answer to this question. (Actually, any info about New England/Mid Atlantic coverage would be interesting - the cell companies in the East tell you so *little* about their future plans!) Thanks, Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet P.S. I'll be out in New Mexico in May, and was wondering about coverage there. It seems like I can't escape it - Metro Mobile has a franchise out there as well. Ahhhhh! I'll be generally in the Santa Fe area, so any info as to coverage would be appreciated! Especially the "B" company with FMR. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 22:02:52 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Time Restricted Connection to Phone System Organization: Cal State Long Beach I'm not sure what kind of device to ask for, so maybe if I describe the problem/application: We have a PC power controller/protection device with the capability to power up on detection of ring signal on a phone line to which which it is is connected (via modular jack). The line is then chained to the modem. We have a four-line 1A2 phone system (no laughing !) and the modem is currently connected to the phone system through a (discontinued) Radio Shack box that allows one modular device to be connected to any one of five possible lines at a time through depressing any one of five buttons. This is fine for normal business hours - release all buttons to avoid modem interference with normal voice use of the phone line, or turn off the modem. However, we would like to use the remote power-up feature of the power controller to activate the system after hours. I know there is a straightforward manual solution: have someone set the adaptor switch appropriately before leaving for the day. However, some of the people involved are somewhat scatter-brained and forgetful and I would like a somewhat more foolproof approach. Another, dedicated phone line is also not an option at this time. What I would like is some kind of timer-driven setup that routes the phone line to the power-controller after hours and disables this connection when normal business hours resume. I have no idea what kind of equipment or kludge would do this. [ I know there is a software solution: leave the computer on and use a clock driven TSR (this is a PC) to adjust the modem to auto-answer or not, or alternatively, answer itself when ring is detected. This is NOT the desired solution at this point, however; we don't want the system left on all night, every night. ] Thanks for any sugggestions. Jeff Sicherman P.S. Looking for used, touch-tone, 1A2 phones and boxes in good working condition (for use, not resale). Will pay a nominal amount and any shipping for your obsolete junk gathering dust. Hey, what can I say, we're traditionalists. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1991 10:28:13 EST From: Eric Skinner <443114@acadvm1.uottawa.ca> Subject: Calling all Bell Canada Caller-ID Customers As mentioned here before, Bell Canada's implementation of Caller*ID is flawed in that inappropriate numbers are sometimes returned as the calling number. Bell's document, "Interface Disclosure ID-0001, Sept 1989, Pretrial Disclosure, Call Management Services, Terminal-to-Network Interface," states that the number to be displayed is the "Dialable Directory Number: the number that the called subscriber can dial to return a call to the calling party." However, this is not how things work in practice. Bell returns the number of the calling trunk, which may be the correct number to call, or which may be an outgoing-only trunk leading from a PBX. The company's main number or a DID number would be appropriate in this case. This effectively makes "Call Screening" and "Call Return" (*69) useless. Preliminary calls to Bell from a few Ottawa subscribers have led to little action; I'm interested in getting email addresses and phone numbers for other interested Bell subscribers in the hopes of convincing Bell to make their service more useful. (Who knows, we might turn it into a local discussion group about Bell's services, if interest warrants). Note: This is *not* intended to be a "bash Bell" activity; in general I'm extremely pleased with how they do things. Please write to: Eric Skinner +1 613 230 0261 University of Ottawa 443114@acadvm1.uottawa.ca (and Software Exoterica Corporation xgml!ers@uunet.uu.net) ------------------------------ From: Mike Wincn Subject: Cupertino's CATV Commission Seeking New Member Organization: Advanced Micro Devices; Sunnyvale, CA Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 16:26:37 GMT The City of Cupertino will be conducting interviews for an opening on the Cable TV Advisory Committee in the next few weeks. The committee is the "eyes and ears" of the City Council on issues related to Cable TV services, broadcast and programming in the Cupertino area: it advises the City Council on issues related to FCC regulations, provides limited funding (through grant applications, and as a part of a franchise agreement) for Public Access Programming by local producers, and provides a forum for discussion between Cupertino residents and United Artists Cable. Within the next few weeks, interviews will be conducted to fill a partial term that will end in January, 1992, and the person who is appointed could then re-apply for the next full four-year term. A primary requirement for this position is that applicants reside in Cupertino, and other requirements are established by the City Council. If you are interested in volunteering your time and expertise, and are a Cupertino resident, contact the Cupertino City Clerk's office at: 252-4505, ext. 224 and ask for an application package. Mike Wincn jmw@brahms.AMD.COM (408) 749-3156 DISCLAIMER: I speak for myself unless noted otherwise. ------------------------------ From: Rop Gonggrijp Subject: Wanted: Worldwide List of Telcos With Addresses Date: 10 Apr 91 23:10:01 GMT Organization: Hack-Tic For a mailing project I need (and now don't laugh here fellas) the adresses of ALL the phone companies in the world. Is there such a list available somewhere? And if so, is it on floppy or do I have to type it all in? Rop Gonggrijp (ropg@ooc.uva.nl) is also editor of Hack-Tic (hack/phreak mag.) Postbus 22953 (in DUTCH) 1100 DL AMSTERDAM tel: +31 20 6001480 ------------------------------ From: Andy Lim Subject: Provisions of CONS Over a Connectionless Network Date: 10 Apr 91 05:36:24 GMT Organization: Telecom Research Labs,Melbourne, Australia G'day, Could someone tell me if SMDS, a connectionless network supports connection oriented services? If it does, how does it do it (signalling and support)? I am investigating ways of providing connection oriented services on a connectionless network (Fastpac, Australian modified DQDB 802.6 MAN)- with emphasis on signalling. Are there anyone doing similar investigations? Any publication references? Hui H. (Andy) Lim, PhD | Ph: +61 3 541 6313 Switching Section, SNRB | FAX: +61 3 543 1944 Telecom Research Laboratories | +61 3 543 3339 P.O.Box 249, Vic. 3168, Australia | Email: a.lim@trl.oz.au ------------------------------ From: Kyler Laird Subject: Radio Reception on Telephone Date: 10 Apr 91 05:25:20 GMT Reply-To: Kyler Laird Organization: Purdue University I remember seeing a thread about this a while back. I'd appreciate any info/pointers to info. A friend of mine has a problem with radio reception on his home telephone. The FCC told him to use a choke. That's it!? He hasn't tried this yet, but I'd like to know what his other options are. Also, I'd appreciate knowing the theory behind this. Thanks! kyler ------------------------------ From: Monty Andro Subject: Seeking 9600/4800/2400 Voice CODEC's Reply-To: Monty Andro Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1991 20:42:40 GMT Ideally I need voice codec hardware that can compress/decompress voice down to selectable rates of 9600,4800 and 2400 bits/sec. This can be implemented in integrated circuits, circuit boards, or a single unit (a single commercial unit would be best). Does anybody know if such a unit or combination of boards and/or chips exist? Are there units that can come close to my requirement? Maybe one unit can't do all three desired rates, but there may be three single units for each rate. If such a single unit or multiple units exist, can they support OPX (Off Premise Exchange) and SLT (Single Line Telephone) type interfaces? (I'm assuming OPX and SLT are valid interfaces.) Any information that can help me identify integrated circuits or actual commercially available hardware (now or in the near future) will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Monty ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #283 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23157; 12 Apr 91 3:16 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa00582; 12 Apr 91 1:43 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11882; 12 Apr 91 0:39 CDT Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 0:03:18 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #284 BCC: Message-ID: <9104120003.ab02100@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Apr 91 00:02:47 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 284 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted [Michael Schuster] Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted [tasman@cs.wisc.edu] Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted [Rich Zellich] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Linc Madison] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Seth Breidbart] Re: Per Line Blocking? [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: Per Line Blocking? [John R. Levine] Re: Per Line Blocking? [Steve Forrette] Re: Cellular Phones for $29 [David Albert] Re: Info Wanted on B_ISDN [Keith Junker] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Schuster Subject: Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 21:44:36 GMT Organization: PANIX - Public Access Unix Systems of NY In article leryo@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Leryo Malbito) writes: > A totally unrelated topic: Does anyone have ANY idea where to get > those strange screwdrivers that fit screws with two holes in them? I > assume the screwdriver looks like some sort of fork with two prongs in > it. Does anyone know if they sell these screwdrivers to the general > public? They're called "spanner" screws, and Jensen Tools (602-968-6231) has a four-bit hex insert set for $6.95. Mike Schuster | CIS: 70346,1745 NY Public Access UNIX: ...cmcl2!panix!schuster | MCI Mail, GENIE: The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 19:38:14 CDT From: tasman@cs.wisc.edu > Does anyone have ANY idea where to get those strange screwdrivers > that fit screws with two holes in them? Page 92 of the 1991 Techni-Tool catalog ("Catalog 40") lists the following item: Spanner Security Set (set of 5) No. 324SC264 $8.95 These are screwdriver bits, rather than screwdrivers. The same page of the catalog lists several other "security" bit sets: tamper proof torx, security hex key, and tri-wing. Techni-Tool's order line is 215-941-2400; 24 Hour Fax at 215-828-5623. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 10:04:45 CDT From: Rich Zellich Subject: Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted If you can't find the two-pin special driver right away, just buy a cheapie regular-blade screwdriver at your nearest discount store. Then, hand-file (or grind with a bench grinder or hand-held motor tool) the blade end down to the two "pins" you need. i.e. grind this: to this: +------------+ +-+ +-+ | | | | | | | | +-+ +----+ +-+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Unless the pins need to be *really* tiny, this chop-job should last at least until you can find the real thing. Another trick is to take a paper clip and twist it around so the ends are usable as the pins; then hold the rest of the clip in a pair of pliers as close as possible to the "pin" ends so the clip-/pin-ends can't twist or flex. Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 01:53:59 PDT From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Daniel Guilderson (ryan@cs. umb.edu) writes: > By the way, the framers of the US Constitution never intended > copyrights to protect personal information. They were intended to > protect creative works. Fine and well, but please remember that the framers of the U.S. Constitution specifically stated that their intents should NEVER be used as a guide for interpreting the Constitution. Indeed, they carefully shrouded their intent in secrecy, so that only the written document itself could be used. Thus, there is a profound irony in any argument based on "the intent of the framers," since it is inherently self-contradictory. Lincoln Madison = linc@tongue1.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: Seth Breidbart Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 11 Apr 91 15:26:08 GMT Organization: Morgan Stanley, & Co., Inc. / New York City, NY In New York, the phone company does not charge (I believe, is not allowed to charge) for DA calls for numbers that are not listed in the White Pages. Therefore, the phone company here will continue to publish directories in order to keep DA profitable. ------------------------------ From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: Per Line Blocking? Date: 11 Apr 91 08:22:35 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > So come on now, all you per line blocking advocates. Isn't per line > blocking just the new code for "no Caller ID"? Actually, John, maybe we just need to take the idea a little further, in order to come up with a solution that suits everybody! I hereby place the following Solomonic(TM) solution into the Public Domain. The problem with "per line blocking" is that it is all or nothing, and that it places the Phone Company (which wants to sell the "Caller-ID" service to people and companies) at odds with their subscribers (who may not want to give out their numbers). So why not do the following: Phone customers are allowed to set a PRICE at which they are willing to sell their caller-ID information, and Caller-ID customers are allowed to set a price they will PAY for Caller-ID information. Caller-ID is then only provided when the price a CID customer will pay is >= the price asked by the phone customer. If it is, then the phone company charges the Caller-ID customer, delivers the CID info, and credits the phone customer's bill with the fee just charged to the Caller-ID user (less a percentage for the phone company, of course). Both the CID customer and the phone customer can revise the fee they will pay/will demand at any time, for a small fee, of course. There would also be a * code that would say "for the next call, give out my caller-ID for free," that would be useful in certain circumstances (such as when you call a number you "trust" with your caller information). This lets the market make the decisions. Telemarketers will quickly determine how valuable the caller information is to them, and telephone users will be able to set a price on their privacy. And the phone company gets a fee for being the broker in this transaction. You could even go so far as to allow the setting of seperate prices for giving your number to residential or business customers. What's more, the phone company could sell the following information: the price a particular phone number has set for getting it's caller-ID. This is important because if you've set a high price on your caller-ID info, then you are likely to not want telemarketing calls. Probably the best way to structure this is for a telemarketer to buy a list from the phone companuy of all the numbers that have a price < some value (or > some value!). The best way to insure privacy, IMHO, is make it a commodity, such that anyone who wants to invade it has to pay a price (measured in economic units I will dub Saddams). The market will do the rest. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Per Line Blocking? Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 11 Apr 91 11:49:18 EDT (Thu) From: "John R. Levine" In article is written: > "What?", you say. "Do you want your line to always reveal your number > to any person you call that subscribes to Caller ID, or do you want it > to never reveal it?" You'll never get far in advertising. The question will be more like this: "Would you like your line automatically to take advantage of our new Caller*ID service, which, for a limited time only*, is available at no charge to you, and will allow your closest friends to know that you're calling, even before they pick up the phone?" (Yes, that's misleading. When did that ever stop the telco?) * - "limited time" == until we can persuade the PUC to charge both for per-line blocking and per-line unblocking. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 14:52:19 PDT From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Per Line Blocking? John Higdon writes: > To me, the term 'per line blocking' would be synonymous with 'no > Caller ID'. Why? A customer calls the telco business office to > establish service. After the vitals are exchanged, the rep asks, "And > which long distance carrier do you want? Measured or unmeasured? > Listed or unlisted? Any Custom Calling features? Blocked or > unblocked?" > "What?", you say. "Do you want your line to always reveal your number > to any person you call that subscribes to Caller ID, or do you want it > to never reveal it?" Now realistically, what do you think 99.999% of > all telephone customers are going to answer at this point? > So come on now, all you per line blocking advocates. Isn't per line > blocking just the new code for "no Caller ID"? Maybe it could be available on a per-request basis. They wouldn't necessarily have to ask you if you wanted it, but merely have it available for those who ask, much like 900/976 blocking. After all, why would the LEC want to encourage people to have blocking? Even if things were the way you suggested, it would not affect my desire for Caller ID, as I would simply not answer blocked calls. Actually, I would have my voice processing board intercept with a message indicating that blocked calls are not accepted, and that they should redial the call without blocking. This way, callers would know exactly what the problem was, and how to fix it. A related idea solves the "But what if they're calling from a payphone?" Since the Caller ID signaling standard transmits ASCII data, why not just deliver "From Payphone" when appropriate? That way, you could decide to answer all such calls if you wanted to, and still be able to ignore calls from unknown numbers (such as businesses or childern with nothing better to do). BTW, I was discussing per-call and per-line blocking with my Pacific Bell friend. He's involved in the actual CLASS tests on the DMS-100 switches. The *67 code acts as a "toggle". Should Pacific Bell be required to offer per-line blocking, *67 would ENABLE it for blocked lines, so that people with blocked lines could still call people that refuse anonymous callers. A third method, a "supressed line", would NEVER reveal its number. *67 would either have no effect or would be disallowed. This would be available in limited circumstances, such as for the infamous "Battered Womens' Shelter", where a person may not know that the line has per-line blocking, dials *67 to turn it off, but ends up turning it on instead. Even if most people had per-line blocking, I wouldn't have a problem with forcing them to dial *67 if they wanted to reach me. After all, if they are a Privacy Phreak to start with, they certainly could understand and respect my right to privacy, now couldn't they? And all the arguments against Caller ID I've heard so far relate to the commercial, boiler-room applications, not on residential use. Which brings up another idea: if there's not a big problem among the Privacy Phreaks about residential-to-residential Caller ID, why not offer Caller ID only to residential customers? I'm sure that the demographics of the Caller ID subscribers in areas that have had it awhile would show that a very high percentage were residential customers anyway, so telco wouldn't lose very much revenue. Unless, of course, what the Privacy Phreaks are *really* concerned about is having to remember to dial *67 before each and every anonymous, harassing call they make. It would be such a bother! :-) Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu [Moderator's Note: Thanks to all who have contributed to this string, but once again it is time to ask that the string be moved into the privacy list if further discussion is desired. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 16:35:44 EDT From: David Albert Subject: Re: Cellular Phones for $29 Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University > Now, Pat, do you really think Cellular One and Ameritech Mobile are > truly scraping for customers? On the contrary, I believe they are > simply trying to rope the customers in.... In the April 10th {Boston Globe}, NYNEX advertises a FREE cellular phone. The deal is that you pay $295 for the telephone and sign up for one year of service (which, they say, can cost as little as $171 for the whole year if you prepay). At the end of the year you get your $295 back. So, of course, the phone isn't really free. In fact, it costs just about $29 (assuming you could get 10% a year on your investment) -- plus service, of course. David Albert UUCP: ...!harvard!albert INTERNET: albert@harvard.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 13:26:55 MDT From: Keith Junker Subject: Re: Info Wanted on B_ISDN Reply-To: keith@ntia.UUCP (Keith Junker) Organization: National Telecommunications and Information Admin, Boulder, CO In article rodney@pico.qpsx.oz.au writes: > Jim Niemann writes: >> What research is being done in broadband ISDN? Is it possible to >> purchase a prototype switch that supports it? >> Where should I look for more info? > As for more information, well, a lot of papers have been written on > this, and there are a couple of standards, published by CCITT. The > reference numbers elude me at present....... Regarding only the technical aspects and not the availability of B-ISDN switches, one such document is, and here I will attempt to reproduce its cover sheet: COMMITTEE T1 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS STANDARDS CONTRIBUTION DOCUMENT NUMBER: T1Q1.3/90-001R2 DATE: JANUARY 18, 1991 STANDARDS PROJECT: Specification and Allocation of Performance for ISDN (T1Q1-10) SUBJECT: 1990 B-ISDN Recommendations ORIGINATOR: ISDN Experts of Study Group XVIII KEY WORDS: Broadband ISDN (B-ISDN), 1990 Recommendations, CCITT, Accelerated Procedures DISTRIBUTION: T1Q1.3 Working Group Abstract: This contribution, an update of T1Q1.3/90-001R1, provides copies of 13 Broadband ISDN (B-ISDN) Recommendations, which Study Group XVIII unanimously approved at its December 1990 meeting for invocation of Resolution 2 (accelerated approval) procedures. The December 1990 version of the B-ISDN Recommendations made only minor editorial changes to the versions approved by WP XVIII/8 at its June 1990 meeting in COM XVIII-R 34-E. The attached copies of COM XVIII-R 34-E have been updated to reflect the changes reported in Temporary Document 9/XVIII, "1990 B-ISDN Recommendations - Proposed Editorial Amendments," by the Chairman of WP XVIII/8. A report of the December 1990 meeting of Study Group XVIII is provided in T1Q1.3/91-001. The B-ISDN Recommendations provide a stable basis for the development of related B-ISDN performance Recommendations. Copies of the ISDN performance Recommendations from the December 1990 meeting of Working Party XVIII/6 are provided in T1Q1.3/91-002. Obviously, this abstract is intended for internal use, but it indicates the nature of the activity going on concerning B-ISDN at this time. One way to get more information or this particular document is to join the committee(!) Keith E. Junker U.S. Dept. of Commerce NTIA/ITS.N3 325 Broadway Boulder, CO 80303 (303) 497-3376 keith@ntia.its.bldrdoc.gov ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #284 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23369; 12 Apr 91 3:21 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab00582; 12 Apr 91 1:46 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab11882; 12 Apr 91 0:39 CDT Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 0:34:19 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #285 BCC: Message-ID: <9104120034.ab05168@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Apr 91 00:34:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 285 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [John R. Levine] Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [Barry Margolin] Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [John Higdon] Re: End of the [Party] Line [Tom Gray] Re: Convenience of Phone System? [Rich Zellich] Re: Apple Data-PCS Petition for Rulemaking [Fred R. Goldstein] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Peter da Silva] Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works [Linc Madison] Re: 900 Discussion on CNN [Gary W. Sanders] Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing [Steve Forrette] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 11 Apr 91 11:45:14 EDT (Thu) From: "John R. Levine" In article is written: > I was at Oakland International last week, and took a closer look at > the Pacific Bell "airport" payphones. ... My experience with those phones while waiting for a plane at San Jose one day is that half of them don't really work. That is, they can't read the stripe on any of my credit cards. > And since when did Pacific Bell get in the business of accepting major > credit cards for phone calls, anyway? Many BOCs have card reader phones, though none anywhere near as space age in appearance as Pac Bell's. Ameritech has a model that replaces the dial pad on a regular WECo payphone with a thing that has a touch pad, a card reader, and some other buttons used to select your favorite carrier. The coin slot works, too. In other places there are some coinless models that have a long card slot down the right side through which you swipe your card and buttons at the bottom. These phones are all programmed differently. For example, US West phones accepted non-AT&T calling cards such as MCI and Sprint's long before the ones around here (NYNEX) did, even though they're physically the same. (You could dial the call yourself, but that's much less fun.) All of them let you charge long distance calls to bank and T&E cards, and they all do so with a flurry of DTMF digits. They handle various telco calling cards pretty reasonably. For example, when I used my Sprint FON card at O'Hare earlier this week, as soon as it read my card it dialed three digits, presumably a speed dial code for Sprint's 800 access number. Then it waited while I dialed my number, and dialed the card number when it heard the burst of dial tone prompt. For an AT&T or LOC card, it does the same thing except that it doesn't dial anything before you enter your number. All in all, it's slightly faster than dialing by hand, assuming I'd have to get the card out of my wallet anyway to read the number. (Hey, I have five different calling cards and I can't always remember all the numbers.) Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 18:11:20 GMT In article STEVEF%WRQ@mcimail.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > But for the credit cards, it is even more silly. The phone dials a > seven digit number into some computer verification system somewhere. > The remote system answers with a short tone, then the phone sends the > dialed number. Another remote tone, then your credit card number is > sent out. This is all via DTMF and with the caller hearing the whole > process. The credit card procedure takes many seconds to complete. This sounds like it is emulating the procedure used by credit card verification devices that are normally connected to POS terminals. It's often much easier to implement a device that emulates an existing device than to get a new protocol adopted. Sure, a more appropriate protocol would be faster, but time to market is always important. > Now, let's say I wanted to have some phun, and recorded the process at > the payphone. At home, I could decode the digits by playing them to > my voicemail board, or by using a test device of some sort. Then, > from any phone, could I not call the seven digit number that the > payphone did, enter the number I wanted to call, then my credit card > number, and have the call billed to my credit account? Presumably, > the charges wouldn't be too outrageous, since I'd be "using" a Bell > payphone to complete the call, right? And as long as I used only my > own credit card, would this even be considered phraud? Some of the tones that it sends are presumably the vendor's ID (find a store that still uses the voice method of credit card verification, and notice that the cashier first tells them the store's ID number before telling them your credit card number), because credit card companies charge vendors a service fee. If you were to replay the tones, you would be fraudulently claiming to be PacBell, and incurring charges to them illegally. > Here's a scenario for you: Let's say I were far away from the airport, > and called the secret number it calls for credit card calls, send-paid > from some other payphone. If I entered my credit card number and > called someone, it would establish a pretty good alibi that I was at > the airport at the time of the call, would it not? This assumes that the ID number that the phone sends identifies the specific phone or location. I suspect it only identifies PacBell in general. It might work to establish an alibi that you were in PacBell's service area, but probably not much more specific than that. > And since when did Pacific Bell get in the business of accepting major > credit cards for phone calls, anyway? They're just a business, so why shouldn't they? Especially in airports, where many of the patrons are not from your service area so are unlikely to be good prospects for a PacBell calling card. Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 12:29 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones Steve Forrette writes: > And since when did Pacific Bell get in the business of accepting major > credit cards for phone calls, anyway? When was the time before last that you went to the airport, Steve? Those major-credit-card-accepting stainless steel phones have been around for a long, LONG time. Like maybe pushing three years in the San Jose and San Francisco airports (I don't ever use Oakland). Re: your theory about the DTMF sequence working from lines other than the official payphone lines: yes, it does. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Tom Gray Subject: Re: End of the [Party] Line Date: 11 Apr 91 12:59:17 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article lars@spectrum.cmc.com (Lars Poulsen) writes: >> because of a $1.8 million equipment upgrade, Mitchell said. >> Eliminating party lines also became imperative because of computerized >> 911-emergency response systems. > This does not ring true to me. If the switch software can provide ANI > for billing, I would expect it to provide ANI for E911 witout > problems. It disturbs me when businesses deliberately tell lies to > regulatory agencies. (It also disturbs me that we set up regulatory Calling party detection on party lines is not infallible. It relies on a specifically modified telephones being used in each residence. It is not uncommon for someone to place an unmodified instrument in his home. This would cause errors in the 911 display. ANI for four party service is notoriously unreliable. Usually the fourth party is not equipped because of this unreliability. There is no commonly available ANI system for party lines of greater than four ( and in practice three) subscribers. In short, I don't think it unresonable to assume that the installers of a 911 service would wish to eliminate party lines. A billing error due to ANI failure may be annoying to a subscriber and costly to a telco, but an ANI failure on a 911 call could be fatal. Tom Gray ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 10:38:45 CDT From: Rich Zellich Subject: Re: Convenience of Phone System? > Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend > Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone > be voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is > being refered to. Take a look at X.400 e-mail "addresses"; that's why all those fields are in there. The general idea is to allow future Directory-Service lookup on fields likely to be known to you (name, organization, country, etc.). There's no reason you can't do something similar with telephone "addresses". All you need is a black box with the requisite smarts, or a phone-board in your personal computer. It will require a fair amount of intelligence in the software to not only recognize spoken words, but also to parse them into something meaningful to the system's directory-search algorithm, but it's certainly doable (though perhaps very expensive) right now. If I can have an e-mail alias file with entries like "jff2" (an old NIC Ident) and "oscteam", then I can certainly do the same thing with a telephone-system alias file. Perhaps the future will even allow [inter]national directory lookup as well; my opinion is that it would be to the phone companies benefit to provide easy and *free* directory lookup in the interest of generating more per-call revenue. I don't know about "from any random pay phone", though. Perhaps when computing power gets a bit cheaper we'll be able to use something like a Casio BOSS with a voice-recognizer and a tone-generator built in, and use the hand-held device to do our dialing for us. Actually, we can do that now (but without the voice-input capability, of course), *very* cheaply with a shirt-pocket dialer with a name-number memory and a simple lcd-screen interface. [Moderator's Note: We have 'alias addresses' to a limited extent now with the speed-calling function offered by most telcos with an ESS office. A long distance carrier who also offers 'alias addresses' is Telecom USA. As part of their Calling Card service, when on their switch, *90 allows you to program up to nine (*91 through *99) 'speed numbers' when using their switch for your long distance calls. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Subject: Re: Apple Data-PCS Petition for Rulemaking Date: 11 Apr 91 15:41:43 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes... > "The Utilities Telecommunications Council" woodwork DO all these outfits come out of?> "also objected to Apple's > petition, noting that water, gas and electric utilities have invested > more than $360 million in radio equipment to operate in the > 1,850-1,990 MHz band." company'a annual rate ...> The utilities are among the major users of the 2 GHz fixed microwave band. Back before cheap fiber optics, a lot of companies had private radio systems there. Many still do. Utilities and railroads are the major users, since they have rights-of-way and lots of data to send. > "That investment - which supports roughly 2,000 licenses" > license. WOW! That's some AWFULLY expensive 2 Gigahertz microwave, > folks!> "-could be stranded if private microwave users are relocated > to other frequencies, resulting severe economic hardships, according > to the council." It's not cheap stuff. To build a microwave network, you need radios, towers, antennas, etc. The 2 GHz band has a longer hop range than the alternatives (higher frequencies). So a utility might stick one 2 GHz dish on a tower every 40-50 miles or so. If they were displaced to the 6 or 12 or 18 GHz ranges (and I'm not sure 12 is still available), then they'd need towers every 20-30 miles (at 6 GHz) or even closer. These don't come cheap! I don't think Apple really apreciates that. Voice and data PCNs are both neat ideas. But the private microwave users have a good case. You can't replace all radios with glass; glass is only suitable to high-density routes, and much private microwave crosses inhospitable terrain, mountain peak to peak. A huge amount of spectrum is reserved for government use, and the FCC currently only gets to divvy up the rest. It's not an easy business. Fred R. Goldstein Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice: +1 508 952 3274 Do you think anyone else on the planet would share my opinions, let alone a multi-billion dollar corporation? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 6:00:24 CDT From: Peter da Silva Yes, I just had a conversation like that with a computer. "Would you like to receive more information" My duck doesn't have insurance either. "Please leave your name" Argent Wolfsong "Your phone number" If you yell real loud I'll probably hear you. "Your date of birth" No, it was a penguin. "What time can you be reached" The Renaissance. peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 01:27:49 PDT From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Jonathan Whticomb writes: > I wouldn't feel too safe about having moved. Unless you changed your > name and social security number, they will find you. > (Ve have Vays...). :^) A neighbor in my apartment complex recently moved into the apartment vacated by someone who apparently wasn't on very good terms with one of her creditors, namely Discover Card. Well, it happens that the new resident also has a Discover Card, so when he changed his address, they started making harassing phone calls to him, demanding to know where the former resident was. He's never met her, has no idea who or where she is, and has no connection to her at all, but Discover continues to call him every few days insisting that he must have some idea. This is, for one thing, part of the reason I never give my phone number to my credit card creditors. Linc Madison = linc@tongue1.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 08:35:08 EDT From: Gary W Sanders Subject: Re: 900 Discussion on CNN Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu (Bill Woodcock) writes: > I just watched a short interview with Robert Abrams on CNN. > (2:10pm-2:15pm, PST) > Abrams is the Attorney General for the state of New York. > 1) Require every 900 number to air a "preamble" including three things; > a brief discription of the nature of the service, a clear statement of > the cost or charges involved, and the opportunity to hang up without > incurring any charges. One other item I think should be included in the preamble is a company name, bussiness mailing address (No PO boxes) and office phone number(that is attended 8-5). This way I have someone to complain to when I call a 900 number and get some garbage line. The latest 900 scam I have been seeing on late nite TV ads is Free 900 calls ... that right free 900 calls for the first minutes $15 for each additional minute ... major $$$$ for a free call. Gary Sanders (N8EMR) AT&T Bell Labs, Columbus Ohio gws@cblph.att.com 614-860-5965 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 14:14:52 PDT From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing John Higdon writes, > So your [fill in the relationship of someone close to you] is stranded > and calls you from a COCOT that disallows DTMF after call completion. > Not only has that person been unsuccessful, but has lost coin in the > process. But John, since you're calling from a COCOT, you will lose your coin anyway! Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #285 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15546; 13 Apr 91 1:36 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa18168; 12 Apr 91 23:55 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa05153; 12 Apr 91 22:49 CDT Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 22:43:16 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #286 BCC: Message-ID: <9104122243.ac05789@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Apr 91 22:42:30 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 286 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? [Andy Sherman] Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Randy Gregor] Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack [Randy Gregor] Re: Radio Reception on Telephone [Jeff Sicherman] Re: '10XXX' May Yet Work! [Randal L. Schwartz] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [Terry Kennedy] Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing [Michael Coleman] Re: Wanted: Worldwide List of Telcos With Addresses [Carl Wright] Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed [Paul Elliott] Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack [Paul S. Sawyer] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Andy Sherman Subject: Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? Date: 11 Apr 91 18:45:47 GMT Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill In article leryo@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Leryo Malbito) writes: > Would anyone know how one could set up a data conference using > three-way calling? This seems like an idea that would be not too > difficult to implement, although a friend and I have unsuccessfully > tried several times...... > [Moderator's Note: You cannot do what you want. The modem has only two > conditions: originate and answer. It cannot talk to another modem set > in the same mode. Any two of the three can communicate if one is set > to receive and the other to transmit. The third one will be (possibly) > able to talk to one or the other, but not both. What usually happens > is the third modem, in generating its own originate or answer carrier > makes the connection so cluttered with noise that none of the three > can communicate, as you have found out. I said modems have only two > modes: this is not entirely true. My US Robotics Courier 2400 has a > third mode called 'transmitter off', allowing it to sit there and > silently monitor what is happening otherwise. So with such a modem, > you could bring a three-way data connection up successfully provided > the third party sat there silently and did not throw carrier at the > other two. PAT] Well, certain types of data conference calls can be set up, but the cost is probably too high for BBS'ing. I don't have the details, but AT&T's Alliance(tm) Teleconferencing service has some kind of bridge modem set up to allow graphics to be shared by multiple sites. You need a special modem on your end to do it, and you dial into the Alliance bridge. I believe the bridge re-broadcasts data to all participants in the conference. The AT&T OVERVIEW(tm) scanner supported this service to allow the sharing of scanned documents with remote pointing. Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ AUDIBLE: (201) 582-5928 READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking! [Moderator's Note: A notable example of a 'data conference call' would be the CB Simulator program on Compuserve. And yes, it is expensive to use. But there you have an example of how such a thing would be done with three or more parties. Instead of a direct link between modems however, what happens is each party transmits to a central computer, and that computer then parcels everything back out again, usually instantly or nearly so. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 13:01:37 PDT From: jartel!compsm!rlg@nosc.mil Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Organization: Computersmith, Los Angeles In article TELECOM Moderator writes: > Over the weekend I bought a CPS-200 Call Forwarding System from Radio > Shack. At the local store here, they had one left, marked down to > $29.95, and I thought that price alone made it worthwhile. Definitely. (I assume this is really the CFS-200). ^ [Moderator's Note: You are right, it is the CFS-200. PAT] > This unit does require two actual phone lines; one to accept calls, > and the other to forward the call. Since I have 'genuine' call > forwarding from Illinois Bell, I won't need it a lot, but one good use > came to mind: I'll use it to remotely turn on call forwarding on my > main line! > ... [exotic method to remotely set up "1172" telco > call-forwarding has a problem with loss of remote control, followup > suggesting use of distinctive ringing to solve the problem.] I actually prefer the CFS-200's call forwarding to that provided by my telco (GTE). I just use the box as intended, without trying to make it set up telco call forwarding instead. When a call comes in on line 1, the box immediately calls out on line 2. When line 2 is answered, the box waits for someone to speak, then beeps to let the answering party know that this is a forwarded call. Only then is line 1 answered/supervised and bridged to line 2. This is so fast that the caller does not notice anything unusual. When working at a client's site, I can set it up to ring in on one of their unused rotary lines, if available. Otherwise, I just have it call their main number, the receptionist answers "Amalgamated Industries", hears a beep, then answers "Computersmith" because she knows its for me. Other benefits: - You can forward out on the line with all the discount calling programs. - You can have it follow you from place to place (even without distinctive ringing.) - If the forwarded call is not answered, an answering machine on line 1 can still take the call. I am surprised at how well it works, particularly for a Radio Shack product. Randy Gregor | Computersmith rlg@xenon.sr.com or uunet!paralogics!compsm!rlg | POB 25-D +1 213 477 4338 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 [Moderator's Note: The way you describe it is exactly how mine works. The problem I have is, I *forget* to turn on call-forwarding when I leave and I forget to turn it off when I return. If I can't remember to dial it on the phone, I probably would not remember to flip the little switch on the unit to turn it on when I left. That's why I though in my case it would be better as a to turn the telco version on from a distance. The ideal service for me would be 'transfer on busy/no answer', and it would automatically follow me. On my cell phone I have that feature and can program it on/off/where to forward from the cell phone. On my home line, IBT insists they only offer it programmed from the CO always on, with absolutely no way to change the destination, etc other than a $15 work order. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 13:01:45 PDT From: jartel!compsm!rlg@nosc.mil Subject: Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack Organization: Computersmith, Los Angeles In article you write: > Has anyone ever come across a device which would allow one to take the > line level out from an RCA jack to a telephone line and to take the > audio from a phone to a RCA jack? A quick-and-dirty hack to go from an audio jack to phone line: Get an old phone with a _carbon_ mic (the pop-out kind). Remove the mic. Connect the audio to the mic contacts, and adjust the output level. These phones don't seem too particular about impedence. Messy, inelegant, may cause warts, etc. but it has worked for me. (Somebody will probably have something to say about this :) To go from the phone line to audio, consider a call-recording device. Randy Gregor | Computersmith rlg@xenon.sr.com or uunet!paralogics!compsm!rlg | POB 25-D +1 213 477 4338 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 14:47:21 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Radio Reception on Telephone Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article Kyler Laird writes: > A friend of mine has a problem with radio reception on his home > telephone. The FCC told him to use a choke. That's it!? He hasn't ^^^^^ > tried this yet, but I'd like to know what his other options are. > Also, I'd appreciate knowing the theory behind this. On the telephone or the manufacturer ? :-) [Moderator's Note: He could also find out where his high-powered and probably illegal CB neighbor is located (if that is the type of radio interference he is getting) and go cut the guy's coax! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Randal L. Schwartz" Subject: Re: '10XXX' May Yet Work! Reply-To: "Randal L. Schwartz" Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Beaverton, Oregon, USA Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 22:15:02 GMT In article , john@zygot (John Higdon) writes: | "equipment manufactured from April 17, 1992, and after be capable of | providing equal access to long distance companies through "10XXX" | access codes. ... AP. " Geez. I sure hope that applies to the equipment that GTE Northwest installs in their *central office*. 10XXX dialing? What's that? :-) FYI: GTE Northwest ("the phone company" to all of the Silicon Rain Forest area out on the westside of Portland Oregon) has made *no* indication of making 10XXX available *anywhere* in the near or distant future. Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn ------------------------------ From: "Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr" Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers Date: 11 Apr 91 19:38:32 GMT Organization: St. Peter's College, US In article , scott@hsvaic.boeing.com (Scott Hinckley) writes: > That seems like a pretty expensive way to deal with it (operator's > time + envelope handler's time + envelope cost + check cost + stamp > cost + amount of check.) Here in NJ Bell land, they would send you a check as well. I recall it some standard form, not a "real" check, but the banks would process them. Maybe they use them on _their_ phone bill? Anyway, it was explained to me that the phone company did things this way because the had no way of knowing if you _really_ just lost a dime in the phone or if you were just trying for a free call. They said that the refund check actually cost them far _less_ than giving away free phone calls to anybody who said they lost money, since it tended to discourage such fraud. Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, US terry@spcvxa.spc.edu (201) 915-9381 [Moderator's Note: Ah, for the good old days when you could lose a nickle in the payphone (usually because the operator accidentally collected it when she meant to return it) and she would apologize and say 'on your next call, tell the operator you have five cents credit coming from Operator 207 (or whoever).' PAT] ------------------------------ From: Michael Coleman Subject: Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department Date: 12 Apr 91 00:35:13 GMT john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: [Password box not as useful as Caller ID, and is rude to callers. And what about the case where the phone is not touch-tone, or some broken COCOT phone?] Well, this may be true, but this is not nearly as rude as I would *like* to be. I recall that in a story "Friday" by Robert Heinlein, one of the characters had a "door bell" which presented a transaction which boiled down to something like this: This is the __ residence. If you feel you have something to discuss that I will find important, you can summon me by inserting $20; if I agree, I will return it. Along these lines, I would love to have as my residential line something similar to a 1-900 number, except that I could cancel the charge with a push of a button. The phone company will never provide this sort of service for a reasonable price, of course. I don't want to be rude to my friends, but I would like to be as rude as possible with unsolicited callers, in the hope that they will stop. As for the objection that not everyone has a correctly-functioning touch-tone phone, I agree that this could occasionally be a problem. It's difficult to come up with a perfect solution when the individual is pitted against the phone company, the telemarketing industry, and other assorted lowlifes. If they would cease and desist, none of this would be necessary. MC ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Wanted: Worldwide List of Telcos With Addresses Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1991 03:12:18 GMT In article ropg@ooc.uva.nl (Rop Gonggrijp) writes: I need the addresses of ALL the phone companies in the world. There is a company called Lynx Technologies in Little Falls, NJ which has this information in a database of the rates and tariffs for all the world. It was expensive ($60k dollars) more than a year ago. They might be able to help you for less. You have to ask. They are at +1 201 256 7200. There is probably some other source, but I don't know what it is. I'd love to hear where you find the info for less. Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: Paul Elliott x225 Subject: Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed Date: 10 Apr 91 17:10:26 GMT Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA In article , @comspec.uucp (David Berman) writes: > And I also believe that the Caller*ID transmissions from the phone > company are kind of standardized. I think. > Question: Does anyone reading know what is sent out? How the phone > number or alpha information is encoded on the ring cycle? Has it been > done in a reasonable way so that decoding is sensible? (etc) Addresses > the future? > Or: Does anyone know where such information is published for > reference? I have in front of me two Bellcore specs that I *think* are appropriate. They are: CLASSsm Feature: Calling Number Delivery Technical Reference TR-TSY-000031 Issue 3, January 1990 (This describes the encoding, bit rate, etc.) and SPCS Customer Premises Equipment Data Interface Technical Reference TR-TSY-000030 Issue 1, November 1988 (This provides some protocol information.) What I don't know is if this is really CALLER ID, or some other variant scheme. The protocol description is a bit too vague for me to be able to figure out how one would encode or decode an actual phone number. Anyone have any additional or better information? I would like to know, also. To contact Bellcore: Information Exchange Management Bellcore 445 South Street, Room 2J-125 P.O. Box 1910 Morristown, NJ 07692-1910 (201) 829-4785 Paul Elliott - DSC Optilink - {uunet,pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!elliott ------------------------------ From: "Paul S. Sawyer" Subject: Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 13:00:15 GMT In article jblake@sirius.uvic.ca (James Blake) writes: > Has anyone ever come across a device which would allow one to take the > line level out from an RCA jack to a telephone line and to take the > audio from a phone to a RCA jack? If your application is as simple as it sounds, the Bogen WMT-1 comes to my mind -- bridging transformer, with RCA jack <-> screw terminals. Paul S. Sawyer {uunet,attmail}!unhtel!paul paul@unhtel.unh.edu UNH CIS - - Telecommunications and Network Services VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 FAX: +1 603 862 2030 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #286 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20246; 13 Apr 91 3:30 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa05196; 13 Apr 91 2:01 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id af02851; 13 Apr 91 0:56 CDT Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 0:12:53 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #287 BCC: Message-ID: <9104130012.ab07232@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Apr 91 00:12:42 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 287 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Voice Recognition Telephones and Security [Ralph Moonen] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [J. Luce] Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [Jim Gottlieb] Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [John Winslade] Re: 900 Discussion on CNN [Dennis G. Rears] Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones [Alan Laird] Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed [Kevin Collins] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [Kent Borg] Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack [Andy Jacobson] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Tony Harminc] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rmoonen@hvlpa.att.com Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 09:30 MDT Subject: Re: Voice Recognition Telephones and Security Barton.Bruce@camb.com wrote: > Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend > Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone be > voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is > being refered to. To which David Gast replied: > On the other hand, do we really want the phone company (and every COCOT > sleeze since the example above includes a pay phone) or the government > to recognize our voice on a routine basis? Our every move would be > tracked. This can already be done: Make a cash withdrawal from an ATM; the bank now knows where you are. Place a calling card call from a payphone; the phone company now knows who you called, and where you are. Walk into a moderately sized department store, and video cameras will track you're every move. Getting paranoid already? :-) > Additionally, this particular scenario has a huge security hole: I > call someone, they record my voice, then they call someone, but pipe > their input through a device that simulates my voice. > Perhaps we should close some the existing security holes before we make > new giant ones. Just as with the ATM cards, of course, there should be some security check. After saying, "I'd like Jane Doe's office line please." The computer should answer with something like: "What is your Personal ID Number, please?" And a couple of other methods also could be implemented to counter fraud. And the Moderator noted: > [Moderator's Note: And what, pray tell, is the difference between this > and sending someone a written letter who then forges my handwriting > and signs off on some fraudulent documents for me? Maybe we should > stop allowing handwritten communication between people (or individuals > and companies) before this 'existing security hole' gets worse. How > inconvenient do you want things to be just to accomodate your fears > about 'what might happen'? PAT] While I agree with the Moderator on the general idea, I think that first, 'this existing security hole' IS getting worse. Desktop forgery is as easy as sh*t, and only takes a mildly computer-educated person to do. The point is, however, one should not make it easier to commit fraud, even though you know that it will be done by the persistent ones. I mean, you _do_ lock the doors of your car, don't you? While you know that they're gonna get in if they want to. Therefore, it is not so much the fear of 'what might happen', but more the fear of what _will_ happen. We just have to try not to let it get widespred. On a 'voice simulation' related topic: Here in the Netherlands, we have the equivalent of the American 900 numbers. Here they start with 06-3. Recently a company started the Tele-Jackpot (06-32035000) at $0.26 per minute. The system works as follows: after blabbing a little and stalling the actual game to earn more money on you, the first reel of the tele-one-armed-bandit starts to run. You hear: "cherry-plum-grape-plum-cherry-star-plum-bar-cherry- grape- etc." The trick is to shout STOP into the phone when you hear "bar". Then the second reel starts running and the same process is repeated. If you get a bar on all three reels, you record your telephone number, name and address on a tape, and you will receive a prize (a Walkman or CD's or something). My idea was: build a simple voice recognition unit, that recognises only the words cherry, plum, grape, star, bar, and outputs STOP whenever it hears "bar". This could earn me a lot of CD's, as the computer would have a lot faster reaction speed than I do. Haven't gotten around to trying this yet, though. Ralph Moonen rmoonen@[hvlpa|ihlpb].att.com (+31) 35-871380 ------------------------------ From: "J. Luce" Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 Date: 11 Apr 91 18:59:33 GMT Reply-To: "J. Luce" Organization: Alcatel Network Systems, Raleigh NC In article elroy!grian!alex@ames.arc. nasa.gov (Alex Pournelle) writes: > Not a phone-weeny, just leafing through my roommate's stuff, Sorta like a Chaos ROOM as opposed to a Manor, eh? John Luce Alcatel Network Systems Raleigh, NC Standard Disclaimer Applies 919-850-6787 aurs01!aurw46!luce@mcnc.org or ...!mcnc!aurgate!luce or John.Luce@f130.n151.z1.fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones Date: 12 Apr 91 12:06:48 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan STEVEF%WRQ@mcimail.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > If you use a calling card, the phone simply dials the number, waits > for the ka-bong, then sends the card number and PIN via DTMF. > But for the credit cards, it is even more silly. The phone dials a > seven digit number into some computer verification system somewhere. The phone that has always intrigued me is the AT&T Card Caller Plus. It handles credit card calls the way most handle calling card calls. It just dials 0+ and enters some form of your credit card number after the ka-bong. I have always meant to tap the line of one to see what it dials but have never gotten around to it. If I could figure out what it dials, then anyone could place a credit card call through AT&T simply by dialing 0+. I once tracked down the guy at AT&T who designed that phone, but he wouldn't tell me :-(. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Apr 91 09:47:00 CDT From: JOHN WINSLADE Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack In a recent article, Patrick writes: > Over the weekend I bought a CPS-200 Call Forwarding System from Radio > Shack. At the local store here, they had one left, marked down to > $29.95, and I thought that price alone made it worthwhile. > This unit does require two actual phone lines; one to accept calls, > and the other to forward the call. Since I have 'genuine' call > forwarding from Illinois Bell, I won't need it a lot, but one good use > came to mind: I'll use it to remotely turn on call forwarding on my > main line! That's a very interesting use for the unit. Am I correct to assume that the reason it is being closed out is that it is almost useless as a 'real' call diverter because (among other things) it simply bridges the two lines which results in the acoustic efficiency close to that of tin cans and string? I have yet to see, but would like to find a call diverter and a 'conference' phone that makes some kind of attempt to equalize and amplify the link between the end connections so that the parties involved do not have to shout. The so-called conference phones usually bridge the lines and are about as useful as the proverbial screen door on the submarine. I realize that balancing the line from the subscriber end is very messy, but I would have thought by now that someone would have figured out a way to do it. Good day! JSW [Moderator's Note: I think the reason they are being closed out is because most people would not buy it when they realized that unlike the telco version, it requires two actual phone lines. In fact, the manager of the Radio Shack promptly mentioned that to me when I expressed interest in this unit. I only used it a couple times as it was intended, and I did not notice any audio degredation. This version came out a few years ago when telco custom calling was less common in many areas of the country. I think most people now prefer to use the telco version when possible. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 11:06:04 EDT From: "Dennis G. Rears (FSAC)" Subject: Re: 900 Discussion on CNN Gary Sanders writes: > One other item I think should be included in the preamble is a company > name, bussiness mailing address (No PO boxes) and office phone > number(that is attended 8-5). Why should anything be forced upon the marketers of the calls? The real underlying reason is to protect *STUPID* people from themselves. It's time we let people who do stupid things suffer as a result of their actions. We have parents who can't control their kids dialing actions (among other things) blaming the telephone company for their bills. They want government to protect them from their lack of responsibilty and gullibility. > This way I have someone to complain to when I call a 900 number and > get some garbage line. Should every business be required to have a phone number so that people can complain? Of course not. Why should this be different? Disclaimer: I have no association with any 900 number producer. Dennis ------------------------------ From: Alan Laird Subject: Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones Date: 12 Apr 91 16:40:10 GMT Organization: Comp. Sci. Dept., Strathclyde Univ., Scotland. In article covert@covert.enet.dec.com (John R. Covert 09-Apr-1991 1436) writes: > Warning: Both Vodaphone and BT as well as Telecom Australia Mobilenet > charge you for reaching the "it has not been possible to connect your > call" recording. I believe this violates CCITT Recommendations, but I Its worse than that (as they say). I believe BT charge for ringing time to a cellular phone. I've also noticed recently a few very short duration calls on my Vodaphone bill to a Cellnet number. This would seem to suggest that I'm being charged for ringing time to Cellnet. I know for a fact that at least some of these calls were not answered. BTW: Vodaphone have a second exhange code which is 0831. I don't know if cellnet have a second code yet (I expect they do but haven't had to start using it). Alan I M Laird, Department of Computer Science, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XH, UK. aiml@uk.ac.strath.cs, 041 552 4400 x3081, 0836 320786 ------------------------------ From: Kevin Collins Subject: Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed Date: 12 Apr 91 19:38:35 GMT Organization: Aspect Telecommunications, San Jose, Ca On 6 Apr 91 08:22:08 EDT, David Berman (daveb@comspec.UUCP) writes: [asking about how/when CallerID info is sent to the called party] > Question: Does anyone reading know what is sent out? How the phone > number or alpha information is encoded on the ring cycle? Has it been > done in a reasonable way so that decoding is sensible? (etc) Addresses > the future? As far as the future is concerned, once the local telcos get around to offering ISDN Basic Rate Interface (two data channels, one signalling channel), the calling party number will be sent from telco to the called number in the call origination message (called the SETUP message). Your (BRI-compatible) phone will have the information *before* it rings, and could easily decide whether to tell telco to proceed with the call or reject it at that time. So, if your mother calls too often, just have your phone set to reject call attempts from her number after 10 pm :-). Kevin Collins | Aspect Telecommunications USENET: ...uunet!aspect!kevinc | San Jose, CA Voice: +1 408 441 2489 | My opinions are mine alone. ------------------------------ From: Kent Borg Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers Date: 12 Apr 91 20:53:22 GMT Organization: Camex Inc., Boston MA In article hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin) writes: > friends -- also here in Chicago (suburbs) -- that have had the same > experience with Illinois Bell: a refund check for $0.25! A few years ago (like five) I got a check for 35 cents -- or some such -- from Pac Bell. I live in Boston, and the check was forwarded by my parent's in Minnesota. I hadn't been in CA for years, but I did faintly remember once getting ripped off by a pay phone in a BART station while I was at the First West Cost Computer Faire, must have been 1977. Nearly ten years earlier. My guess is that in the paperwork involved with the Bell breakup they found a slew of refunds they forget to send out. (I can't remember, but I think I saved the check somewhere as a momento of how these things work.) Kent Borg internet: kent@camex.com AOL: kent borg H:(617) 776-6899 W:(617) 426-3577 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 22:40 PDT From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack In TD V.11 #279 James Blake said: > Has anyone ever come across a device which would allow one to take the > line level out from an RCA jack to a telephone line and to take the > audio from a phone to a RCA jack? If you're willing to consider a 1/4 inch jack for your audio source, there is of course the Ma Bell "QKP" "QKT' or "QKTBT" voice coupler arrangement. These little jobs were provided usually in a type 30 jack housing, or occasionally engineered with a 1/4 jack in the side of a reworked 500 type phone set. Primarily for radio stations for the ubiquitous "phone patch" so often used for call in shows and remote broadcasts, in most arrangements they were bridged off of the co line and were turned on/off by a switch on the side of the associated phone. The old ones consisted of little more than a transformer for isolation, a capacitor (to prevent passage of DC?) and a zenor to limit the line level (and of course a 1/4 inch jack). They were crude devices, producing a characteristic distortion and giving a poor signal level match for broadcasting two-way conversations. Later versions contained more circuitry removing the distortion. Most stations that can afford them use expensive and well engineered bridges from non-telco vendors that clean up the audio and match the signal level. Many of these devices are made to work with 1A2 equipment, and are designed to be hooked up to the CO or KSU line, entirely replacing the phone set. I don't remember the names of any of the manufacturers, but they are available from any broadcast supply house such as Allied (Harris) Broadcast Supply. Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 12:16:18 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls In TELECOM Digest V11 #279, Mark Walsh writes: > Which brings up an interesting question that I have had. Yes, I too > find these most annoying. When the automated solicitors prompt you to > leave information on their machine, I leave a message consisting of an > incoherent diatribe of grotesque words and concepts. (The last one > had something to do with sexual activity.) Anyway, I know that > obscene phone calls are illegal, but what if you are not the > originator of the phone call? When I get an machine calling to ask 'survey' questions (like am I interested in aluminum storm windows) I usually use my 3-way calling to add a local religious recording to the connection (+1 416 483-4321). The preacher then bible-thumps to his heart's content and the caller's machine either records pieces of the Bible to fill in the blanks or - if it has a VOX - records the entire message (usually a couple of minutes). On a couple of occasions the Bible text has fitted the survey questions really well, and once the prompt asking for my name was filled perfectly by the preacher saying his name and church affiliation. Of course they have *my* phone number (since the machine knows what it dialled to reach me), but they have never called back to sell storm windows to the Reverend. I've given the ethics of this some thought, and I don't think I'm doing anything wrong. Disagreements ? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #287 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22559; 13 Apr 91 4:35 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa22368; 13 Apr 91 3:07 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac05196; 13 Apr 91 2:02 CDT Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 1:39:43 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #288 BCC: Message-ID: <9104130139.ab29398@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Apr 91 00:39:27 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 288 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Charles Bryant] Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? [Charles Bryant] Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless [Mark Cheeseman] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Harold G. Peach] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface [Jim Langridge] Re: Special Screwdriver Wanted [Bjorn Ahlen] Re: Per Line Blocking? [Marc T. Kaufman] Re: Per Line Blocking? [Dennis Rears - Telecom Privacy Moderator] Re: WXYZ (was Re: New FCC Modem Tax?) [Marc Unangst] Cellular Phone Differences [Steven Gutfreund] Telex Gateway Needed [Lynn Spatz] Documentation Wanted on January, '90 AT&T Outage? [Marc Riese] Ringback and Phone Number Readback for 213 Pac Bell [Jon T. Adams] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Charles Bryant Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: Datacode Communications Ltd, Dublin, Ireland Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 11:04:40 GMT In article Colum Mylod writes: > In article ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) > writes: >> [In the 01 area...] From April 8th all numbers starting with >> 69, 8 will have a 2 added to make them 269 XXXX and 28X XXXX. > Lucky you getting some info, even if they stick in a bill too! Those > of us dialling from overseas (where publicity on the changes is zilch) > are just getting tri-tone for the numbers that changed on 8 April. I just tried dialling an 85X XXX number several times and got: "The number you have dialled has been changed to seven digits. Please place the digit two in front of the local number and dial again." ... repeated twice (and starting at a random point). If you don't get this recording you could try reporting the problem (via the international operator, I suppose). Charles Bryant (ch@dce.ie) ------------------------------ From: Charles Bryant Subject: Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? Organization: Datacode Communications Ltd, Dublin, Ireland Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 14:12:58 GMT In article leryo@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Leryo Malbito) writes: > Would anyone know how one could set up a data conference using > three-way calling? > [Moderator's Note: You cannot do what you want. The modem has only two > conditions: originate and answer. It cannot talk to another modem set > in the same mode. If you can modify the BBS software and modem it can be done. It is just a multidrop configuration. However this requires that the modems can support this. Depending on the type of modem, it may be possible to kludge something together anyway. If the modems can control whether their carrier is on of off with RTS you can leave the BBS modem alone and take turns transmitting for each of the other two. Since the BBS will echo, this allows each user to see what the other is doing. Note that the BBS will probably hang up when you try to switch between users as there must be a brief loss of carrier, and even if it dosen't some garbage characters will inevitably arrive at the BBS. If you can use an error-correction protocol it could be made to work. Note that the protocol would have to be specially devised, MNP or similar would be no use since the receiver at the BBS must cope with packet numbers from two sequences. Charles Bryant (ch@dce.ie) ------------------------------ From: Mark Cheeseman Subject: Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless Organization: RUNX Un*x Timeshare. Sydney, Australia. Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 06:08:26 GMT In article , slcpi!admin8779.shearson. com!mjohnsto@uunet.uu.net (Mike Johnston) says: > I just put one of those sleek looking, floor standing hologen lamps in > my living room. Imagine my chagrin when after turning the lamp on I > tried to use my cordless phone and discovered a loud hum. > Incidentally, this hum varies with the brightness of the lamp. I.E the > lower I dim the lamp, the louder the hum in my phone. Help! What's a > guy to do? Is there any way I can shield my lamp from this or am I > just stuck? Sounds to me like poor power supply rejection in the base unit of the phone. Obvoiusly, the lamp has a dimmer in it, which would typically use some form of triac switching to achieve the dimming action. However, this results in rather sharp current rise times, which tend to get into everything else connected to the same supply. What is needed is some level of inductance in the supply to the lamp (it really should be built- in, if the manufacturer cared about the possibility of interference), but I can't quote any figures off the top of my head. A few tens of turns around a ferrite core should provide a signifcant improvement though. The other possibility is that the noise is being radiated RF-wise, but I'm assuming that the cordless phone is using FM, and that it has reasonable AM rejection, which should kill of dimmer noise. If this is the case, the solution is really the same - limit the rate of current rise in the lamp, using an inductor. I hope this helps. Mark ------------------------------ From: andreap@ms.uky.edu (Peach) Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1991 19:55:03 GMT elroy!grian!alex@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Alex Pournelle) writes: > dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: >> In article , TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony >> Harminc) writes: >> The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten >> digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no >> sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls >> intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an >> exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- >> friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an >> area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a >> 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) > At least in Pac*Swell's southern area, this isn't QUITE true: there > *IS* a 213-213 exchange; actually, a "psuedo-exchange"; the Big Book > of Prefixes (Higdon will doubtless give out the real name:-) for the > L.A. LATA lists 213-213 as "Pseudo-POTS for local 800 service" or > something. The indication I got was that it wasn't a "public" > exchange, but one for phones the Great Unwashed should never see. > Yes, there was also a 213-818, an 818-818 and an 818-213 as I recall. I am just a novice at this stuff, but are you saying they are changing the rules about area codes? Prefixes that have a center digit of one or zero can no longer be assumed to be an area code? Is this a nationwide change? Harold G. Peach, Jr. Internet: hgpeach@ca.uky.edu 252 Ag. Engineering Bldg., U.Ky. Packet Radio: N4FLZ@KF4NB.KY.USA.NA Lexington, KY 40546-0276 Phone: (606) 257-3335 [Moderator's Note: The rules about *area codes* are going to change in a few years when area codes can have other than zero or one as their second digit. The rule about the third digit of an area code having to be two through nine has already changed. Now we see a limited number of zeros as the third digit in area codes, but you still never see a third digit of one. It was *prefixes* in the past which never had zero or one in the second digit. And several years ago, a prefix never had zero as the third digit; nor as a rule were prefixes duplicated in adjacent area codes, or similar-looking area codes placed adjacent to each other. Big cities got 'short pull' area codes and small towns got 'long pull' area codes. The explosive growth in telephone services requiring individual numbers in the past few years has forced the old rules to be abandoned. We can still safely say if the second and third digits are both one, or both zero, the three digits make up some special service code rather than an area code or a prefix. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 09:01:12 est From: jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface In an article from TELECOM DIGEST V11 #265 on April 3rd, 1991, Gilbert Amine made two products known: ANI-232 from Rochelle Communications and CLASSMATE 10, developed by MHE Systems and distributed by Bell Atlantic Business Supplies. Since I have had an interest in linking Caller ID to our databases here at work, I decided to try one. First, I called the Contel bussiness office to confirm Caller ID was available? "Yes Sir, That service is provided to your numbers." Second, I phoned Bell Atlantic. Yes I could return the item for any reason within 30 days for full refund or credit. So I had them send me a CLASSMATE 10. It arrived two days later. Except for the package, I was impressed. The device itself was just a hair larger than a pack Camel 100s. The associated software was supplied on a 5 1/4 floppy disk. The software included a neat little "database" utility that allowed me to enter names, addresses and associated info along with phone numbers of prospective callers. It worked like a champ! (at home). When it failed to perform at the office I again called Contel; "No Sir, Caller ID is not provided to your numbers." After several more attempts to get the answer I wanted to hear again, The regional manager explained that Caller ID was "Not in the two year plan" for my company's area. He apologized for the misinformation I was given at the begining. Oh well, "Nothing ventured, Nothing gained." Jim Langridge | jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil | 703 663 2137 Synetics Corp. | | 703 663 3050 (FAX) 24 Danube Dr. | | King George, VA. | 22553-5000 | ------------------------------ From: Bjorn Ahlen Subject: Re: Special Screwdriver Wanted Organization: Retix, Santa Monica CA Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1991 23:27:01 GMT In article 3263, leryo@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Leryo Malbito) asks: > Does anyone have ANY idea where to get those strange screwdrivers that > fit screws with two holes in them? Last time I needed to open a cabinet with these "child-proof" screw heads, I used an old carpenter's compass. This is very much like a navigators compass (sic) used to "walk" measurements on charts, but is of course much sturdier. You could possibly find one of these at your local old-fashioned hardware store. Plan B would be to use a small pipe wrench (unless the heads are recessed of course :). ------------------------------ From: "Marc T. Kaufman" Subject: Re: Per Line Blocking? Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1991 06:40:10 GMT In article Robert J Woodhead writes: > So why not do the following: Phone customers are allowed to set a > PRICE at which they are willing to sell their caller-ID information, > and Caller-ID customers are allowed to set a price they will PAY for > Caller-ID information. > Caller-ID is then only provided when the price a CID customer will pay > is >= the price asked by the phone customer. If it is, then the phone > company charges the Caller-ID customer, delivers the CID info, and > credits the phone customer's bill with the fee just charged to the > Caller-ID user (less a percentage for the phone company, of course). I like it. And there's more. Once we get individualized pricing, we can set the price to receive a call. After midnight, or from a telemarketer, I would set a higher price to trip the ringer than I would for calls received during the day or from friends. Might as well make telemarketing profitable -- for us. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 11:43:20 EDT From: Telecom Privacy List Moderator Subject: Re: Per Line Blocking? The TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Thanks to all who have contributed to this string, > but once again it is time to ask that the string be moved into the > privacy list if further discussion is desired. Thanks. PAT] OK. I have posted the last articles on this to the telecom-priv digest. Further discussions go to telecom-priv@pica.army.mil, admin requests to telecom-priv-request@pica.army.mil. Dennis [Moderator's Note: Thanks. Although I enjoy putting some Caller ID commentary here in the TELECOM Digest, I am becoming increasingly reluctant to do so because of the amount of space it consumes with endless arguments which never resolve. Caller ID *news* and *tech questions/comments* are quite welcome here, but follow-up commentary should really go to Dennis. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: WXYZ (was Re: New FCC Modem Tax?) From: Marc Unangst Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 18:20:41 EDT Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, +1 313 665 2832 nol2105%dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil@dsac.dla.mil (Robert E. Zabloudil) writes: > Yes, I know what he meant, but there really is a WXYZ in Detroit, > isn't there? Yes, there is. Channel 7, the local ABC affiliate. Marc Unangst mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us ...!hela!mudos!mju ------------------------------ From: Steven Gutfreund Subject: Cellular Phone Differences Date: 11 Apr 91 14:25:42 GMT Reply-To: sgutfreund@gte.com Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA I apologize if this has been discussed already, but what are the qualititive and/or other differences between at car-based cellular (at I believe 2 Watts) and a hand-held (at I believe .6 Watts)? Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund sgutfreund@gte.com GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA harvard!bunny!sgutfreund [Moderator's Note: Actually, the permanently mounted phones in cars and transportables (sometimes called 'bag phones') are rated at three watts. Depends on where you use them, but in a large city like Chicago, where cellular signals saturate everything and towers are seen only a few city blocks apart, there is no real difference. On my handheld (Radio Shack CT-301) I don't even use the 'standard' antenna; opting for a 1/8 wave loaded coil -- a stub about the size of my thumb -- instead, and I get along fine. If you are buying your first unit, and plan to use it mostly in a metro area, don't let the references to the watts it puts out concern you (very much). PAT] ------------------------------ From: lspatz@ncrcom.DaytonOH.NCR.COM () Subject: Telex Gateway Needed Organization: NCR Corporation - Dayton, OH Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 18:13:14 GMT I am looking for a programmatic interface to telex, i.e. gateway. This gateway will run on various NCR TOWERs and also the new 3000 series. Could you also tell me who the carrier is. Any help is appreciated. Thanks for your help in advance. Lynn Spatz ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1991 09:18:58 +0000 From: Marc Riese Subject: Documentation Wanted on January '90 AT&T Outage I read in {IEEE Institute} (the newspaper that comes with Spectrum) March '91: "On Jan. 15, 1990, a flaw in a new version of software interrupted long-distance, international, and toll-free 1-800 calls for nine hours - AT&T's most extensive service disruption in its history." (This is probably old news for most readers - apologies.) Can anyone tell me more details about this? Is there a public report about it? Thanks, Marc Riese ------------------------------ From: "Jon T. Adams" Subject: Ringback and Phone Number Readback for 213 Pac Bell Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 13:46:32 PDT Some time ago Andy Jacobsen had described the efforts he had gone through to find the ringback and # readback functions for GTE West LA. Well, I finally came across his note filed away in my heap last evening and started punching out digits on my phone, a 213-674-xxxx number in Pac Bell's area. The number 1-958-xxxx (where xxxx is my last four digits) gets me a dial tone against which I cannot dial. I then do a flash hook which nets me a weird tone. I hang up and get an immediate ring-back. I pick up the phone, hear that weird tone, then hang up. The number readback is 1223 for my prefix. A mechanical lady comes on the line without a ring tone and then rapidly reads back my phone number. Thanks, Andy - tres cool. jon ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #288 ******************************  ISSUE 289 WAS LATE IN ARRIVING AND IS FILED HERE AFTER ISSUE 292.  Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00607; 13 Apr 91 22:50 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20975; 13 Apr 91 21:20 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab19042; 13 Apr 91 20:15 CDT Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 19:20:16 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #290 BCC: Message-ID: <9104131920.ab09244@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Apr 91 19:20:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 290 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Offline a Few Days [TELECOM Moderator] Per-Jack Installation Charges (was: Cellular Phones for $29) [Rich Zellich] SNET/NYNEX and Springfield (was: New Tower, But no Service?) [John Covert] *Prodigy* at 9600 bps via Tymnet: What Implications? [Seng-Poh Lee] GTE Problems Again [Ron Schnell] Ohio PUCO to Move on Caller ID [Bruce Klopfenstein] Texas Caller ID - Mandatory Blocking [Ed Hopper] Bellcore ISDN Videotape [Steven W. Grabhorn] Four Port Cards With Four IRQs [Emmanuel Disini] Sync vs. Async and Misc. Questions About Leased Lines [Jesse W. Asher] Refund Assistance [Allyn Lai] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [Doctor Math] Forbidden Numbers (was: 416 to be Split Into 905) [Seth Breidbart] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 18:31:51 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Offline a Few Days TELECOM Digest and comp.dcom.telecom are offline for a few days until I return from a personal family emergency matter in Kansas. Over the weekend, messages are appearing which were in the queue at the last minute. Please hold traffic to this newsgroup until about April 20. Thank you. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 9:50:15 CDT From: Rich Zellich Subject: Per-Jack Installation Charges (was: Cellular Phones for $29) Here is what one decent company in St. Louis charges (and the totals for the installation they did in my house): Communications Prewires Inc. (+1-314-291-8959) Pre-wiring for phone, cable TV, video, and speakers: $ 25 per outlet, jack, or speaker ($50 per stereo speaker PAIR) [if I remember right, this price also applied to built-in vacuum system outlets; connecting hose included free] $ 20 to connect to telco-installed demarc (interface) box $125 for attic-mounted antenna, incl. all parts & installation My new-home installation: 10 phone jacks = $250 [main 3-pair cable] 2 phone jacks = $ 50 [2nd 3-pair cable] 5 video jacks = $125 1 TV antenna jack = $ 25 Connect to demarc $ 20 Install antenna $125 ----- TOTAL $590 I consider the $125 attic-antenna charge to be a rip-off, considering that he did not "mount" the antenna, but only laid it on it's side on top of the box it came in, which was laid across the rafters, and that he only installed a VHF antenna, and not VHF/UHF/FM (which is my main complaint; he didn't ask first, or tell me until the installation was done). On the other hand ... the charge would have been the same had he had to go through Hell to do the installation. The per-jack charge for everything else includes however many feet of cable required at no extra charge; thus, the second three-pair cable run to only two of the phone-jack locations in the house (for future use; they're not even connected to wall jacks at this time). I asked about six-pair, or greater, but they don't normally use it, and unless there had been some left over from another special job, it would have cost me too much for them to go out and buy a whole commercial-size spool of the stuff. I settled for running the second three-pair cable instead, for which I was charged nothing. The $125 charge for six video jacks was actually six *wall plates*, and *eight* jacks; he was going to splice three cables together to feed three remote TV sets from one main location, and charged for the single jack that would have required. Since I have amplified video switches feeding those three remotes, I instead had him install a separate jack in the wall plate for each of the three outgoing cables; now I can feed three separate signals to those three sets, instead of always the same signal to all three. They came out on one-day notice from the builder to run the cables, then came back the day after closing to install the cable-end jacks and wall plates, and to connect to the just-installed demarc, and install and connect the attic antenna. Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 09:57:19 PDT From: "John R. Covert 11-Apr-1991 1237" Subject: SNET/NYNEX and Springfield (was New Tower, But no Service?) NYNEX/New England *used* to serve Western Mass, ie, Springfield. > (Metro Highbill serves the same area, even though it was/is a CT > company.) About 1 1/2 years ago, NYNEX seemed to have "abandoned" > Springfield, and SNET took it over. I would call that "West Central Mass", not "Western Mass", since NYNEX has and will continue to keep Berkshire County (which runs from CT to VT along the NY border). What happened with Springfield was the following: The original license for the Springfield (Hampden and Hampshire Counties) MSA was issued to a joint venture between NYNEX and SNET. NYNEX was operating the switch, but SNET was doing the customer service. Since the Hartford-Springfield corridor is one continuous populated area, with the airport located at a point where I had trouble sticking to one of the two systems (back when they were separate), SNET's customers were screaming about the lack of interconnection. NYNEX and SNET applied to Judge Greene for permission to interconnect the two systems. MCI and Sprint filed letters of objection, stating that they, and not Baby Bell NYNEX, were authorized to carry the traffic between the 413 and 203 LATAs. NYNEX, in one of the rare cases of cellular carriers doing something good for the majority of the customers, gave up, and sold their portion of the system to SNET. Since SNET isn't a Baby Bell, they are allowed to carry inter-LATA traffic, and were able to integrate the two systems. > As it is now, SNET indicates on their maps that they plan to have all > of CT, and all of Western Mass in the near future (a year?) SNET will have only West Central Mass: the Springfield (Hampden/Hampshire) MSA they now have, and the Franklin County RSA (Mass RSA 1). This doesn't really inconvenience NYNEX customers from the eastern LATA, since until the whole interconnection problem is solved through legislation or a change in the Justice Department, NYNEX in the 617/508 LATA would be prohibited from connecting with any NYNEX in the 413 LATA. > Cell One in Boston has two plans with FREE nightime airtime. One plan, > for $59 per month, gives you 60 minutes of FREE peak airtime (after > which 61+ minutes will costs $.43 per minute), and ALL airtime is FREE > *off-peak*. Cellular One still charges local (eleven cents per five minutes) and toll (at N.E.T. rates from their nearest point of interconnection) for all calls. NYNEX Mobile has bundled all calls to Eastern Mass, R.I., and at least southern NH (if not all of NH) into their airtime rates. No landline charges unless the call goes beyond those points. john ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 07:08:41 From: "Seng-Poh Lee" Subject: *Prodigy* at 9600 bps via Tymnet: What Implications? I just managed to get Prodigy running at 9600 bps via Tymnet. It works great, although there are still pauses due to the front end. But when the front end is responsive, the screen updates are super. Prodigy has not announced 9600 support yet. I just edited their config and script file to do that. When Prodigy went nationwide, they used Tymnet to fill voids in their dial-up network. Presumely they have a bulk contract with Tymnet since Prodigy users are not charged for connect time. I wonder what will happen when more and more people start using Prodigy at 9600 via Tymnet. If Tymnet has higher charges for 9600, will Prodigy start passing some of those charges to those 9600 customers? Prodigy has already started charging for e-mail over 30/month. Will they now start charging more for 9600 users? Or perhaps limiting free connect time? Time will tell. In the mean time, those in cities with 9600 Tymnet modems can enjoy faster sessions. Seng-Poh Lee splee@gnu.ai.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 08:37:57 From: Ron Schnell Subject: GTE Problems Again Well, now I REALLY hate GTE. I got the bill for our modem line here, and decided to look it over carefully for once. While looking at the "ZUM" charges, I noticed that what they were charging me was not the same as the rate the operator had quoted me only days earlier. Looking even more closely revealed that calling the same number during the same rate period was not charged at the same rate! No, the calls did not spill into multiple rates. As a matter-of-fact, they were different by as much as a factor of five! Needless to say, I called the billing office, where they were very rude as always, and they agreed that something was wrong. They would put my bill under investigation. I wonder how many people are routinely overbilled. I am writing a letter to the California PUC with copies of the bill. By the way, this is a business line. Ron (ronnie@sos.com) ------------------------------ From: Bruce Klopfenstein Subject: Ohio PUCO to Move on Caller ID Date: 12 Apr 91 06:26:13 GMT Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh. I heard from a reliable source that the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio has moved on Caller ID. I do not know any details. If anyone sees any press reports on this topic, please post or send email to me. Thanks very much. ------------------------------ From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: Sat Apr 13 08:58:38 CDT 1991 Subject: Texas Caller ID - Mandatory Blocking I read a very brief article about an action of the Texas PUC (those clear thinking devils) ruling that SWBT can offer Caller-ID, but only if all lines DEFAULT to to per-line blocking. Is this true? I believe I read it in USA Today (hence the total lack of detail and the high probability of screwed up facts). If true, this action represents a screwed up mess that only Texas regulators can attain. Authorize a service, then cripple it to the point it won't be worth having. Ed Hopper ------------------------------ From: "Steven W. Grabhorn" Subject: Bellcore ISDN Videotape Date: 13 Apr 91 04:35:10 GMT Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego I think there's something wrong here, but I'm not sure. I just received a flyer from Bellcore advertising an ISDN videotape: "See for yourself what's possible today with ISDN! An Informative Videotape ... this 15 minute videotape will bring you up to speed on the latest advances of ISDN..." "Ordering Information ... PRICE: $295.00" This can't be right, can it? $295.00 for a *15 minute* video tape? And it doesn't even say if it's VHS or BETA. :-) The flyer says a lot of of other things which I haven't included and the standard disclamers apply. Steve Grabhorn, Code 645, Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA, 92152 Phone:619-553-3454 Internet:grabhorn@nosc.mil UUCP:..!sdcsvax!nosc!grabhorn ------------------------------ Subject: Four Port Cards With Four IRQs From: "Disini SW, Emmanuel Disini,PRT" Date: 12 Apr 91 06:43 GMT I just want to take the time to thank you all for the tremendously useful responses I received regarding 16450s and 16550s. There must have been about 25 repsonses to that single post. If it's not too much to ask, I also have a follow up question: Does anyone know of a four-port serial card with COM ports that can be configured to use different IRQs? That is, COM1 on IRQ4, COM2 on IRQ3, COM3 on IRQ5, etc. If you could point me to a vendor as well that would be great! Please send your responses to: d1749@applelink.apple.com Thanks, joel disini manila ------------------------------ From: "Jesse W. Asher" Subject: Sync vs Async and Misc. Questions About Leased Lines Reply-To: "Jesse W. Asher" Organization: Health Sphere of America Inc. Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 14:24:20 GMT Our company is in the process of hooking up seven remote sites using leased lines. To help understanding of the problem, I'll provide background information. We've got a Sun Server at the main office and high powered PCs running unix and tcp/ip out in the branch offices. We would like to have the PCs used to access the database at the main office via high speed digital lines (19.2kb or 56kb lines) using tcp/ip (we are using Oracle as the database). What hardware do you recommend to do this and how? Should sync or async be used? What should be used on the PC end to connect to the line? Does it need some sort of board that runs sync that you connect the DSU to? Because we have enough offices to make up for the cost, AT&T is recommending that we have a full T1 going to our POP. I assume this requires special hardware? I would appreciate any help with this as it is completely new and confusing to all of us here. I'm sure that we can get the job done -- I just want it done right. Thanks much. Jesse W. Asher NIC Handle: JA268 Phone: (901)386-5061 Health Sphere of America Inc. 5125 Elmore Rd., Suite 1, Memphis, TN 38134 UUCP: ...!banana!homecare!jessea ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!Allyn@uunet.uu.net Subject: Refund Assistance Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 14:38:20 PDT I saw this on a COCOT in a Carrow's Restaurant in Sunnyvale, CA (Sorry, forgot to see which company the COCOT belongs to): For Refund Assistance please dial 211 ...or words to that effect. This message was on a large, easy to read sticker... Anyway, I hadn't noticed this on pay phones before ... nice to see that some companies are becoming more "service" oriented. Allyn Lai allyn@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ From: Doctor Math Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 23:17:24 PDT Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers Organization: Brown Cow Software (a licensed Waffle developer) scott@hsvaic.boeing.com (Scott Hinckley) writes: > When I was in Atlanta (back in the days of the $.10 pay phone) I was > connected to a wrong number by one of the bandits. When I called the > operator to try and get through to the correct number (I did not have > another dime) she would not connect me, but took my name and address. > A couple of weeks later I recieved a check (not coupon, real > honest-to-goodness check) for $.10 ... which was sent in an envelope > with a $.22 stamp on it! This happened to someone I knew, except that before taking his name and address, the operator pushed some mysterious button causing almost a dollar in change to come pouring out of the phone! (I was there, I saw.) > That seems like a pretty expensive way to deal with it ... I'm told it's around six dollars overhead for them to cut you a check. My guess is that the PR department eats the six bucks for "customer relations" and that the "lost" change is paid out of somewhere else. ------------------------------ From: Seth Breidbart Subject: Forbidden Numbers (was: 16 to be Split Into 905) Date: 13 Apr 91 19:58:35 GMT Organization: Morgan Stanley, & Co., Inc. / New York City, NY > [Moderator's Note: The rules about *area codes* are going to change in > a few years when area codes can have other than zero or one as their > second digit. The rule about the third digit of an area code having to > be two through nine has already changed. Now we see a limited number > of zeros as the third digit in area codes, but you still never see a > third digit of one. 201 has been New Jersey for a long time. Likewise, 301 is Maryland. Maybe you mean prefixes? But New York has exchanges with 1 as the third digit (just glancing through the Manhattan phone book). > It was *prefixes* in the past which never had zero > or one in the second digit. And several years ago, a prefix never had > zero as the third digit; In 1975 or thereabouts, a friend of mine had the phone number (business) 617-xx0-0000. Seth sethb@fid.morgan.com [Moderator's Note: Well silly me! What I meant to say, but somehow did not type in was 'area codes do not have *second and third* digits of one, i.e. 311, 511, 711, etc.' The rule was: first digit 2 <=> 9; second digit 0 or 1, but never two zeros or two ones; and third digit always 1 <=> 9 with never a zero in the third position, and a one in the third position only provided there was not a one in the second position. Thanks also to John Higdon and others who wrote on this. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #290 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12215; 14 Apr 91 4:48 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab03947; 14 Apr 91 3:48 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06562; 13 Apr 91 23:30 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21317; 13 Apr 91 22:21 CDT Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 21:32:11 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #291 BCC: Message-ID: <9104132132.ab19907@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Apr 91 21:32:00 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 291 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson A Good Thing I Asked! No NationLink Roam per Cell One [TELECOM Moderator] AT&T's New Calling Card [Bill Huttig] Long Distance Calling Within-NPA [Carl Moore] Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? [Morten Reistad] Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? [Gordon Burditt] Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way CAlling Possible? [Don Kimberlin] Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [Bill Martens] Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [Peter da Silva] Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack [John Higdon] Re: ISDN Residential Survey [Paul McGinnis] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 19:46:28 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: A Good Thing I Asked! No NationLink Roam, per Cell One I had hoped to take my (Cellular One - Chicago equipped) bag phone with me when we drive to Kansas in a couple days, but according to Cellular One here, they do NOT yet offer NationLink roaming. I've had a copy of their User Guide for several months which says they offer *31 (call forwarding) and *32 (caller notification) service. In addition, the third edition of the Cellular Telephone Directory says that Cell One - Chicago offers the service. I'm glad I called to double check! Some of you will recall when I made this same trip to Independence, KS last July, I took along my Radio Shack CT-301 handheld unit, serviced by Ameritech. I was unable to place or receive roamer calls, and because it was the fourth of July, I had to wait until the next day -- after we had already arrived in Kansas -- to call Ameritech here and ask them to correct the problem. They found me on a 'negative listing'; removed me from it, and everything worked fine for the rest of the trip and coming home. So this time around, I made certain Ameritech had 'Fast Track Roaming' on my account and did not have my serial number on any negative listings, etc. I can use *18 on that phone to have calls to my home number forwarded to the cellular switch and on to me wherever I may be in the next several days. But I wonder why Cellular One - Chicago mentions *31 / *32 in their own guide, and it appears in the book as well when in fact they say it is 'only in the testing stage here' ? I'll still take along both phones, since I want to do some comparison tests along the way ... but its a good thing I did not just start out with my bag phone (Cell One) *assuming* that what the Cellular Telephone Directory says is correct, isn't it! Now let's hope the national guide to cellular roaming is correct on a few other details, such as roaming agreements, the coverage maps, etc. Maybe they got some of that wrong also. As I have noted in other messages today, telecom is off line until about April 20. Please hold messages this week while I go attend to my father. Thanks. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: Bill Huttig Subject: AT&T's New Calling Card Date: 13 Apr 91 23:43:16 GMT Reply-To: Bill Huttig Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL In a previous Digest someone wrote about new international calling card numbers. AT&T has been issuing them for awhile. The US part is not your phone number. They start with 838 or 836 followed by eleven digits: the international part is 891253 83x NNN NNNN U YY when the US part is 83x NNN NNNN ZZZZ where x is a 6 or 8 and N is any number and U is a check digit (I think same as old cards) YY has the word auth. Code above it. ZZZZ is the normal four digit US pin. Does anyone know when the rest of the carriers are issuing their cards? There is also a note on the mailer stating that to comply with government requirements AT&T is no longer sharing card numbers with the local telephone company. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 17:24:25 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Long Distance Calling Within-NPA If you are in Maryland, currently served only by 301 NPA, you dial 1 + 301 + 7D for long distance within it. If you are in the yet-to-be-formed 410 (to split from 301), your long distance calling within Maryland will become: 1 + 410 + 7D (it's now 1 + 301 + 7D) within your area and 1 + 301 + 7D (no change!) to points staying in 301. Contrast this with long distance within Virginia. If you were in the newly-formed 804 area back in 1973; 804 was formed by splitting 703, which until then served all of Virginia: 1 + 7D (no change!) within your area. 1 + 703 + 7D (had been 1 + 7D) to points staying in 703. (At the time, the Washington DC area had NPA + 7D for long distance, even on calls within 703 or within 301, but this instruction was not changed by the 703/804 split.) ------------------------------ Date: 13 Apr 91 13:19 +0200 From: Morten Reistad Subject: Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? Leryo Malbito asks: > Would anyone know how one could set up a data conference using > three-way calling? This seems like an idea that would be not too [...] Yes, you can. You would have to have the vintage line discipline for half-duplex modems in place, ie. have explicit control over the carrier, and you would have some kind of line discipline to decide which one will have a go at the carrier. Most access control schemes can be used, CSMA, Token-passing, time-slots have all been used in similar setups. The setup is called multidrop in telco lingo (even in Norwegian it is spelled multidrop ;-) and is mostly used with leased, voice grade lines on low speeds. The V.23 standard (1200 bps, one channel only) is mostly used for this. I have one such fully functional vintage 1980 NOKIA modem as a bookstopper. The advanced modems used for dialup lines are ill-suited for such use, mostly because they are automated and "user-friendly", and because they need to analyze (train) for several hundred milliseconds before they have a useful connection. This training is needed because more advanced (faster) modulation techniques are used. Many IBM sites use this kind of setup (multidrop, on leased, el-cheapo voice grade lines) for their infrequent users. My local travel agency had that kind of setup until January this year. Morten Reistad ------------------------------ From: Gordon Burditt Subject: Re: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? Date: 13 Apr 91 18:47:37 GMT Organization: Gordon Burditt > [Moderator's Note: You cannot do what you want. The modem has only two > conditions: originate and answer. It cannot talk to another modem set I realize that half-duplex modems are not popular these days, but they do exist, and their use was popular on multipoint dedicated lines, among other places. With decent transmission paths between all parties (someone was complaining about a certain GTE switch providing one-way transmission on three-way calling), you should be able to use them in a three-way conversation. There is no "originate" and "answer" - transmission in any direction uses the same frequencies, with one modem turning on its transmitter at a time. A passive listener could "hear" all sides of the conversation. Often a "master" end would poll the "slave" ends in sequence. More complicated setups could switch mastership around. The main problem is that you have to somehow settle who gets to talk next, and when the current talker is done. Software generally has to be very aware of the half-duplex operation, so putting in half-duplex modems will likely require software changes, and maybe extra control lines on the serial port. Popular half-duplex modems included the Bell 202 (1200 bps asynchronous) the Bell 201 (2400 bps synchronous). There were more expensive 208 and 209 synchronous modems that required dedicated lines. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 12:54 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way CAlling Possible? In article leryo@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Leryo Malbito) writes: > Would anyone know how one could set up a data conference using > three-way calling?... Our Moderator replied: > [Moderator's Note: You cannot do what you want. The modem has only two > conditions.... In Digest 11, Issue 286, Andy Sherman offered a possibility: > certain types of data conference calls can be set up, but the > cost is probably too high for BBS'ing. ... AT&T's Alliance(tm) > Teleconferencing service has some kind of bridge modem set up to allow > graphics to be shared by multiple sites. ... This brought our Moderator to suggest: > [Moderator's Note: ... be the CB Simulator program on Compuserve. ... > Instead of a direct link between modems ... each party transmits to > a central computer, and that computer then parcels everything back out > again, usually instantly or nearly so. PAT] If acccomplishing such a computer conference is *not* mandated using three-way telephone calling, and if you have a PC with hard drive available, the PC BBS software called TBBS provides such a CB-like function to multiple callers. It's done by writing each incoming message to the BBS' hard disk, then broadcasting that message back out to all parties connected at the time. The obvious drawback to small operators is, of course, a serial port, modem and dial line for each connected participant. If, however, this is not a problem, TBBS might well suffice. I'm not aware of how TBBS is distributed, but a scan of BBS's in most any major city will find one or more BBS's using TBBS, and of course, one can then ask its Sysop for a source of the software (and if you want hardware for multi ... and I mean MULTI, for some have dozens of lines ... modem ports). [Moderator's Note: This is a good opportunity to introduce everyone to Phil Becker, author of the TBBS software. Becker, of Aurora, CO, wrote he read oard ystem originally (1980) as a single line BBS package for the Radio Shack computers of that era. He revised it many times during the early and middle 1980's to include newer Radio Shack machines such as the Model 4 (I think) and the IBM PC. He expanded TBBS into multi-line versions, capable of handling 8, 16 or 32 line BBS programs. The success of Compuserve's CB Simulator was apparently the reason Becker chose to incorporate it in later versions of TBBS. I helped with beta-testing of a couple versions of multi-line TBBS which were installed here with a local sysop. About 1985 or so, Becker added the software necessary for TBBS to interface with FIDO and participate in that international mail and newsgroup (Fido calls them 'echomail conferences') network. I'd strongly recommend TBBS to anyone starting a multi-line BBS. (I wish *I* had the money and phone lines here to do it!) PAT ------------------------------ From: Bill Martens Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Date: 13 Apr 91 11:28:32 GMT Reply-To: Bill Martens Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan Well, the bad calls from the secretary are almost as bad as my situation. I called a hotline of a major publishing company which operates in the U.S. and also in Japan which was answered by an English speaking person (amazing!). I told them I wanted a catalog on some of the books which they carry (computer and other technical books). I was told that a person who spoke English would call me back concerning the catalogs I requested (no problem). About 15 minutes later (while talking to the vice-president of the largest publishing company in Japan) a guy calls me from the previous company. (Great!) My next task was to ask this guy for the information (catalogs) which I needed for my company. But everytime I said something to him, he would come back with something in Japanese. So I finally asked him (in Japanese of course) if he speaks English to which he promptly said iie (no in Japanese). Well, that was the biggest waste of my time (and as it turns out the guy isn't even in the department which handles retail questions!) and I had put the poor vice-president of the other company on hold for this guy! Bill Martens Kioityo 3-12 Tokyo Japan ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1991 14:09:37 GMT tr@samadams.princeton.edu (Tom Reingold) writes: > It's sort of like stealing a tenth of a penny from everyone's > bank account and making millions of dollars. Can you argue that it > cost no one a significant amount therefore your deed is insignificant? The Moderator replies: > His individual calls to individual phone numbers might well > have been obnoxious; they were most likely not illegal. Your repeated > telephone calls, intended to harrass, were illegal. Of course this gap between legal and illegal calls, one causing X amount of grief to one individual, the other causing (X+delta)/N grief to N individuals, is a wonderful example of how complex a society can get without being civilised. Why should *anyone* have more of a right than anyone else to make unsolicited and annoying phone calls? What if Tom had set his autodialler to call a few hundred households and given them that same message? peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 00:10 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Phone Audio to RCA Jack jartel!compsm!rlg@nosc.mil (Randy Gregor) writes: > In article is written: > > Has anyone ever come across a device which would allow one to take the > > line level out from an RCA jack to a telephone line and to take the > > audio from a phone to a RCA jack? > Get an old phone with a _carbon_ mic (the pop-out kind). Remove the > mic. Connect the audio to the mic contacts, and adjust the output > level. and "Paul S. Sawyer" writes: > If your application is as simple as it sounds, the Bogen WMT-1 comes > to my mind -- bridging transformer, with RCA jack <-> screw terminals. That bridging transformer is most important. Never, but never connect any unbalanced audio equipment directly to any telephone or other device directly connected to the network unless you are positive that isolation is provided within. One of the first commandments that we telco experimenters learned was "thou shalt not unbalance or introduce foreign battery on a telco line". If you connect unbalanced audio equipment without a transformer for isolation you will at best probably introduce hum and noise on the line and at worst introduce a safety hazard with unanticipated leakage currents. While the connection of a battery operated device MAY work OK without isolation, it is better to just obey the rule of making sure that your connection is isolated and balanced. If you leave such a device connected during the automated testing (done usually at night), a trouble ticket will be generated and you may have to deal with a repair man showing up. In the old days, this would have been tantamount to a visit by the FBI in our minds, but even though times have changed you do not need the hassle. Whatever you do, do not indiscriminately connect stuff to the handset transmitter contacts. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!TRADER@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: ISDN Residential Survey Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 19:53:46 PDT Someone had told me that ISDN basic rate service was available for $29 per month in service charges in 408 area code from PacTel - anyone have the scoop on ISDN rates from PacTel? Oh, by the way - I'm designing an ISDN card for my employer - basic rate S/T type interface. Paul McGinnis TRADER@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #291 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12843; 14 Apr 91 5:13 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa29428; 14 Apr 91 3:37 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab06698; 14 Apr 91 2:31 CDT Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 2:28:13 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #292 BCC: Message-ID: <9104140228.ab19837@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 14 Apr 91 02:28:03 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 292 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Wanted: Worldwide List of Telcos with Addresses [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: Billed Busy Signals [Alan R. Gross] Re: "Hello, I'm Digit-Dialing ..." [Peter da Silva] Re: Convenience of Phone System [John G. Dobnick] Re: Per Line Blocking? [Paul Durham] Re: 900 Discussion on CNN [Robert Thurlow] Re: Documentation Wanted on January '90 AT&T Outage [Carl Wright] New AT&T Desk Sets With Displays = Tiny Risk [Laird P. Broadfield] Book Review: Facsimile Facts and Figures, 1990/91 [TELECOM Moderator] Administrivia: Offline a Few Days [TELECOM Moderator] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 12:51 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Wanted: Worldwide List of Telcos with Addresses In article ropg@ooc.uva.nl (Rop Gonggrijp) writes: > I need the addresses of ALL the phone companies in the world. In Digest 11, Issue 286, Carl Wright replies: > There is a company called Lynx Technologies in Little Falls, NJ which > has this information. It was expensive ($60k dollars) > There is probably some other source, but I don't know what it is. I'd > love to hear where you find the info for less. The definitive list of the "phone companies" of the world is, in my opinion, the CCITT publication titled simply, "List of Addresses." This is, for lack of a better description, the "phone book" of the members of the CCITT, including not only the official postal address of every CCITT member, but a listing of key personnel for various functions, right down to their own individual business address, direct phone number, Telex number, and any other public means of communications to them. The last time I bought one, it was several hundred dollars, but well worth the money for my purposes, providing me not only accurate information, but contacts with people who were interested and concerned, not just some front-office types whose main job was to *not* know anything helpful. The is officially sold by the CCITT Bookstore at 2, rue du Varembe in Geneva, but stocks may be available at other CCITT publications sources such as the UN Bookstore in New York City and the National Technical Information Service in Springfield, Virginia. If you really don't want to buy the entire book or haven't the funds, finding the one of the CCITT participants of your local CCITT-member "telco" will probably lead you to an individual who has a copy to aid you in a few addresses and numbers. Lat time I had a copy, it was 600 pages or so! ------------------------------ From: locke@tree.uucp (Alan R. Gross) Subject: Re: Billed Busy Signals Reply-To: locke@.PacBell.COM (Alan R. Gross) Organization: TREE BBS (916)332-4930 Sacramento, CA Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 17:31:43 GMT Jack.Rickard@f555.n104.z1.fidonet.org (Jack Rickard) writes: > I've had continuing problems with both Sprint and Telecom*USA over > the past year regarding multiple billing entries for busy signals. I > use a modem and automated mailing software to contact other systems > through Fidonet. > I recently spoke with a gentleman from Telephone Express. He avows > that this is a by-product of software switching and that their use of > DMS-250 switches would eliminate these billing entries. Anyone know > the straight scoop on this little problem and how I can eliminate it? While it is possible, this diagnosis is very unlikely. You provide a clue as to what might be happening in your message: > If the modem receives a busy signal, it makes another attempt a > minute or so later. Hayes and Hayes compatible modems recognize busy signals and terminate the call instantly. If your modem is taking a minute, then it is not a busy signal it is getting. It is most likely getting another modem. A way to test this would be to make sure your modem's speaker is on -- you can park this in front of your dial string to make the modem stay on quietly until a true CONNECT is sent by the answering modem: ATL0 ~~ Your software might use something besides the two tildes for a pause, if so, replace them with whatever is necessary for a pause. > On the bill, I routinely find a series of calls to the same number, > spaced two minutes apart, each billed for a minute. The final call of > the series of course, is several minutes in duration indicating I did > finally connect. The most likely scenario is that you are reaching the modem at the other end, and failing to achieve speed recognition or parity (IE: a 1200 baud caller just got off line with the place you are calling to -- you call once at 9600, and the answering modem steps up to 2400 baud after failing to connect at 1200. By this time, your modem has timed out, and hung up. Your modem calls again, the answering modem tries to achieve recognition at 2400, fails, steps to another speed, your modem times out, etc.) The fault is probably not with your modem, but instead with the setup at the other end. I call several boards, and mail services -- some are flakier than others. Several take multiple attempts to get a true CONNECT, even though their modem is answering, and both modems are attempting to talk. > I've monitored the system and it is working perfectly. Monitor it with modem speaker on, give us some more details of the system you are using -- modem, software, etc., as well as the systems you are calling. > [Moderator's Note: You can't eliminate it by yourself. Only your long > distance carrier can do so. The problem you describe is common with > any telecom organization unable/unwilling to obtain 'answer > supervision' from the serving local telco. The 'supervision' > detirmines when a call has been answered, or if it was answered. AT&T > and the Bells have it, most of the others do not. PAT] Sprint does use telco answer supervision. It also uses software answer supervision -- so the call must pass two tests - the LEC has to pass the answer to Sprint, and Sprint's software must detect voice or carrier for the call to be billed. In some areas the answer supervision provided by some independents (FGB areas), is quite impossible. In these areas, just software answer supervision is used. It is unlikely, though possible, that Jack's calls are terminating in one of the few remaining FGB areas. The best way for Jack to test to see if it's carrier related is to put ATT's carrier code, 10288 in his dial string -- I would wager that the one minute calls don't go away if he does this over a month. Of course, the rates will be higher, but I have found that Sprint will usually credit the difference in rates, if you let them work on the problem with you. Randall A. Gross | csusac.ecs.csus.edu!tree!locke @ the UNIX Tree BBS, Sacramento, CA | ucbvax!ucdavis!csusac!tree!locke Sprintmail: A.R.Gross | DISCLAIMER: Ego loquito ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: "Hello, I'm Digit-Dialing ..." Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1991 14:22:39 GMT jpp@tygra.UUCP (John Palmer) writes: > Woman: "I'm telemarketing." > I go on to bawl her out for invading my privacy and tying up my > business line. I hand her some line about how that is illegal and that > she better not call me again or I'd call the police. She politely says, > "Thank you. Goodbye" a. It's not illegal. It is less than honorable to feed her a line like that. b. Personally, I would have thanked her for being so honest about what she was doing, and for taking the time to skip the rest of my group. All you're doing here is encouraging sleeze. c. Your organization has a history of doing the equivalent of telemarketing on Usenet, so why were you so bent out of shape over this? > Hmmmm. Someone wrote a very bad telemarketing script for her. They > actually told her to be *HONEST* about it!! Honesty is considered a negative characteristic at Detroit Direct Marketing Inc. That explains a lot. peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com ------------------------------ From: John G Dobnick Subject: Re: Convenience of Phone System Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 12:27:11 CDT TELECOM Moderator, responding to gast@cs.ucla.edu (David Gast) wrote: >> Barton.Bruce@camb.com wrote: >> Additionally, this particular scenario [voice recognition] has a >> huge security hole: I >> call someone, they record my voice, then they call someone, but pipe >> their input through a device that simulates my voice. Now they can >> easily represent themselves as me. > [Moderator's Note: And what, pray tell, is the difference between this > and sending someone a written letter who then forges my handwriting > and signs off on some fraudulent documents for me? With written communication, you already _have_ the hard copy written record suitable for evidentiary use, should it be necessary. With oral communications, you have to record the conversation. Current laws regarding recording of phone conversations preclude such recording in many cases -- namely those where the consent of _both_ parties is required. Seems like a tomato and avocado comparison to me. My $0.02 worth. John G Dobnick (JGD2) Computing Services Division @ University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee INTERNET: jgd@uwm.edu ATTnet: (414) 229-5727 UUCP: uunet!uwm!jgd ------------------------------ From: Paul Durham Subject: Re: Per Line Blocking? Reply-To: Paul Durham Organization: Microtel Pacific Research Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 02:08:05 GMT In article John Higdon writes: > To me, the term 'per line blocking' would be synonymous with 'no > Caller ID'.... > "What?", you say. "Do you want your line to always reveal your number > to any person you call that subscribes to Caller ID, or do you want it > to never reveal it?" Now realistically, what do you think 99.999% of > all telephone customers are going to answer at this point? "Never", of course. > Now as a customer, you order Caller ID. However, the rep becomes > uncharacteristically candid with you Not very likely ;-). > and points out that ten people in your area have "unblocked" lines > and suggests reconsidering your order. > So come on now, all you per line blocking advocates. Isn't per line > blocking just the new code for "no Caller ID"? No, not at all. If you are a caller ID zealot, you can screen your incoming calls to eliminate anyone calling without caller ID (automatically, of course). If anybody wants to call _you_ they will have to be unblocked. However, if they can get line blocking, people can prevent their phone numbers (and names) from being accumulated by businesses without any extra cost or inconvenience. Remember, people enjoy this _already_. To keep the network fully connected, per-call unblocking would have to be provided, of course. Everybody would be happy - except the telemarketers and the phone company (due to loss of caller ID revenue). Sounds good to me. P. Durham ------------------------------ From: Robert Thurlow Subject: Re: 900 Discussion on CNN Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx. Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1991 14:46:29 GMT In drears@pica.army.mil (Dennis G. Rears (FSAC)) writes: > Why should anything be forced upon the marketers of the calls? The > real underlying reason is to protect *STUPID* people from themselves. Are you a technology professional? How many people do you know who are not technology professionals? Do you think it is clear to all callers that the '9' after the '1' means they'll get a line item on their phone bill a month later? I know my family wouldn't all know this. I think voiding parents of responsibility for their kid's actions is stupid, too, but I either want free call-blocking so that I can make a blanket decision, or I want a PIN number to permit me to know that the call was not made by an untrusted person. > Should every business be required to have a phone number so that > people can complain? Of course not. Why should this be different? From the business end of things, I demand to be told a non-1-900 method of communicating with said company in the case of a dispute; either a regular phone number or a postal address will do. I do not want to get shafted by a company and have to depend on my telco to tell me how to contact the company, as I think that would place the telco in a conflict of interest that could make things touchy. Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com An employee and not a spokesman for Convex Computer Corp., Dallas, TX ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Documentation Wanted on January '90 AT&T Outage Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1991 03:09:57 GMT The best article I've seen on AT&T outage was in {Science News}. Try your library and the index for the magazine. Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) Subject: New AT&T Desk Sets With Displays = Tiny Risk Date: 14 Apr 91 04:07:56 GMT Speaking of those credit-card reading airport phones here in PacBell land, have you all noticed that they show (on the LCD) the digits, as you dial, *even after the call has connected*? (I.e. including whatever you key in to your favorite voice-response/voice-mail system.) Now maybe I'm just paranoid, but this always makes me glance over my shoulder when using these. Well, AT&T has gone one better. We've recently purchased several new desk-sets (single line model 730, two-line model 732). The interesting bit here is that on the nice display that shows date-time when on hook, and what you're dialing when off-hook, will also show you last-dialed when you pick up the phone again. It even obligingly scrolls through the first 16 digits (display is 12 wide) for you. I've been amusing myself walking around the office this weekend reading people's voicemail passwords off these. I don't think I'll ask for one anytime soon. (P.S. We've got "COCOT sleeze" and "telemarketing sleeze", but what do you call the new variety of sleeze that does inside-wiring and sells you cheap and/or unnecessary premises equipment? An amazing number of these have sprung up out here. (Actually, these AT&T sets seem pretty solid (except for the above feature); it's those godawful GE sets they sold us that I'm still peeved about ....)) Laird P. Broadfield INET: lairdb@crash.cts.com UUCP: {akgua, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 2:16:16 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Book Review: Facsimile Facts and Figures, 1990/91 A new reference work has come to my attention which may be of use to you if you are a large user of FAX. Authored by David Day, and published by the International Facsimile Association, "Facsimile Facts and Figures, 1990/91" includes several chapters devoted to these topics and others: Statistics, unique uses, public fax, a history and statistical overview, and the results of the Mitsubishi Home Office Facsimile Survey in full. The entire Hong Kong Telephone report is also included. Other sections discuss state and federal legislation pertaining to 'junk fax', fax directories, and fax networks. "Facsimile Facts and Figures, 1990/91 is 134 pages, 8.5" x 11" spiral bound. The price is $69.95 plus $9 shipping by Priority Mail or Federal Express. Credit cards accepted. Make checks payable to David Day. International Facsimile Assn. Order lines for book: 4023 Lakeview Drive 602-453-5330 Voice Lake Havasu City, AZ 86403 602-453-9234 FAX Tell them you read about it in TELECOM Digest. Thanks. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 18:31:51 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Offline a Few Days TELECOM Digest and comp.dcom.telecom are offline for a few days until I return from a personal family emergency matter in Kansas. Over the weekend, messages are appearing which were in the queue at the last minute. Please hold traffic to this newsgroup until about April 20. Thank you. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #292 ******************************  NEXT COMES ISSUES 289 WHICH WAS LATE IN ARRIVING, THEN 293 & 294 FOLLOW.  Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15636; 14 Apr 91 6:46 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19042; 13 Apr 91 20:15 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa03578; 13 Apr 91 19:10 CDT Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 18:25:53 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #289 BCC: Message-ID: <9104131825.ab09359@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Apr 91 18:25:40 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 289 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Going Offline a Few Days [TELECOM Moderator] Re: End of the [Party] Line [Alan R. Gross] Bridge Lifters [Larry Lippman] Open Letter to AT&T, re: Len Rose [H. Keith Henson] Mass Event 800/900? [Comp.Risks article, via Christopher Lott] 40,000 Lose Phone Service in Racine [UPI wire via Bill Berbenich] What is 700 Service? [David Schanen] Bad Bellcore Telephone Numbers in Piscataway, NJ? [Carl Moore] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 17:35:42 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Telecom Going Offline a Few Days I'm afraid the inevitable has arrived, and I'll be leaving town for a few days as of Monday evening, April 15. Dad's not gone yet, but we expect he will be in a day or two. From now through sometime Monday, I'll print as many Digests as possible to clear the queue. ** PLEASE SEND NO NEW MESSAGES TO TELECOM UNTIL LATE NEXT WEEK, APRIL 19 OR LATER. ** You'll know I'm back when you receive a Digest in your mail (or traffic in comp.dcom.telecom), most likely by Friday or Saturday. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ From: locke@tree.uucp (Alan R. Gross) Subject: Re: End of the [Party] Line Reply-To: locke@.PacBell.COM (Alan R. Gross) Organization: TREE BBS (916)332-4930 Sacramento, CA Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 04:34:22 GMT In article lars@spectrum.cmc.com (Lars Poulsen) writes: > story submitted by Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 > about the end of party line service in Woodbury, Connecticut. > I enjoyed the story, but would like to make a couple of technical > comments. I wish there were a way to get them back to Ms. Cappiello of > AP. >> By JANET L. CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writer >> Woodbury Telephone is being allowed to eliminate the service now >> because of a $1.8 million equipment upgrade, Mitchell said. >> Eliminating party lines also became imperative because of computerized >> 911-emergency response systems. >> When a caller dials 911, the caller's address appears on a computer >> screen at the dispatch center. With party lines, there's a risk that >> the address could be that of the other customer, Mitchell said. > This does not ring true to me. If the switch software can provide ANI > for billing, I would expect it to provide ANI for E911 witout > problems. It disturbs me when businesses deliberately tell lies to > regulatory agencies. (It also disturbs me that we set up regulatory > agencies that aren't technically competent to see through such fibs). > While this particular obfuscation is relatively harmless, I bet that > if the company fibs about harmless things they probably lie through > their teeth about facts that have a material impact on the > ratesetting. It is true that you can get ANI from a two party line, but when it comes to four party lines or larger, it doesn't work so well. I speak from experience, not technical knowledge, btw. When I lived in Fairbanks, they had two and four party lines, and the Alascom operator *always* had you state the number you were calling from before she would place the call through when calling from a four party line. This was not the case on two party lines, but some interesting situations did arise in billing from the Goldstream Valley, which is an area a few miles away from Fairbanks with all two-party lines. The switch was in an old beater trailer, and the grounding in the area was extremely poor. Every couple of weeks, someone in Goldstream would get billed their party line's long distance calls, which demonstrates that ANI on two-party lines can get flaky. Randall A. Gross | csusac.ecs.csus.edu!tree!locke @ the UNIX Tree BBS, Sacramento, CA | ucbvax!ucdavis!csusac!tree!locke Sprintmail: A.R.Gross | DISCLAIMER: Ego loquito ------------------------------ Subject: Bridge Lifters Date: 10 Apr 91 23:12:36 EST (Wed) From: Larry Lippman In article wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) writes: > But there was ANOTHER distinctive noise you could hear during ring > cycle: bridge lifters. Here's the story, as it was explained to me: Bridge lifters are nothing more than a dual-winding saturable inductor, typically a WECo 1574-type inductor. Bridge lifters are most commonly used on business lines which have an off-premises extension in a telephone answering service or other location. In such cases, both loops originate in the CO. If the combined parallel impedance of both loops is low enough, degradation of transmission can occur. The bridge lifter functions to eliminate such parallel impedance. The bridge lifter inductor is specially designed to be *very* saturable at 20 mA of DC loop current (the minimum expected value for an off-hook station). This inductor is a dual-winding device intended to be connected in series with a subscriber loop. With no DC current flow, the inserted impedance of the bridge lifter could be as high as 100,000 ohms. With 20 mA of loop current, the inserted impedance is typically less than 50 ohms. Pure DC resistance of the inductor is typically 10 ohms. Both ringing and DC supervision pass through a bridge lifter inductor with almost no attenuation in either the on-hook or off-hook state. In the case of say, a business line with a bridged connection to a telephone answering service, *both* loops are connected in series with their own inductor. Therefore, when either loop is in use, the other is "transparent" unless it goes off-hook to establish loop current flow. Some variations of bridge lifters contained resistors or diodes across the inductor windings in order to minimize effects of inductive noise resulting from power lines. Bridge lifters are also used to facilitate temporary "back-tap" connections during central office cutovers if the new CO is in another building. > Party lines were intended for conservation of wire. Thus, almost all party line subscribers were in close proximity to each other resulting in only one loop leaving the CO. Bridge lifter inductors therefore had almost no application on party lines. > Cable is capacitive. When Mr. Tip was dialing, he was breaking the > loop current with the pulser in his dial. BUT, the stub going off to > Sleeve's condo had a lot of capacitance in it, and it terminated in a > good sized ringer cap, too. (Maybe several, if Ms. Sleeve had a set in > each room.) While bridge lifter inductors do have some effect on reducing dial pulse distortion, it is minimal. This should not be surprising if one considers that the DC resistance of bridge lifter inductors is only about 10 ohms, and that the frequency domain of dial pulsing is only about 10 Hz. Thus, the bridge lifter inductor presents little insertion loss at DC or 10 Hz. > So Ma called her elves at Murray Hill, and they invented a bridge > lifter. It goes between the CO and the outgoing pair and lifts > (disconnects) Mr. Tip when Ms. Sleeve is off-hook, and vice versa. I'm > now speaking out of my hat, but I THINK it only affected things during > dialing. Otherwise, how could the other party demand surrender of the > pair for an emergency? If you consider what I have explained so far, you should realize that bridge lifter inductors have an effect any time there is loop *current* - whether it be during dialing, talking or the shunt effects of ringing. > In any case, you can HEAR the bridge lifter, in an office with ringing > sidetone, (as opposed to those that give you the switch generated > tone) as a "raspy" quality to the ring. I often notice this while > calling a doctor's office. The variation in audible ringing components *could* be the result of a resonant network created by the bridge lifter, or it could be the result of a resonant network created by the ringing detection circuit in a telephone answering service. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: hkhenson@cup.portal.com Subject: Open Letter to AT&T, re: Len Rose Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 13:03:12 PDT The following letter may be reproduced and posted as desired. Keith Henson H. Keith Henson 1794 Cardel Way San Jose, CA 95124 March 29, 1991 Robert E. Allen Chairman of the Board ATT Corporate Offices 550 Madison Ave. New York, NY 10022 Dear Mr. Allen: As a loyal ATT long-distance customer all my life, I feel I owe you an explanation for canceling my ATT long-distance service. I have never had a problem with ATT service, operators, or audio quality. I was more than willing to pay the small premium, and have been a heavy user of ATT long-distance services for the past 15 years. I am also a consultant in the computer business who has used Unix and its derivatives intermittently over the past 10 years. Outside of my technical work I have long been involved in legal and political issues related to high technology, especially space. One of my past activities involved the political defeat of an oppressive United Nations treaty. I have also taken substantial personal risks in opposing the organizations of Lyndon LaRouche. During the last three years I have been personally involved with email privacy issues. Because of my interest in email privacy, I have closely followed the abusive activities of Southern Bell and the Secret Service in the Phrack/Craig Neidorf case and the activities of ATT and the Secret Service with respect to the recently concluded case involving Len Rose. Both cases seem to me to be attempts to make draconian "zero tolerance" examples of people who are -- at most -- gadflies. In actuality, people who were pointing out deficiencies and methods of attack on Unix systems should be considered *resources* instead of villains. I consider this head-in-the-sand "suppress behavior" instead of "fix the problems" approach on the part of ATT and the government to be potentially disastrous to the social fabric. The one thing we don't need is a number of alienated programmers or engineers mucking up the infrastructure or teaching real criminals or terrorists how to do it. I find the deception of various aspects of ATT and the operating companies to obtain behavior suppression activities from the government to be disgusting, and certainly not in your long-term interest. A specific example of deception is ATT's pricing login.c (the short program in question in the Len Rose case) at over $77,000 so the government could obtain a felony conviction for "interstate wire fraud." Writing a version of login.c is often assigned as a simple exercise in first-semester programming classes. It exists in thousands of versions, in hundreds of thousands of copies. The inflation is consistent with Southern Bell's behavior in claiming a $79,000 value for the E911 document which they admitted at trial could be obtained for $13. I know you can argue that the person involved should not have plead guilty if he could defend himself using these arguments in court. Unlike Craig Neidorf, Len Rose lacked parents who could put up over a hundred thousand dollars to defend him, and your company and the Secret Service seem to have been involved in destroying his potential to even feed himself, his wife, and two small children. At least he gets fed and housed while in jail, and his wife can go on welfare. All, of course, at the taxpayer's expense. There are few ways to curtail abuses by the law (unless you happen to catch them on videotape!) and I know of no effective methods to express my opinion of Southern Bell's activities even if I lived in their service area. But I can express my anger at ATT by not purchasing your services or products, and encouraging others to do the same. By the time this reaches your desk, I will have switched my voice and computer phones to one of the other long-distance carriers. My consulting practice has often involved selecting hardware and operating systems. In any case where there is an alternative, I will not recommend Unix, ATT hardware, or NCR hardware if you manage to buy them. Yours in anger, H. Keith Henson cc: Telecom Digest, comp.risk, etc. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 09:22:02 -0400 From: Christopher Lott Subject: Mass Event 800/900? The following was posted to comp.risks; I've abbreviated the post slightly: From: woody@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Bill Woodcock) Subject: Re: Tricky application of Caller ID (Davis, RISKS-11.42) >> imagine, say, 10,000 kids in the audience [ hold phones up to TV speaker, >> which plays DTMF ]. You've got 10,000 phones dialing the same number >> simultaneously. How many of those calls do you think will get through? > In answer to your question, all 10,000 of them will get through. Sprint has a > service called "Mass Event 900/800" for doing exactly this. It can handle, > coincidentally, 10,000 calls simultaneously, and is offered to their larger > 800 and 900 customers. I've heard, but not been able to substantiate, that > AT&T has a similar service. Can anyone explain more about this? How is it done? Does it require hundreds of operators "standing by Right Now!"? Christopher Lott \/ Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 cml@cs.umd.edu /\ 4122 AV Williams Bldg 301 405-2721 ------------------------------ From: bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech.edu Subject: 40,000 Lose Phone Service in Racine (from UPI wire) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 16:07:32 EDT Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu UPce 04/10 1244 40,000 without phones for about five hours RACINE, Wis. (UPI) -- Some 40,000 customers were left without telephone service in Racine for nearly five hours Wednesday because of the failure of a switching unit in Wisconsin Bell's Racine office. Wisconsin Bell spokesman Maurie Louret said the unit failed about 6 a.m., leaving 40,000 customers unable to make or receive any phone calls. The switching unit was repaired and brought back on line at 10:45 a.m. The prefixes affected by the outage were 631, 632, 633, 634, 636 and 637. Louret said Wisconsin Bell took mobile telephones to Racine for use by emergency services and major customers. Louret said the switching unit manufactured by AT&T is a computer and its central processing unit failed for unknown reasons. He said some circuit packs were replaced and some reprogramming was done and the system began working again at 10:45 a.m. He said many people trying to place calls at the same time caused some congestion in the system after it was brought back up. Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu ------------------------------ From: David Schanen Subject: What is 700 Service? Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1991 06:11:58 GMT I used to sell WATS, 800 and 900 service for ATT/Mountain Bell but I never heard of 700 service until just recently. I'm sure someone out there who will enlighten me(us). Dave Inet: mtv@milton.u.washington.edu * 8kyu * UUNET: ...uunet!uw-beaver!u!mtv [Moderator's Note: 700 is used by the various LD carriers for special features and services of their own. For example, AT&T uses it for their Alliance Teleconferencing; Telecom USA has its Voice News Network on those lines, etc. When you dial 700-xxx-xxxx, *which* 700 you get depends on your default LD carrier. Dialing 700-555-4141 will identify the LD carrier serving your line with one plus dialing. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 17:12:32 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Bad Bellcore Telephone Numbers in Piscataway, NJ? Recently, the following numbers were posted to the Digest as being at or near Bellcore Customer Service in Piscataway, NJ: 201-275-2090 for Telex order (possibly a 752 prefix?) 201-600-2000 for TeleResource Service (should be 699 prefix?) These are not valid prefixes, and I have added questions above in parentheses. Also, if these are in the Piscataway area, they will be fully cut over to 908 in about two months. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #289 ******************************  ISSUE 289 WAS LATE AND IS FILED OUT OF ORDER. 293 AND UPWARD NOW FOLLOW.   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09158; 15 Apr 91 3:17 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21580; 15 Apr 91 1:47 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa17005; 15 Apr 91 0:42 CDT Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 0:00:09 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #293 BCC: Message-ID: <9104150000.ab29647@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 15 Apr 91 00:00:04 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 293 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [John R. Levine] Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [Nigel Allen] Re: Western Electric Power Cable [Don H. Kemp] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Tim Irvin] Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Stephen Tell] Re: Time Restricted Connection to Phone System [Macy Hallock] Satellite and Fiber Optic Cable Communications to Israel [Hank Nussbacher] RBOCs and Information Services [Peter Marshall] Cost of 9.6/19.2 Kbps Leased Line - Bay Area to Midwest [Aaron Y.T. Cheung] Books on NetWare [Wayne Ngai] Fighting the Hyatt Hotel Surcharges [Brian Gordon] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 12 Apr 91 10:14:58 EDT (Fri) From: "John R. Levine" In article you write: > This sounds like it is emulating the procedure used by credit card > verification devices that are normally connected to POS terminals. Nope, the verification terminals use 300 baud ASCII with the classic and extremely cheap 103 FSK modem encoding. I know because a few years ago when I was at Javelin Software I programmed one of the PCs on our network to emulate one of them to verify and submit phone order credit card transactions from the order database. For payphones, they use DTMF since phones already have DTMF generators. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Apr 91 09:24 EDT From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada In Volume 11, Issue 285, Message 1 of 10, John R. Levine writes: > My experience with those phones while waiting for a plane at San Jose > one day is that half of them don't really work. That is, they can't > read the stripe on any of my credit cards. If your employer uses a magnetic card system (rather than conventional metal keys), you may find the magnetic stripes on your credit cards and telephone calling cards damaged quite often. (If this is happening, not only will you find it hard or impossible to use card reader phones; merchants who call for authorization on your credit card purchases will have to punch in your card number manually, and you won't be able to use a banking machine.) Credit card issuers and telephone companies realize that the magnetic stripe on their cards wears out for a number of reasons. If you have a card that won't work, just call the issuer and say that the magnetic stripe is damaged, and that you would like a replacement. As well, it's a good idea to carry your building access card (CardKey (R) or whatever) separately from your credit cards. Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp ------------------------------ From: Don H Kemp Subject: Re: Western Electric Power Cable Date: 14 Apr 91 20:46:45 GMT kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > As a somewhat interesting aside, WECo 750 MCM power cable had > "non-traditional" uses. A sixteen inch length (which weighs about > three pounds) makes an excellent "attitude adjustment tool" for > telephone company personnel who have to work in crime-ridden urban > areas. I once saw its effectiveness in deterring a car theft in the > parking lot of a New Jersey Bell central office in Newark. The power > cable section also had the advantage of not being an unlawful weapon. > After all, it's an engineering sample, right? :-) Ah, yes. A chunk of power cable (either 750 MCM or 500 MCM) with an appropriate length of handgrip made, of course, by wrapping the cable with "12 cord". Brings back memories. First ran across this use for the stuff back in 1964 when I was working for WECo, installing what was claimed to be the largest crossbar tandem office in the country. This office was on lower Mission Street in San Francisco, which (at that time, haven't been back since '73) _not_ one of the "nicest" parts of town. Used to carry such a critter across the handlebars of my bike. Never did have occasion to put it to use though. Don H Kemp B B & K Associates, Inc. Rutland, VT uunet!uvm-gen!teletech!dhk ------------------------------ Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 14:20:38 +22323328 From: irvin@northstar105.dartmouth.edu In TELECOM Digest V11 #288, Moderator writes: > Big cities got 'short pull' area codes and small towns got > 'long pull' area codes. Would you explain the terms 'short pull' and 'long pull'. Tim Irvin [Moderator's Note: Back in the days when rotary, or pulse dialing was very prevalent, the numbers on the dial which required a longer time to pull forward and spin back to their resting place, i.e. 7,8,9,0 were fashionable in some quarters, but not in others. 1,2,3,4,5,6 took a shorter period of time to pull and release. Many or perhaps most business places, and certainly the more fashionable residence hotels wanted xx-hundred and x-thousand leading numbers for their switchboards. You'd have thought they'd want 2111, 3111, 2121 and other 'faster to dial' numbers, but they didn't. Big cities were most likely to receive lots of calls, therefore the area codes were made from 'short' numbers; i.e. New York = 212, El Lay = 213, Chicago = 312. East Podunk, Kalamazoo, and Timbuck, too got the 7xx and 8xx codes. But oddly, Our Nation's (drug and murder) Capital got 202, partly short and partly long. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Stephen Tell Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Date: 15 Apr 91 02:57:06 GMT Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill In article winslade@zeus.unomaha.edu (JOHN WINSLADE) writes: > In a recent article, Patrick writes: >> Over the weekend I bought a CPS-200 Call Forwarding System from Radio >> Shack. At the local store here, they had one left, marked down to >> $29.95, and I thought that price alone made it worthwhile. Based on discussion here I went and looked at one, and then bought the last one they had here in Chapel Hill. > That's a very interesting use for the unit. Am I correct to assume > that the reason it is being closed out is that it is almost useless as > a 'real' call diverter because (among other things) it simply bridges > the two lines which results in the acoustic efficiency close to that > of tin cans and string? The last page of the instruction booklet contains a schematic for the unit. This is really why I bought it. Its tiny; use a magnifying glass or enlarging xerox machine. There do appear to be some opamps and stuff between the isolation transformers (one per line). I haven't analyzed the circuit yet. The heart of the thing is a 40-pin DIP with smaller-than-usual pin spacing. Its obviously one of those single-chip computers, although I don't recognize it: The schematic calls it a TMS7DC42. The chip itself is labeled: TCT1061 MAS (delta) 727 02 Where (delta) indicates a symbol that looks a lot like the greek letter of that name. Most of the pins on the chip are clearly I/O lines; the pins are labeled on the schematic: A0-7, B0-7, C0-7, D0-7, INT1*, INT3*, VSS, VDD, MC, RESET*, XTAL1, and XTAL2. Anyone recognize this beastie? I haven't done much investigating yet. If I can't find out what chip this is, I may just desolder it and wire the I/O pins up to an 8052 based board or somthing. Of course I'll get to do software from scratch that way, but I probably couldn't read the code out of the chip that's in there. Its probably a mask-programmed thingy. It looks like a good toy for someone who's comfortable with a soldering iron and EPROM programmer. If I find out anything more I will follow up if there's interest in projects based around this thing. Steve Tell tell@cs.unc.edu H: +1 919 968 1792 #5L Estes Park apts CS Grad Student, UNC Chapel Hill. W: +1 919 962 1845 Carrboro NC 27510 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 17:23 EDT From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: Time Restricted Connection to Phone System Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA In article you write: > I'm not sure what kind of device to ask for, so maybe if I describe > the problem/application: > We have a PC power controller/protection device with the capability > to power up on detection of ring signal on a phone line to which which > it is is connected (via modular jack). The line is then chained to the > modem. > We have a four-line 1A2 phone system (no laughing !) and the modem > is currently connected to the phone system through a (discontinued) > Radio Shack box that allows one modular device to be connected to any > one of five possible lines at a time through depressing any one of > five buttons. I never laugh at 1A2. I've literally installed thousands of 1A2 sets over the years. Simple, but reliable. We install 1A2 systems behind PBX's in police departments and radio station studios to this day. That's about it, though. Well, actually all you need is a relay in line with the phone line to the computer from the RS multiline adapter. I'd use a little RS timer or something. How about a $5 RS lamp timer, with a 110VAC DPDT relay, with a line cord plugged into the timer and phone cords on its terminals ... maybe something a little more fancy to allow use all day Sat and Sun, too. If you are uncomfortable with construction of this, I could give you a hand ... it'd be kinda fun ... I've built several items like this for our customers over the years. You'd be surprised at some of the special assemblies I've made up to work behind 1A2 over the years, most of which would simply not be possible behind anything else. > P.S. Looking for used, touch-tone, 1A2 phones and boxes in good > working condition (for use, not resale). Will pay a nominal amount and > any shipping for your obsolete junk gathering dust. Hey, what can I > say, we're traditionalists. You've come to the right place. Exactly what type do you want? State: 1 - color. 2 - numbers off bottom of phone. 3 - manufacturer of set. Most touch tone phones have a model number that starts with a 2. For instance 280045-OBA-40M would be a typical ITT number for a ten button set. I have a few ten buttons left. I sell them off at hamfests. I'm going to haul them to the Dayton hamfest on 4/26, so get your order in now. I'll sell them for $10 used, $20 new + shipping, this covers my cost of opening up and testing each set. I also have a few six button sets. (And even a few rotary dial sets, too ...) At hamfests I sell them for $5 more. (No shipping, though.) (No doubt others on the net have a few to spare, too. I hear John Higdon has a roomful to spare. David Lesher has quite a few, too, but probably cannot find them right now.) The only reason I do this is that I've worked with them for twenty years and its kinda fun for me to get back to 1A2 once in a while. At the office it all electronic PBX's, key systems and networks ... hardly a relay in the bunch. I also have a lot of other 1A2 parts: key cells, cards, intercoms and such. I might have some keystrips and speakerphones, too. Need any? BTW - I have a Panasonic KXT308 Key System in by house, with a four line 1A2 and six button sets in my computer room ... just 'cuz I like them, too. My sons like the Panasonic phones better because they have a digital display and speakerphone. I'm happy with my 2564 set ... it feels like a real phone to me. The Panasonics are pretty nice though. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 10:39:26 IST From: Hank Nussbacher Subject: Satellite and Fiber Optic Cable Communications to Israel First to the fiber optic sub-oceanic cable: EMOS (Euro-Mediterranean Optical System) is 2900km long and is owned jointly by 13 countries: Israel, Turkey, Greece, Italy, France, England, Germany, Holland, Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, USA and Canada. The cost for installation has been $107 million. The main station for EMOS is in Palermo-Sicily where it hooks up to TAT-9 and then interconnects to TAT-8. The termination points for EMOS among the Mediterranean countries are: Israel: Tel-Aviv; Turkey: Marmaris; Greece: Lechaina. EMOS was made operational as of January, 1991 during the Gulf War. EMOS replaces two existing copper cables for Israel: Tel-Pal (Tel-Aviv to Palermo) initiated in 1975 and carries 3,000 calls. Mar-Tel (Tel Aviv to Marseille) initiated in 1968 and carries 128 calls. EMOS will support 20,000 simultaneous calls. On the satellite (which incidentally comes from the Arab word satala which means to spin or rotate) end of the picture, Israel will have its own satelitte called AMOS (African Mediterranean System) which will have six transponders and will be located at 15E over Zaire. These six transponders will replace the three Israel currently leases from Intelsat (Intelsat V F12 at 1W). AMOS will be a minisatellite and strictly KU-band and will be operational in 1993. Hank Nussbacher Israel ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Apr 91 08:44:48 -0700 From: Peter Marshall Subject: RBOCs and Information Services According to articles in COMMUNICATIONS DAILY and THE NEW YORK TIMES on 4/5, Judge Greene has scheduled oral argument for 4/18-19 on question of RBOC ownership of info services; while in the 4/1 INDUSTRY WEEK, an A.T. Kearney, Inc. consultant stated, "I don't believe that the Bell companies bring any distinctive competency or advantage to offering content-based information services," and that collecting and adding value to such services is "just beyond their area of expertise." ------------------------------ From: "Aaron Y.T. Cheung" From: aaron@ahkcus.org (Aaron Y.T. Cheung) Subject: Cost of 9.6/19.2 Kbps Leased Line - Bay Area to Midwest Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1991 19:06:42 GMT Would appreciate information (cost expectations and contacts information if any) of running a 9600/19200 bps digital (or analog) leased line (satellite or terrestrial) between East Cost and Midwest. In particular, looking for between the Bay Area and Minnesota/ Illinois. Any info appreciated; similar references wanted also. Thanks, aaron (aaron@ahkcus.org) ------------------------------ From: Wayne Ngai Subject: Books Wanted on NetWare Date: 14 Apr 91 22:55:00 GMT Hi! I am looking for some good books on the subject "NetWare". Could anyone out there please tell me as to what books on NetWare that they would recommend getting for a person like me who doesn't know anything about it? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! If any of you knows a good book on NetWare for those people who don't know anything about it such as myself, Please send email to me as to what you would suggest. Thanks in Advance! Wayne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 18:14:15 PDT From: Brian Gordon Subject: Fighting the Hyatt Hotel Surcharges I just finished writing a letter to the president of the Hyatt Hotel chain -- at the address provided on their "please send us your comments" form -- complaining about their phone surcharge policies. The more of us who take the time to do that, the better chance we have of reversing the trend. The specific hotel was the Hyatt Regency in Sacramento, but the policy is, I presume, chain-wide. Their default LD carrier isn't stated, but a direct dial calls costs "AT&T operated assisted rates PLUS $0.75 access charge PLUS a $0.20 per minute surcharge". 800 calls are free -- except that an 800 call to contact an alternate LD carrier carries the $0.75 access charge. That means that a twenty-minute call home, for which they have no incremental expense, costs you the phone charges PLUS about $5.00. That pays for your personal 800 number for a month! Every letter of complaint helps. I pointed out that that kind of rip-off would better suit a $19.95 Motel, not a $100 Hyatt -- and that many of the $19.95 places don't do it!! That makes it easier for me to decide where to spend my hotel dollars. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #293 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25338; 15 Apr 91 20:45 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab23985; 15 Apr 91 18:57 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11588; 15 Apr 91 17:51 CDT Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 17:39:37 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #294 BCC: Message-ID: <9104151739.ab02250@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 15 Apr 91 17:38:46 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 294 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: How Were Large Call Volumes Handled Long Ago? [Macy Hallock] Re: Seeking 9600/4800/2400 Voice CODEC's [Macy Hallock] Re: TX CID -- Mandatory Blocking [Peter Marshall] Re: Invadion of the Phone Snatchers (Why Bother With $0.25) [Ralph Moonen] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [Michael Klein] Re: 900 Discussion on CNN [Dennis G. Rears] Re: Special Screwdriver Wanted [Tom Knight] London Code Split (was: Dublin Number Expansion) [John Slater] Experimenting With AT&T's Account Management [Joel B. Levin] Interesting Real Estate Opportunity [David Brightbill] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 16:03 EDT From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: How Were Large Call Volumes Handled Long Ago? Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA In article : > What did recipients of large volumes of calls do before ACDs? Did > someone manually distribute calls? Well, Western Electric made electromechanical ACD's back into the '50's as I recall. The site I remember was a variation of a 701 as I recall. I can't remember the exact offical designation. I'd have to drag out my old catalogs, but I think either SC or AE made something along the same lines. These were true ACD's and offered supervisor positions along with some indication of load. I also recall seeing an ACD setup based on a 101ESS node slaved out of the central office. ACD's were usually used only in larger installations way back then. Frankly, ACD's were not used by most organizations of small and medium size until the '70's. Small and medium sized installations were handled in different ways: We had a lot of dispatch areas that were nothing more that very big (60 button) call directors with a large rotary hunt line group feeding them. Most of the large Police Dept. dispatch areas I saw back in the '60's were done this way. They were often supported with a 2040 Dialpak PAX for intercom and call transfer. (Boy, I barely remember these for some reason.) In the early '70's, the first crossbar PBX's with circular rotary hunt groups were introduced. Many of these were used as pseudo-ACD's, often with 1A2 systems behind them. Early Rolm and Philco electronic PBX's did not have any real ACD features, either. They called circular hunt groups ACD groups, but the introduction of real traffic oriented ACD algorithims had to wait until CPU and RAM got a bit less expensive. > Also, there was a mention some time ago of an ACD that can > periodically announce your position in the queue, and the average wait > time from that point. Does this actually exist? I've never heard one > do that ... as someone who seems to spend a lot of time on hold, I'd > love to know how much longer. There are a couple of ACD manufacturers doing this now. Technokron (sp?), Rockwell, and Aspect have demonstrated these features, and tell me they are delivering the products. Several PBX manufacturers are in the process of introducing these features. I recently saw a Mitel SX-2000 set up for this feature, and many others say they will deliver this soon (Fujitsu 9600, NT Meridian, AT&T, Rolm, Tadiran, and others.) Other features that are now being seen in the medium size systems that were previously seen only in larger systems: - Predictive routing: When a call lands in the system, the current call load is calculated, and the call is set to overflow positions (at the same site or at other locations) if the system predicts that the call would have to hold beyond certain time period while holding for the first choice ACD group. - Call Center Management: The system prints out reports showing current loading and the past half hour's load. Full shift analysis and reporting also provided. Some systems use an external processor for management reporting and can assist in estimating call center staffing requirements based on accumlated history. This can also be used to show which agents are the most/least productive. - Off Premise Overflow: Too busy? Send the calls to another call center ... This can also be used to send calls to agents working at home (kinda like what some of the 900 dial-a-friend services are now doing...) - System Load Display: The present holding time and number of calls holding are displayed on electronic wall displays and/or the agent phones... keeps up the pressure to keep things moving... Side note: We now have auto-attendant systems that add some intelligent call holding features to a phone system. If you call and reach a busy station, the system announces: There is one call holding presently, press 1 to hold. (Other use can be made of this feature, too.) Public announcement: Dayton Hamvention (currently the largest amateur radio convention in the world) is April 26-28. Think of 10,000 nerds accompanied by massive intermodulation products. Its a very worthwhile convention, with more and more emphasis on the overlapping fields of telecom and computers. We are currently accepting suggestions for a simplex frequency for all internet/telecom types to meet on. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 17:34 EDT From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: Seeking 9600/4800/2400 Voice CODEC's Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA In article is written: > Ideally I need voice codec hardware that can compress/decompress voice > down to selectable rates of 9600,4800 and 2400 bits/sec. There are several companies now doing this. I have worked with Micom (800-MICOM-US) and Republic Telecom equipment. Timeplex, Stratacom and others do this now as well. Recently a couple of companies have advertised in _Data Communications_ and _Network World_ small, modem sized stand alone units. The names escape me at the moment... > If such a single unit or multiple units exist, can they support OPX > (Off Premise Exchange) and SLT (Single Line Telephone) type interfaces? > (I'm assuming OPX and SLT are valid interfaces.) Most any type of line, with the proper signalling modules, can be supported. Most of those units accomodate either in-band or out of band (part of data stream) signalling. > Any information that can help me identify integrated circuits or > actual commercially available hardware (now or in the near future) > will be greatly appreciated. Sorry, I only work with assembled units, so I can give no codec info. You can give be a call at my office (216) 778-6233 (Cleveland) to discuss this ... or use macy@ncoast.org Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy ------------------------------ Subject: Re: TX CID -- Mandatory Blocking From: Peter Marshall Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 12:23:52 PDT Your commentary seems likely premature as the TX PUC matter you are reacting to is apparently a proposed rule that seems to include a "baseline line blocking" component. Peter Marshall halcyon!peterm@seattleu.edu The 23:00 News and Mail Service - +1 206 292 9048 - Seattle, WA USA ------------------------------ From: rmoonen@hvlpa.att.com Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 09:48 MDT Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers (Why Bother With $0.25) Kent Borg wrote: >> friends -- also here in Chicago (suburbs) -- that have had the same >> experience with Illinois Bell: a refund check for $0.25! > A few years ago (like five) I got a check for 35 cents -- or some such > -- from Pac Bell. A couple of years ago, the Dutch PTT had to refund *every* telephone subscriber $0.71, because the billing equipment wasn't billing the first five minutes correctly. The Organisation of Elderly Citizens then started a law-suit against the PTT, which they won, and the PTT had to pay back every subscriber. Ralph Moonen rmoonen@[hvlpa|ihlpb].att.com (+31) 35-871380 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 10:10:54 EDT From: Michael Klein Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers > [Moderator's Note: Well, but at least with the IBT refund coupons (I > refuse to call them checks!) you can redeem them with your phone bill. > They say that on the front of the piece of paper. I would be > embarassed to send them a COCOT refund coupon along with my phone bill > payment, although I guess I could. PAT] Based on my recent experience in Atlanta, BellSouth refunds your quarter as a check, about two to three weeks after the refund was requested. The first time I lost my quarter, the operator first tried to connect me. When this failed, I was transferred to the "refund operator". The check came with an El Paso, Texas postmark, drawn on one of those banks that mail out the rebates for Kodak batteries and Fruit-of-the- Loom underwear. Michael Klein, BellSouth Services, Inc., Atlanta, GA ...!gatech!blsouth!klein ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 15:52:54 EDT From: "Dennis G. Rears (FSAC)" Subject: Re: 900 Discussion on CNN Robert Thurlow writes: > In drears@pica.army.mil (Dennis G. > Rears (FSAC)) writes: >> Why should anything be forced upon the marketers of the calls? The >> real underlying reason is to protect *STUPID* people from themselves. > Are you a technology professional? How many people do you know who > are not technology professionals? Do you think it is clear to all > callers that the '9' after the '1' means they'll get a line item on > their phone bill a month later? I know my family wouldn't all know > this. This has nothing to do with technology!!! In this world, there are countless legal schemes that are made to part a sucker with his money. 900 numbers are but one of them. I know I will get plenty of flamage for this but, If a caller does not realize there is a charge for 900 numbers I hope they *GET BURNED AND BURNED BADLY*! What do they think, somone is providing the "service" for free? Each person is responsible for his actions. > I think voiding parents of responsibility for their kid's actions is > stupid, too, but I either want free call-blocking so that I can make > a blanket decision, or I want a PIN number to permit me to know that > the call was not made by an untrusted person. I agree with the call-blocking, but still it is *your* phone, *your responsibility*. If TPC can provide the service great, if not, it is your problem to keep 900 dialers off of it, not TPC. >> Should every business be required to have a phone number so that >> people can complain? Of course not. Why should this be different? > From the business end of things, I demand to be told a non-1-900 > method of communicating with said company in the case of a dispute; > either a regular phone number or a postal address will do. I do not > want to get shafted by a company and have to depend on my telco to > tell me how to contact the company, as I think that would place the > telco in a conflict of interest that could make things touchy. To put it simply, you are in no business to demand, you have nothing to back up your demands with. You can refuse to call them but then again if you didn't call them in the first place you wouldn't have a problem. If you do have a dispute with them, write the TPC and tell them of the dispute. It is then up to the 900 company to collect directly from you. dennis ------------------------------ From: Tom Knight Subject: Re: Special Screwdriver Wanted Date: 15 Apr 91 21:10:39 GMT Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory The fishhook remover on a Fisherman Swiss Army knife (the two pins at the end of the scaler) fit into most of the two pin security screws. It's the only use I've found for that blade. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 10:42:28 BST From: John Slater Subject: London Code Split (was: Dublin Number Expansion) Bob Goudreau wrote: >> I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that >> they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet >> unspecified future use. >> I believe (and I don't speak for my employer on this) that as 01 is >> already the international dialling sequence (eg the USA is 0101), 017 >> and 018 were out of the question, or just plain confusing. > Beg your pardon? I thought (and your own example seems to prove) that > the international prefix was "010", not "01". So where's the > ambiguity for 017, 018, or indeed any 01x (as long as x != 0)? Indeed. No ambiguity, but I was mistaken originally in claiming that the entire "01..." sequence was now clear. And I should know, as my Mercury account shows all too clearly how many international calls I make :-( However it's worth pointing out that there is a proposal to standardise the international access code throughout the world. I believe "00" is proposed, as this is used in quite a few countries already. Germany springs to mind. This would fit in with both US and UK systems without conflict. (Go ahead, tell me I'm wrong! :-) Sorry, I can't substantiate this, or remember where I first heard about it (here, perhaps?) John Slater Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office ------------------------------ From: "Joel B. Levin" Subject: Experimenting With AT&T's Account Management Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 07:39:53 EDT I have forgotten the name of AT&T's plan, but I refer to the account management plan whereby each user of a phone (roommates, for instance) dial all long distance calls with 0+ and then enter a personal four digit code beginning with 15 instead of a calling card number. I have reported here before that when I dialled calls using 10288+0+ (Sprint is my default carrier) and entered 1511# or 1512# after the boing I heard the "thank you" and the call went through, this when calling from my home phone on a Nashua, NH central office. I have received my first billing since I began making these calls, and I have some good news and some bad news. The good news: first, as I said, the calls went through. Second, I was charged the straight station-to-station direct dialled rate with no surcharge for use of any 0+ services. The bad news: the calls, listed on the AT&T page of my New England Telephone bill, are shown as if they had been dialled with 1+; they are listed in chronological order with no indication that any group were distinguished in any special way from any others. So I can dial them that way, but without making prior arrangements with AT&T it has no effect. Aside: this experiment cost me a small amount of money; except for the day AT&T was having its eleven cent sale, these calls cost me 20% to 30% more than they would have on Sprint before the Sprint-plus discount. Now, before you get excited about that, I should say that these were all one minute night rate calls forty miles to Boston, and cost me $.12 or $.13 where Sprint would charge $.10. JBL nets: levin@bbn.com | BBN Communications or: ...!bbn!levin | M/S 20/7A POTS: +1 617 873 3463 | 150 Cambridge Park Drive FAX: +1 617 873 8202 | Cambridge, MA 02140 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 11:31:30 -0400 From: David Brightbill Subject: Interesting Real Estate Opportunity I was down in Panacea, Florida this past weekend and ran across a real estate opportunity which may be of interest to comp.dcom.telecom readers. While trying to locate a sandblast contractor, I came across a microwave tower with a "For Sale " sign posted in front of it. It's a large tower on an acre or so of land. It has at least five antennas/feed horns on it. The sign was gone from the wall of the equipment building but local folks said that it used to say "Southern Bell" on it. The site was maintained, and from the way that the electric meter was spinning, I'd guess that the equipment is currently in use. Panacea is on the Gulf coast about 40 miles south of Tallahassee. The real estate sign has an 800 number on it which I didn't copy down ... but if you ever wanted to own your own microwave facility, come on down to Panacea. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #294 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02068; 15 Apr 91 22:44 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24973; 15 Apr 91 21:02 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27770; 15 Apr 91 19:57 CDT Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 18:52:31 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #295 BCC: Message-ID: <9104151852.ab02200@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 15 Apr 91 18:52:20 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 295 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson "Toggles" are Poor Interface Design [Gordon Burditt] "Selective" Call Waiting [Joel B. Levin] Telecom Assistance Available for Kurdish Refugees [Carl Moore] In Praise of Illinois Bell Installers [Michael P. Andrews] Re: Mass Event 800/900? [Bill Woodcock] Re: Billed Busy Signals [Kath Mullholand] Re: Radio Reception on Telephone [Joshua Putnam] Administrivia: Archives Was Offline; Now Back [Many of You] That's All For Now! See You In a Week [TELECOM Moderator] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gordon Burditt Subject: "Toggles" are Poor Interface Design Date: 14 Apr 91 20:17:59 GMT Organization: Gordon Burditt > BTW, I was discussing per-call and per-line blocking with my Pacific > Bell friend. He's involved in the actual CLASS tests on the DMS-100 > switches. The *67 code acts as a "toggle". Should Pacific Bell be It strikes me that designing "toggles" into the user interface is very poor design. This is made even worse when there is no feedback as to whether you turned the feature on or off, and worse still when you don't know what the default is. A user of an unfamiliar phone line won't know the default if it can be ordered differently, and someone might not know the default of his own line if the request to change it might or might not have been processed yet, or if his line might have been "slammed". The Caller-ID example has the even worse feature that you can't easily test whether the feature is on or off without cooperation from someone on a second line. Some other features, like Transfer-On-Busy Enable/Disable, Permanent Call-Waiting Enable/Disable (anyone offer this? - deactivate Call Waiting until it is specifically re-activated?), or Call Forwarding Enable/Disable have equal or worse problems with testing if someone designs the activation codes with a toggle. Are we getting that short on *XX codes that toggles are necessary? Anyone got a list of a "standard" set of them? How many different "standard" sets are there? (Does GTE have more "standard" sets than it does COs?) A feature might need four codes: Permanent ON, Permanent OFF, Per-call override ON, and Per-call override OFF, if all of these were available and made sense. Call Waiting could use all four - I could turn it off and temporary-override it on for some outgoing voice calls, yet leave it disabled for incoming data calls. Things like Call Forwarding, Transfer-on-Busy, Reject ID-Blocked Calls, Activate Call Screening, Activate-900-Like-Billing-For-Incoming-Calls, etc. don't need temporary overrides. Caller-ID blocking could use all four but I doubt changing the permanent default will be available by other than a service order. And, of course, many features like Call Trace, Speed Calling, Screen Out Last Caller, Return Call, Sue Telemarketer, Refund-900-Like-Billing- For-Last-Call, etc. only need a code to activate them when needed. Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ From: "Joel B. Levin" Subject: "Selective" Call Waiting Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 07:41:05 EDT News from the world of New England Telephone bill inserts: " ...But there may be certain calls you don't want interrupted. That's why Call Waiting service now includes a new feature, selective call waiting. This function enables you to temporarily suspend your Call Waiting service before or during important calls." This is followed by a plug for Call Waiting, then how the new free feature with Call Waiting service works: dial *70 or 1170 before dialling, and "you must follow these steps before each all to activate selective call waiting because it's deactivated when you hang up." Then the best part: "How Can I Enhance Selective Call Waiting? "Get Three-Way Calling service. It allows your selective call waiting feature to work on incoming calls. When you receive an important call, briefly press the switchhook ...." I thought this was an interesting way to market Three-Way Calling. The brochure includes a postage paid coupon to order these services, which includes the further information that Call Waiting costs $3.81 per month with a one time connection fee of $6.08; Three-Way Calling is $4.51 a month plus $6.08; and if you sign up for both you only pay the $6.08 once. (These numbers may only apply within New Hampshire.) JBL nets: levin@bbn.com | BBN Communications or: ...!bbn!levin | M/S 20/7A POTS: +1 617 873 3463 | 150 Cambridge Park Drive FAX: +1 617 873 8202 | Cambridge, MA 02140 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 15:50:10 EDT From: cmoore@brl.mil Subject: Telecom Assistance Available for Kurdish Refugees On the ABC-TV network on Saturday 13 April, I heard on World News Saturday, among news about the Kurdish refugees near the Turkey/Iraq border, of two pay phones having been put on a mountain in that area for those refugees. [Moderator's Note: If there ever were a group of people for whom my heart goes out at this time, it would be the Kurds; they've been through so much in the past several months as have the citizens of Iraq. The phones will help them establish / maintain contact with family and loved ones. Do you know which telecom organization did the installation of the units? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 05:34 CDT From: "Michael P. Andrews" Subject: In Praise of Illinois Bell Installers Just last week I had Illinois Bell add one business phone line to my house. We had three residential lines in service. The previous occupant of my house ran a travel agency in the basement and had added lines one at a time until the house was wired with six individual one-pair aerial drops. The back wall of the house had a two plastic housings holding a total of three protectors in a loosely attached and messy arrangement. The IBT installer that came to add my extra line told me that they were instructed to replace the aerial drop with a single six pair line whenever the home had more than three lines. He ASKED MY PERMISSION to replace the service with a better one. He then installed a neat new single six pair cable and a new lockable Seicor interface/protector with a capacity of twelve lines. Mind you, I would have been happy if the installer had just powered up one of the unused pairs. I'm very happy with the new installation and especially with the IBT installer who worked for three + hours in a cold drizzle to do a better job. [Moderator's Note: I think most telco employees are dedicated people who will do a good, professional job given a chance. There are the rotten eggs in that profession like all others; fortunatly most know the importance of reliable telecommunications and it reflects in their work. It sounds like you got a good person assigned to the job. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Woodcock Subject: Re: Mass Event 800/900? Date: 15 Apr 91 22:55:21 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Davis, RISKS-11.42 asked: > imagine, say, 10,000 kids in the audience [hold phones up to TV > speaker, which plays DTMF]. You've got 10,000 phones dialing the same > number simultaneously. How many of those calls do you think will get > through? woody@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (That's me!) answered: > In answer to your question, all 10,000 of them will get through. > Sprint has a service called "Mass Event 900/800" for doing exactly > this. It can handle, coincidentally, 10,000 calls simultaneously, and > is offered to their larger 800 and 900 customers. I've heard, but not > been able to substantiate, that AT&T has a similar service. cml@cs.umd.edu (Christopher Lott) further asks: > Can anyone explain more about this? How is it done? Does it require > hundreds of operators "standing by Right Now!"? As other people asked me after that posting (which I admit should have been made more explicit) the service works only with prerecorded or prerecorded/DTMF interactive messages. The main use for this, as has been implied, is to pick up an instant mailing list relatively inexpensively (800) or at a profit (900). In addition, since it requires some work on the part of the potential consumer, it's a lits that's probably going to be pretty well targeted, and responsive, as direct-mail things go. My only objection to this is the targeting of children, as was originally described by Gary Marx in the statement that started this thread. bill.woodcock.iv woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu 355.virginia.st berkeley.california 94709.1315 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1991 9:24:34 EDT From: KATH MULLHOLAND Subject: Re: Billed Busy Signals Jack Rickard asked about billed busy signals. Sprint tells us that they have answer supervision wherever they are able to obtain feature group D lines. This covers about 95% of the country. This doesn't guarantee perfection, I guess, because they also say that busy signals lasting longer than thirty seconds will be billed. Can you time your modem to hang up a little quicker? We use Sprint and two other long distance carriers, and haven't noticed that any one carrier bills for a higher percentage of short calls than another. Kath Mullholand UNH Durham, NH ------------------------------ From: Joshua_Putnam Subject: Re: Radio Reception on Telephone Date: 15 Apr 91 19:44:05 GMT Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA In sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes: > In article Kyler Laird cc.purdue.edu> writes: >> A friend of mine has a problem with radio reception on his home >> telephone. The FCC told him to use a choke. That's it!? He hasn't >> tried this yet, but I'd like to know what his other options are. >> Also, I'd appreciate knowing the theory behind this. > On the telephone or the manufacturer ? :-) > [Moderator's Note: He could also find out where his high-powered and > probably illegal CB neighbor is located (if that is the type of radio > interference he is getting) and go cut the guy's coax! :) PAT] I've never known anyone with CB interference on the phone, but that may just be luck. Here we always have trouble with AM broadcast stations. Depending on the location of the phone lines, quality of the phone, etc., the talk radio can be as loud as the person on the other end of the line, sometimes louder. The only phones that seem to be immune are our old rotary-dial ones from the dark ages. (No touch-tone in my house :-( The stations are all operating legally, and the phone company used to provide specially-modified phones back before customers could buy their own. (The phones have a capacitor soldered across the speaker terminals.) For more serious cases, a phone line filter is available. The Amateur Radio Relay League (ARRL) Handbook, available in any good library, has a detailed section on interference that includes solutions for phone interference and part numbers for the various filters, chokes, capacitors the phone manufacturers use. Josh Putnam josh@happym.wa.com 206/463-9399 ext.102 Happy Man Corp. 4410 SW Pt. Robinson Road Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399 Moderator's Note: If you want to see a place where AM stations make for bad reception on the radio itself, try an area just outside Wheaton, IL where the transmitters for WGN (720 AM) and WBBM (780 AM) are located about a half-mile from each other. When driving within about a mile on any side of those transmitters, you can tune *nothing* on your car radio but them. Solid WGN signal across the whole AM band for quite a distance, then the same from WBBM for awhile. There is a space in the middle of the two where you get only heterodyne from the two of them together. Listen in sometime if you are driving past! PAT] ------------------------------ From: Many of You Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1991 17:45:34 EDT Subject: Administrivia: Telecom Archives Offline; Now Back [Moderator's Note: This letter from Jeff Wasilko is typical of several received over the weekend. PAT] Pat: I was trying to get some stuff from the archive at MIT, but can't log into it. Here's the error message: Connected to lcs.mit.edu. 220 mintaka FTP server (Version 5.57 Thu Dec 6 10:57:23 EST 1990) ready. 530 User anonymous unknown. Login failed. Do you know if they planned to take the archive machine down? Jeff [Moderator's Note: No, they did not *plan* on taking it down. What happened, according to Mike Patton, a sysadmin at MIT who is my contact there for the Telecom Archives was that Saturday night, some unknown person uploaded some really huge files, taking every bit of free space they had. Then the same person posted notices telling everyone to come and get the files. This person had no association whatsoever with MIT and had the nerve to use them for a transfer site with all that stuff. Mike said at one point Saturday night there were over 100 ftp jobs going on at once. The machine came to almost a complete halt and their only choice at the time was to completely disconnect anonymous ftp 'for the duration'. Today they fixed it so there can be no anonymous uploads, and Mike said things should be back to normal by the time most of you read this. I'm sorry for the interupption in service, but it was some abusive person taking advantage of MIT's facilities. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 17:53:53 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: That's All For Now! See You In a Week This issue of the Digest is the final one to be issued this week ... I am leaving in an hour on a trip to Kansas. I will be back over the weekend, April 20-21, and you'll know I am back when you receive your next issue -- number 296 -- probably next Saturday night or Sunday morning. My thanks to all of you who have sent notes of condolence. Dad is still alive as of this writing ... he may have a day or he may have many years left; that's not for any of us to know or decide. The doctors say he is holding his own, but still very weak and unconcious most of the time. He is being fed with a tube down his throat, but the bleeding which began last week ended after a couple days. I'm taking both cell phones with me, and will report anything interesting when I return. PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #295 ******************************   Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24530; 21 Apr 91 5:48 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ad17728; 21 Apr 91 4:46 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa10621; 21 Apr 91 0:11 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09822; 20 Apr 91 23:00 CDT Date: Sat, 20 Apr 91 22:04:37 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: A Personal Note: The Therapy of Grief BCC: Message-ID: <9104202204.ab05186@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> Because of my father's serious illness, most of you know I went out of town last Monday to be with my family for a few days. We (my brother, his wife, their 15-month old child and myself) left at 9 PM Monday, and drove 750 miles -- a sixteen hour trip by automobile including food, gas and bathroom stops -- to Independence, Kansas, arriving Tuesday afternoon. On Wednesday, April 17, we went to visit dad in the VA Hospital in Wichita, Kansas, -- 140 miles each way from Independence -- where he had been in the intensive care unit for a few days. He had had two heart attacks while in the hospital, and considerable intestinal bleeding in another concurrent illness. Because he had earlier been in considerable pain, the hospital had, with the concurrence of the family, medicated him to the extent required that he felt no further pain. Family members living in the area had been there several times; but dad was apparently 'holding out' to see the children. We visited in groups of two for five minute intervals throughout the day and evening. 'Visiting' really consisted of simply holding his hand and speaking quietly to him; he could only respond with facial motions and occassional single words of speech. Of particular pleasure to him, judging from his reactions, was the opportunity to see the 15-month old boy. He had seen the child, (his grandson and my nephew) only once before, nearly a year earlier. At 1:30 AM Thursday, April 18, he was sleeping, and the nursing staff found his vital signs to be consistent with earlier examinations. On their examination seven minutes later, at 1:37 AM, they could detect no heatbeat or pulse. The supervising physician at that hour of the morning examined him about fifteen minutes later to confirm the findings of the staff, and the official pronouncement was given at 2:00 AM, April 18. After a busy day Thursday arranging for the disposition of dad's remains, and signing off on numerous insurance and other documents, we drove to Tulsa, Oklahama -- about sixty miles each way -- to pick up my sister, who flew in from Orlando, Florida at 11:30 PM. I fell into bed at 3:00 Friday morning, only to be up and at Potts Memorial Chapel at 8:00 AM, as the family's representative at visitation prior to a memorial service at 11:00 AM. At the conclusion of the service, my mother's request was that the immediate family linger at the front of the assembly room to individually greet those who wished to speak with us. I extended my hand perhaps 200 times to people in the receiving line whose names I would not know but who apparently knew my father quite well. Then on to a private luncheon for the family given by close friends of my father and mother. After lunch, others took my mother back to her home while my brother, sister and I returned to the chapel to meet with employees there for the final process ... then it was a trip to the aiport in Tulsa to get my sister on her flight back (she had left a sick child of her own at home); and back to Independence. Because the town is so small, and 'everyone knows everyone else', it took only a few minutes for me to speak with her banker, her best friend and a local attorney who will continue to check her well-being. Finally about 6 PM last night it occurred to *me* what had happened: I sat in my room at mother's house and cried. One of dad's favorite composers was Johann Sebastian Bach; and of Bach's many works, dad particularly liked 'Come Sweet Death; Come Bless'd Repose' and now I understand why: Here was a man who lived his life in such a way that he could look his Maker squarely in the face and without a second's hesitation say "Lord, why don't you take me right now?" ... dad wasn't afraid or concerned at all ... and I think he looked forward to being released. After all, would *you* want to lay there with tubes stuck down your nose, and needles in your arms delivering intravenous nourishment to you? As my brother and I stood there beside him the night before, each holding his hand and letting him communicate as best he could, his last words to us were "now that you boys are here, I can go." The grief that has overwhelmed us the past few days has started a process of healing in our family ... a therapy rooted in grief. And although I'll miss dad terribly, his passing will heal our family in many ways, by bringing us together in love which has been conspicuously absent for many years. My brother, his wife, the baby and I left about 7 PM and returned to Chicago, 'driving straight through' on the same 750 mile, sixteen hour trip. Tonight I am very tired -- exhausted, really. I returned to find many, many notes of concern from telecom readers and other friends 'on the net' ... to each of you, my sincerest thanks. I hope you'll excuse this diversion today from the usual topics of the TELECOM Digest ... but I just had to talk about it. Patrick Townson   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07720; 21 Apr 91 23:53 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13014; 21 Apr 91 22:17 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa10847; 21 Apr 91 21:13 CDT Date: Sun, 21 Apr 91 20:29:30 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #296 BCC: Message-ID: <9104212029.ab21761@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 21 Apr 91 20:29:09 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 296 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular Phones for $29 [Steven King] Re: Documentation Wanted on January '90 AT&T Outage [Ronald T. Crocker] Re: Per Line Blocking? [Daniel Herrick] Re: Radio Reception on Telephone [Daniel Herrick] Re: How Were Large Call Volumes Handled Long Ago? [John Nagle] Ameritech Call-Minder [David W. Tamkin] Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [Darren Alex Griffiths] Re: 900 Discussion on CNN [Darren Alex Griffiths] Re: What Fire?? Channel 2 Uses Criss-Cross [Mark D. Fisher] Re: Convenience of Phone System [Leroy Casterline] Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Leroy Casterline] Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Chip Rosenthal] Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Mike Schuster] Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted [Mark Allyn] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steven King Subject: Re: Cellular Phones for $29 Date: 15 Apr 91 18:32:54 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, Arlington Hgts IL In article albert@das.harvard.edu (David Albert) writes: > In the April 10th {Boston Globe}, NYNEX advertises a FREE cellular > phone. One of the providers in Chicago (Cell One or Ameritech; not having a cell phone myself I don't pay much attention to who's who) was offering a "free" cellular phone deal. Actually, it was a zero-fee rental agreement. Of course, if you ever moved or switched providers you'd have to give the phone back ... I don't recall the terms of the lease, or how much you paid per month, per minute, etc. Steven King, Motorola Cellular (...uunet!motcid!king) [Moderator's Note: They've both had deals like that from time to time, or similar things with variations. Some deals are okay, others border on sleaze, like the ones Fretters is always coming up with. I think you are just as well off buying the phone at the normal rate and making your own arrangements for service. Speaking of cellular service, I was sort of disappointed in Cellular One / Chicago's performance on my recent trip. I'll discuss it more later on. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Ronald T. Crocker" Subject: Re: Documentation Wanted on January '90 AT&T Outage Date: 15 Apr 91 21:16:42 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc. - Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL WARNING: Personal comments follow and do not indicate the feelings of my employer with reference to this incident. There was some publications around the time of the incident indicating that the problem was a missing break statement in some C code in the 4ESS software. It was indicated that the generic was installed in the offending office in December, was up and running with "no" problems for three weeks. I know more about this, but am bound by agreements to not disclose it. The immediate (kneejerk?) reaction by AT&T management was to insist on everyone at Bell Labs taking a course in C programming, and find a tool that would highlight missing break statements. Nothing like shooting the message carrier :->.-- Ron Crocker Motorola Radio-Telephone Systems Group, Cellular Infrastructure Group (708) 632-4752 [FAX: (708) 632-4430] crocker@mot.com or uunet!motcid!crocker ------------------------------ From: herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com Subject: Re: Per Line Blocking? Date: 15 Apr 91 12:28:56 EST In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > "What?", you say. "Do you want your line to always reveal your number > to any person you call that subscribes to Caller ID, or do you want it > to never reveal it?" Now realistically, what do you think 99.999% of > all telephone customers are going to answer at this point? > Now as a customer, you order Caller ID. However, the rep becomes > uncharacteristically candid with you and points out that ten people in > your area have "unblocked" lines and suggests reconsidering your > order. > So come on now, all you per line blocking advocates. Isn't per line > blocking just the new code for "no Caller ID"? Maybe you are right, John. The phone companies seem to think so. However, as a residential customer, I subscribe to phone service for my convenience, not anyone else's. If you have an idea for an information product that is eagerly endorsed by potential buyers of the data and boycotted by potential suppliers of the information, you have a product whose time has not yet come. If the only way you can acquire the information that you seek to sell is to take it by force, there are some ethical issues that arise. I want per line blocking with per call unblocking that works from a rotary dial pulse phone before they start selling caller id (sic) here. I also want them to stop LYING and calling it "caller id" when it is CALLING STATION id. But, then, the advocates here in this forum think of it as caller id and describe a great variety of uses that work only when knowing the calling station happens to identify the calling party. Try this scenario on for size -- perhaps there is a teenager with whom my son logs hours of talk time per week. Perhaps he offends her so she refuses to answer calls from him. How do I get through for my one three minute conversation per month with her parent? There are four or five people originating calls from my phone. On the basis of relative volumes, her assumption that caller id (sic) showing my number identifies a call from my son is a good assumption. I can imagine a product that reads the caller id (sic) data and looks the number up in an internal directory and displays a caller name from the directory. Because the directory was entered by the owner of the product, it would show my son's name as the caller. Any time he was persona non grata, I would have great difficulty getting through. I really think that caller id (sic) is not the great boon to mankind that most of the contributors here seem to think it is. dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ------------------------------ From: herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com Subject: Re: Radio Reception on Telephone Date: 15 Apr 91 17:35:35 EST In article , lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue. edu (Kyler Laird) writes: > A friend of mine has a problem with radio reception on his home > telephone. The FCC told him to use a choke. That's it!? He hasn't > tried this yet, but I'd like to know what his other options are. > Also, I'd appreciate knowing the theory behind this. Perhaps the basic idea is to find the person operating the transmitter and choke him. dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com [Moderator's Note: There are all these 'scenarios' people come up with -- red herrings, really -- as excuses for not having Caller ID. From your example above, I take it you would rather force the people to answer the phone every time it rings -- being unable to tell in advance who is calling -- rather than sit down with the people as one parent speaking with another to discuss and correct the misbehavior of your children. PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Nagle Subject: Re: How Were Large Call Volumes Handled Long Ago? Date: 16 Apr 91 06:33:40 GMT jjwcmp@ultb.isc.rit.edu (Jeff Wasilko) writes: > ACDs have been mentioned a few times this week, which got me > wondering: > What did recipients of large volumes of calls do before ACDs? Did > someone manually distribute calls? Yes, using "order turrets", special switchboards set up for the purpose. But Automatic Call Distribution was introduced in 1932, with the No. 3. Order Turret. The problem is very similar to distributing calls from one level of selectors to the next in a step-by-step office, and was first solved using that technology. Definitely not a new feature. John Nagle ------------------------------ Subject: Ameritech Call-Minder Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 21:32:33 CDT From: "David W. Tamkin" This afternoon on WBBM AM radio in Chicago I heard a commercial for Ameritech Call-Minder. There was a phone number to call about it: 1-800-222-2522. I'm not sure whether that number will receive calls from outside Ameritech's region. I called and found out this much: The rate for residences is $9.80 per month. That includes the voice mailbox and call forwarding on no answer and busy. Residences will not be charged for the forwarding hop: that surprised me. They will be charged for calls to the mailbox to check for messages, of course. My parents' Illinois Bell CO is not yet converted for CLASS, so they cannot order it. I didn't ask about ordering a voice mailbox without call forwarding on no answer or busy (they could get regular call forwarding if they want). There probably is no price set for such a thing anyway. They do not recommend giving out the direct number to the voice mailbox; their stand is that callers will try to hack the PIN. Centel's position was quite different, offering the possibility of giving out the mailbox's phone number so that calls will go directly there when that's how the customer wants to handle things. Nor did I ask -- nor hope to get an answer to -- how much of the $9.80 is taxed. I know that Centel doesn't collect tax on the $3.95 a month I pay for my voice mailbox from them, but they might tax the $2.25 I pay for call forwarding on no answer or busy (which includes regular immediate call forwarding); technically I would be charged for the forwarding hop to my voice mailbox when a call is forwarded, but my Centel voice mailbox is within my free calling area. Ameritech is supposed to mail me printed information about it. We'll see what, if anything, arrives. David Tamkin Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 708 518 6769 312 693 0591 dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com MCI Mail: 426-1818 CIS: 73720,1570 GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN ------------------------------ From: Darren Alex Griffiths Subject: Re: Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones Date: 16 Apr 91 18:34:29 GMT Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA In article ndallen@contact.uucp (Nigel Allen) writes: > In Volume 11, Issue 285, Message 1 of 10, John R. Levine writes:> > As well, it's a good idea to carry your building access card (CardKey > (R) or whatever) separately from your credit cards. When I worked at UC Santa Barbara a number of years ago one of the researchers was carrying a magnet from the third floor of Physics to the Free Electron Laser in the basement. The magnet was quiet powerful, I think it was used to aim the beam, in anycase, it erased not only all of his credit and atm cards, his digital watch failed to work as well. It's it fun to live in the technological era? :-) darren alex griffiths (415) 708-3294 dag@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ From: Darren Alex Griffiths Subject: Re: 900 Discussion on CNN Date: 16 Apr 91 19:39:58 GMT Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA In article woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu (Bill Woodcock) writes: > He went on to describe 900 number operators as "The worst sort of scam > artists and snake oil salesmen," > He made quite a point of most of the "victims" being minorities, > unemployed, or otherwise disadvantaged. I missed the interview unfortunately. I would be interested, however, in whether or not CNN did one of their 900-number poles to see what the audience thought of the question? darren alex griffiths (415)708-3294 dag@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ From: "Mark D. Fisher" Subject: Re: What Fire?? Channel 2 Uses Criss-Cross Date: 17 Apr 91 05:55:19 GMT Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology In article jens@mot.com (Jens von der Heide) writes: > "Hi, I'm calling from Channel 2 News. Could you tell me if you see a > building on fire next door ?? Are there a lot of fire trucks around?? > Needless to say, there was no fire activity around. Later > that night the mystery was explained. We recently moved, and, kept > the same phone number. The apartment next door to our previous > address was on fire. Apparently, the local news station looked up our > phone in a phone directory that lists numbers by address and probably > wanted to see if the activity was worth covering. I once had a very similar experience: I had moved taking my old telephone number with me. Then several months later I received a call from the local tv news. He asked me about the fire in my building. Before I was in a complete panic, we realized what had happened. My old roommates were soon looking for a new place to live :-) Mark D. Fisher ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 91 18:03:35 -0600 From: leroy Casterline Subject: Re: Convenience of Phone System? Reply-To: casterli@lamar.ColoState.EDU (leroy Casterline) Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 >> Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend >> Tony Jones's third office line please'... While I was at Winter CES this year, I saw just such a product. Let's see, where did I put that spec sheet ... shuffle ... ah, here it is. Called the ORIGIN Voicephone from Origin Technology, Sunnyvale, CA. (408) 734-1021. Leroy Casterline ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 91 11:17:00 -0600 From: leroy Casterline Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack > The device takes calls on (relative to it) 'line 1' and forwards the > call on (relative to it) 'line 2'. You call on the device's 'line 2' My company just finished developing a call forwarding device for a client. This device will forward calls using three-way calling and a single phone line. It will forward calls to just about anything, including cellular phones, pagers, SMR's and international numbers. Re-programming is accomplished by calling it and overdialing a code when it speaks the "Please wait, this call is being transferred" message. This brings up a voice menu which allows you to change forward-to numbers, change it's mode, etc. It can also be used in a mode where it allows the answering machine to answer the call, then monitors for 'screening' DTMF tones, which will transfer the call to one of the forward-to numbers on the spot. Allows you to give the codes to 'important' clients, family members, etc who can then reach you wherever you are, while other callers (who don't know the codes) are handled by the answering machine. One nice feature of this device is that it allows you to receive calls on your cellular phone (even while roaming) without you having to give your cellular number to anyone. Leroy Casterline ------------------------------ From: Chip Rosenthal Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Date: 18 Apr 91 04:37:38 GMT Organization: Unicom Systems Development, Austin, TX In article tell@cs.unc.edu (Stephen Tell) writes: > The schematic calls it a TMS7DC42. TMS70C42??? That's a T.I. 8-bit micro. > Where (delta) indicates a symbol that looks a lot like the greek > letter of that name. That delta is probably the `ESD sensitive device' marking. Chip Rosenthal 512-482-8260 Unicom Systems Development ------------------------------ From: schuster@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: Thu, 18 Apr 91 16:45:18 PDT Randy Borow writes: > Yes, Mr. Rolfs, there ARE more than one such digital answering > machines. The newest one has the features I mentioned, since I > throughly looked it over and tried it at the store. You may have to > look around. I'm drawing a blank from AT&T customer service and a few local AT&T phone stores. Do you have a model number for the NEW NEW AT&T digital answering machine? Mike Schuster | CIS: 70346,1745 NY Public Access UNIX: ...cmcl2!panix!schuster | MCI Mail, GENIE: The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: Mark Allyn Subject: Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted Date: 21 Apr 91 05:01:40 GMT Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle Try Boeing Surplus in Kent, Washington. They are the surplus outlet for the Boeing Company and you find all kinds of incredibly wierd tools there. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #296 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12673; 22 Apr 91 1:59 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab15341; 22 Apr 91 0:26 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab15713; 21 Apr 91 23:18 CDT Date: Sun, 21 Apr 91 23:10:04 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #298 BCC: Message-ID: <9104212310.ab10749@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 21 Apr 91 23:09:52 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 298 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson SaudiNet Update: Email Delays to the Gulf [Todd Looney via Ken McVay] Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [Mitch Wagner] Two Line Phone Wanted [Christopher D. Swanson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kmcvay@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca (Ken McVay) Subject: SaudiNet Update: Email Delays to the Gulf Organization: 1B Systems Management Limited Date: Thu, 19 Apr 90 23:38:39 GMT * Originally by Todd Looney * Edited by Ken McVay ELECTRONIC MAIL SERVICES AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IN MAIL DELIVERY DURING THE WAR IN THE PERSIAN GULF Are electronic mail services proving effective during a massive crisis such as the war in the Persian Gulf? The answer is a resounding yes! Such services provide an electronic "link" between friends and family members that is incredibly efficient when judged by standards of normal mail delivery. SaudiNet, a project of The American Public Emergency Computer System (APECS), is a volunteer group of over seven hundred nodes across the country who operate computer bulletin boards. Computer bulletin board systems (BBS's), are numerous and scattered about the country, and the world for that matter. With these systems, it was a logical extension of the electronic mail that was already in place, to utilize them (the volunteer systems), to send electronic mail to the troops serving in the Persian Gulf. [Ed. Note: CPECS, the Canadian PECS equivalent, provides the same function for Canadian users, as well as an international uucp gateway into SaudiNet/APECS] With SaudiNet, electronic mail is sent to a receiving point on the West coast, then transmitted over dial up phone lines to a point in Saudi Arabia where the messages are printed out, folded and stapled, then handed over to the Military Post Office (MPO), which in turn delivers the mail to the intended recipient. SaudiNet has two distinct advantages over other services, SaudiNet allows a person to send a letter to "any soldier". This letter can be sent to a "land based" or "sea based" service person, and can be a welcome letter of encouragement to a soldier who might not otherwise receive a letter from home. The other advantage with using SaudiNet is the general consensus among its volunteers that it is "not over until the hugs". SaudiNet vowes to continue this valuable, non-profit service as long as it is needed. The United States Postal Service has had an incredible volume of mail pass through their system since the start of the crisis. At the height of the Christmas mail season, during the week of December 11th, the USPS was handling 525,850 pounds of mail each day! During mid February the volume of mail declined to 400,700 pounds per day and currently (week of April 2nd) the number has dropped significantly, down to 166,143 pounds per day. Dennis Hauck, USPS Program Manager for Operation Desert Storm, has many years experience dealing with military mail. Hauck is retired from the US Air Force, fifteen of his twenty years service was spent in charge of military mail in Saudi Arabia. He explained to the BBS News how the USPS handles mail to the Mideast. After mail is placed in a "drop box", it then goes to one of five military mail processing centers in San Francisco, Dallas, Chicago, Washington D.C. and New York. From these, the mail is sent to either Tinker AFB in Oklahoma or Macguire AFB, in New Jersey. Hauck says that the USPS tries to have the mail from the drop box into military hands within three days. From there it is the military's responsibility. The mail leaves one of the air bases on an aircraft bound for Saudi Arabia arriving after a stop in Europe for refueling and a change of crew. Once it arrives in the desert, the boxes of mail are sorted and sent to D'hahran or Khalid Military City, about a four or five hour drive north of Riyadh. Captain Weidner, Chief of Army Postal Operations in Washington D.C., told the BBS News to think of the Mideastern Theatre being roughly divided into two zones, D'hahran serving troops in the lower Saudi Arabian area and the Khalid Military City office serving troops in a more forward position, including but not limited to southern Iraq. Once the mail gets to these two Military Post Offices (MPO's) it is further sorted by a Direct Support Unit (DSU), then sent to individual units for delivery by military postal clerks. Hauck points out that as the volume of mail decreases, so does the availability of aircraft drop correspondingly. In other words, mail that is current (day of delivery to military by USPS) might have to sit and wait for an avail- able aircraft. This results in a delay that adds to the confusion. Both Hauck and Captain Weidner report that their respective services have not escaped critism by citizens on the delivery of mail from the U.S. to their loved ones serving in the Persian Gulf. Hauck says that the worst case is a delay of thirty to sixty days before mail is received by the intended recipient. In some cases, there have been accusations that the mail never got there at all. This critism is not limited to the USPS or the MPO. Chip Chiappone, Product Marketing Manager for GEnie is in charge of GEnie's "Letters from Home" service. He reports to the BBS News that his service has received some disparaging letters about electronic mail not reaching the intended soldier, Chiappone said, "You can't believe how *relieved* I am that we are not the only service experiencing these kinds of problems. I've gotten some letters from people who had stopped using the USPS to utilize the service and they are complaining that their letters had not reached their family member." Chiappone says that their service has been averaging three to four days on mail delivery but they too have not escaped the delays that are unavoidable when the military is delivering mail in such a "fluid" situation as the crisis in the Persian Gulf obviously is. Unlike SaudiNet, GEnie's "Letters from Home" service is slated to end on April 30th. Tony Mattera, in charge of Prodigy's "USA Connect" service, tells the BBS News that transport of return mail out of Riyadh is being re-structured because of rapid troop redeployments. Captain Weidner confirmed this. When asked if Prodigy's service is experiencing complaints, Mattera sidestepped a bit and answered that it is his understanding that return mail is being checked for explosives, souveniers and such and the resulting delay could be up to four weeks. Mattera said that Prodigy's service is scheduled to end on May 30th, however, Mattera said that the service had been extended before and he could not rule out the possibility that the service could be extended further. *All* of the electronic services contacted by the BBS News told of delays and complaints of varying degrees. It is the understanding of the {BBS News} that mail sent electronically to Saudi Arabia, is being received by the military in a timely manner. In fact, Todd Looney, President and COO of APECS, which oversees the SaudiNet project told the {BBS News} that letters had been sent to General Schwartzcoff and received. The General sent a reply back to SaudiNet, expressing his interest and support of the system so it is generally held that the system is working. The breakdown in the system seems to be when the letters reach the military. It is understandable that there are delays because there are troops being sent home on an almost daily basis as well as re-deployment in the desert because of the "scaling" down of the military presence in the Persian Gulf area. Dennis Hauck also pointed out that the military has "closed out" 34 APO's as of April 11th. Hauck said that the electronic services should be concerned with the closure of APO's. A service such as SaudiNet could have "their computers smokin' and be working their particular brand of "magic" to get one last letter to "Billy" only to find out that he had shipped out the week the letter was sent." The "bottom line" is electronic mail is arriving in the Persian Gulf usually within twenty four hours, once it gets into military hands however, for a number of reasons there are delays of delivery to the soldiers. It may be that the military may need to look at "revamping" their current mail delivery structure. Particularly because the technology exists to sent a letter over a normal telephone line within a matter of minutes by personal computer. While the military "wowed" the American public and indeed the world with their technological marvels in weaponry, they may need to bring their mail service up to date to reflect the current technology available to the average person. One further note, while the other electronic mail services are rapidly "scaling down" and even suspending their services that facilitate getting letters to the troops, APECS will be expanding their operation to become a permanent public service. In addition to SaudiNet, APECS will offer a way for civilians to communicate with their loved ones who will be rebuilding Kuwait. Further plans include being able to provide electronic mail communications to any "crisis" area in the world from concerned citizens in the United States who would like to offer their support and encouragement. APECS Inc. is actively seeking corporate donations to alleviate the expense that SaudiNet volunteers are bearing in the form of long distance charges to keep SaudiNet operational. For more information about APECS Inc. contact: Michael Hess, National Publications Coordinator, (513) 835-5258. [Ed. Note: CPECS, while not yet at the point where incorportation is an active consideration, is now working to expand both the FTN (Fidotech) network and enhance InterNet gateways, and will continue to work in parallel with it's American-based cousin. Corporate sponsorships and private donations are not actively sought, but would certainly be appreciated, as our transport costs are high. For specific information on the Canadian effort, contact kmcvay@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca, or call Ken McVay voice, at 1-604-754-7423.] Public Access UUCP/UseNet (Waffle/XENIX 1.64) | kmcvay@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca| TB+: 604-753-9960 2400: 604-754-9964 | ..van-bc!oneb!kmcvay | FrontDoor 2.0/Maximus v1.02/Ufgate 1.03 | SaudiNet 90:82/0 | HST 14.4: 604-754-2928 | IMEx 89:681/1 | ------------------------------ From: Mitch Wagner Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Organization: UNIX Today! Date: Tue, 16 Apr 91 17:12:17 GMT In article tr@samadams.princeton.edu (Tom Reingold) writes: > I worked at Bellcore where someone had built an experimental phone > switch that ran on a UNIX system and was therefore programmable in the > way I know best. For outgoing calls, it could read a text file and > speak through a DECTALK. > Everyone in my workgroup got an automated ad, saying that if we called > a certain 800 number, we would win a free vacation. It was really > obnoxious. This was before 900 numbers existed, though. So I had the > phone switch call the 800 number every 90 seconds for about 90 > minutes... > He claimed that his business was legitimate and that he was > having the phone company trace the calls. Wouldn't it have been funny > if he had found out that the "phone company" had made the calls? > [Moderator's Note: Would it have been funny if he found out the phone > company was making the calls? No, I think not. Your employer might > well have gotten sued and you might well have gotten fired, especially > if your employer got sued. Out the door on your ass in a manner of > speaking. His individual calls to individual phone numbers might well > have been obnoxious; they were most likely not illegal. Your repeated > telephone calls, intended to harrass, were illegal.... Oh, I suppose you're right, but it's hard to get too worked up about what Mr. Reingold did. I'm one of those who find telemarketing to be pestilent, this despite the fact that I've often found myself working for firms that employ telemarketers. When I worked as a reporter for the (now defunct) DAILY ADVANCE in Flanders, N.J., I got bitten by our own telemarketers. We were a small community newspaper, and I got hand-written letter from a couple who were looking for publicity for some school event or another. I put the letter aside and, a couple of months later, picked it up to do a short write-up. I picked up the phone, called in, identified myself -- "Hi, this is Mitch Wagner from the Daily Advance" -- and the woman said, "Hold on, let me have you speak to my husband." I heard a silence, then a man came on and said, "Listen to me. I have told you people and told you people that I am not interested, and I want you to stop harassing me. Now let me talk to your supervisor right now." Well, I was having a bad day, so I lit into him. I said, "LISTEN YOU NEANDERTHAL! I'VE ABOUT HAD IT WITH PEOPLE WHO SEND IN PRESS RELEASES AND THEN JERK US AROUND ABOUT DOING AN ARTICLE! IF YOU DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR FROM US, WHAT IN THE HELL DID YOU SEND ME THAT LETTER FOR?! I HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO THAN TO PANDER TO SOME IDIOT'S HARASSMENT FANTASIES, AND--- " "Oh," said a small voice on the other end. "You're calling about the letter about the school?" "WHAT DID YOU THINK I WAS CALLING ABOUT?!" "We forgot about the letter. See, we've been getting these calls from your telemarketing folks every night for a week, and.... " The article turned out nicely. So far as I know, the couple stopped getting calls. About that time, I lived at the end of a long dirt driveway -- a private road, actually, about a half-mile long. I got a call from the subscription department at the Newark STAR-LEDGER asking if we wanted home delivery. I said, "Sure," and they gave me a complimentary three-week subscription. At the end of the three weeks, I called to renew, and they renewed, but never delivered. Well, I figured that the paperboy just got sick of going all that way out of his way just to drop off one paper, and since no money had ever changed hands, I forgot about it. But the STAR LEDGER didn't. I continued getting calls about once a month, asking whether I'd be interested in subscribing. I'd explain the situation, offer my conjecture as to why the subscription stopped, and say that under the circumstances, I could certainly understand why they wouldn't want to deliver my paper to me. But the representatives always appeared to be pretty flustered by all of this, and they'd apologize profusely and offer me a free three week's subscription to sign up. I would, and I'd get the paper for a day or two, and then it'd stop. Mitch Wagner VOICE: 516/562-5758 GEnie: MITCH.WAGNER UUCP: wagner@utoday.com [Moderator's Note: Interesting ... almost the same thing happened to me with the {Chicago Tribune}. A high school boy came to my home one day soliciting subscriptions on behalf of some school organization which got a couple bucks for each new subscription obtained. I gave him my order plus an advance payment, and the papers started coming. When the first subscription term expired, the Tribune started billing me, but I would only get the papers about half the time. Two or three days per week they would not show up. I called to complain, and the Tribune would offer me a month free as goodwill. About half of those would arrive; the others would never show up. Each month I complained, and each month the Tribune customer service people would write off the bill and set up another month of complimentary service. After about six months of me paying nothing and the papers getting delivered about half the time, they finally quit bringing them entirely. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Christopher D. Swanson" Subject: Two Line Phone Wanted Organization: St. Olaf College Date: 21 Apr 91 13:12:38 I am looking for a two-line phone that will work on RJ11/14(?) jacks. (I have two lines on one 'home wall jack'). If you have such a phone, please e-mail me as I do not read these groups to frequently. Thanks in advance, Chris Swanson, Chem/CS/Pre-med Undergrad, St. Olaf College, Northfield,MN 55057 DDN: (CDS6) INTERNET: swansonc@acc.stolaf.edu UUCP: uunet!stolaf!swansonc AT&T: Work: (507)-645-4528 Home: (507)-663-6424 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #298 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12734; 22 Apr 91 2:00 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15341; 22 Apr 91 0:23 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15713; 21 Apr 91 23:18 CDT Date: Sun, 21 Apr 91 22:34:41 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #297 BCC: Message-ID: <9104212234.ac13291@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 21 Apr 91 21:34:33 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 297 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Telecom Assistance Available for Kurdish Refugees [Ron Heiby] Re: Books Wanted on NetWare [Barry L. Parr] Re: Western Electric Power Cable [Tim Pozar] Wanted: Answering Machine Autodisconnect Circuit [David Nyarko] Re: 900 Discussion on CNN [Ron Dippold] Re: 900 Discussion on CNN [David G. Cantor] Error Detection Reference Materials Wanted [Eugene Zywicki] Request on Frame Relay Products + Specs + Suppliers [Andy Lim] Information Needed About DemoSource [Steve Pozgaj] Mitel Smart-1 Dialer - Docs Wanted [Julian Macassey] The Third Number in a Hunt Group [Thomas B. Clark III] U-Lowell Colloquium, April 24 [John C. Sieg] A Very Sophisticated ACD From Dytel [Michael P. Andrews] Caller*ID from US PBXs [Steven S. Brack] The Dangers of Cellular Car Phones [SF Chronicle via Geoff Goodfellow] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ron Heiby Subject: Re: Telecom Assistance Available for Kurdish Refugees Date: 16 Apr 91 20:33:09 GMT Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL cmoore@brl.mil writes: > border, of two pay phones having been put on a mountain in that area > for those refugees. With the kind of luck they've had over the years, the two phones are probably COCOTs! Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod ------------------------------ From: "Barry L. Parr" Subject: Re: Books Wanted on NetWare Date: 18 Apr 91 00:24:18 GMT In response to the request for books on Netware: Netware User's Guide by Edward Liebing M&T books, Redwood city , CA 1989 ISBN 1-55851-071-0 It's an excellent book from the publisher of {Dr. Dobb's Journal} and {LAN Technology} magazines, with information for both beginners and advanced users. Although this book is published by my company, I have no proprietary interest in it. I'm in a separate division. ------------------------------ From: Tim Pozar Subject: Re: Western Electric Power Cable Date: 19 Apr 91 17:17:22 GMT Organization: Late Night Software (San Francisco) In article teletech!dhk@griffin.uvm.edu (Don H Kemp) writes: > Ah, yes. A chunk of power cable (either 750 MCM or 500 MCM) with an > appropriate length of handgrip made, of course, by wrapping the cable > with "12 cord". Brings back memories. In the radio communications industry you may have used a length of Andrew LDF4-50 1/2 inch coax. Nice balance and comes with hand grips! Tim pozar@lns.com Fido: 1:125/555 PaBell: 415-788-3904 USNail: KKSF-FM / 77 Maiden Lane / San Francisco CA 94108 ------------------------------ From: David Nyarko Subject: Wanted: Answering Machine Autodisconnect Circuit Reply-To: David Nyarko Organization: University of Alberta Electrical Engineering Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1991 13:23:32 -0600 Could anyone give me pointers to a circuit which would automatically disconnect an answering machine when at least one phone connected to the line is off hook (picked up), and restore the normal operating state of the answering machine, when all phones are back on hook. Please email to nyarko@bode.ee.ualberta.ca ------------------------------ From: Ron Dippold Subject: Re: 900 Discussion on CNN Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Mon, 15 Apr 91 22:12:31 GMT In article woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu (Bill Woodcock) writes: > Abrams is the Attorney General for the state of New York. He and a > group of Attornies General from other states with harsh anti-900- > number legislation have formed a committee to pressure the federal > government to pass restrictive legislation dealing with the 900 issue. > He went on to describe 900 number operators as "The worst sort of scam > artists and snake oil salesmen," and quoted several statistics: total > income of 900 services in 1990 was between $800 million and $1 > billion; projected income in 1991 is likely to be $1.5 billion; more > than 30% of the "victims" of 900-based "scams" are over 65. He made > quite a point of most of the "victims" being minorities, unemployed, > or otherwise disadvantaged. I find it rather strange that they would be going after services that require _you_ to call them for it to work, rather than after those who invade your own privacy, namely telemarketing operators. All my experiences seem to indicate that the same scam artists and snake oil salesmen are much more likely to be on the calling end, not the recieving end. Neither do the 1-900 operators call you up three times a day and make demands on your time. It's probably because most of these 1-900 lines are of the 1-900-****-ME! variety, so they can hold it up as a campaign against pornography come election time. ------------------------------ Reply-To: dgc@math.ucla.edu Subject: Re: 900 Discussion on CNN Date: Tue, 16 Apr 91 09:31:45 +0100 From: "David G. Cantor" Dennis G. Rears writes regarding 900 service providers: > If you do have a dispute with them, write the TPC and tell > them of the dispute. It is then up to the 900 company to collect > directly from you. If this were true, then most of the problems associated with 900 numbers would simply go way. Unfortunately (and I speak with much experience on this matter), the local telco won't remove the 900 calls from your bills and force the 900 company to collect directly, except after major hassles. If the UNREGULATED 900 providers didn't have force of the regulated telco's behind them, with the implicit threat of cutting off telco service if the bill isn't paid, then the problem wouldn't exist. The sleazy 900 providers wouldn't have a ghost of chance if they had to enforce bill payment in the usual way. While cutting off service in this situation hasn't happened, so far (at least in California), to my knowledge, the hassle in removing these items from the bill is ENORMOUS! A simple solution would be to allow the payer of a telephone bill to specify how much of the payment goes to each billing vendor (long-distance services, 900 providers, etc.) and then make it the responsibility of a vendor to collect his own bills if they are not paid through the telco. The telcos oppose this strongly. In many ways, 900 numbers are a substitute for bank credit cards, with none of the safeguards that are provided for such credit card users by Federal law. David G. Cantor Department of Mathematics University of California Los Angeles, CA 90024-1555 Internet: dgc@math.ucla.edu ------------------------------ From: Eugene Zywicki Subject: Error Detection Reference Materials Wanted Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd., Nepean, Ontario Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1991 17:29:57 GMT I am looking for good reference materials/books that discuss error detection techniques in high speed communications systems. Specifically I am looking for hardware implementations along with the kind of error coverage you get. I am already familiar with CRC-16 and 32, so please save bandwidth on those two. You can e-mail me directly. Eugene E. Zywicki CAnet: ez@gandalf.ca Gandalf Data Ltd. Voice: (613) 723-6500 Nepean, Ontario Fax: (613) 226-1717 Canada K2E 7M4 ------------------------------ From: Andy Lim Subject: Request on Frame Relay Products + Specs + Suppliers Date: 17 Apr 91 04:36:11 GMT Organization: Telecom Research Labs,Melbourne, Australia Hi there, Is there anyone out there who can give me the email addresses of suppliers for frame relay related equip't (like switches)? I would like to find out the availability, specifications and costs of the products? Thanks, Hui H. (Andy) Lim, PhD | Ph: +61 3 541 6313 Switching Section, SNRB | FAX: +61 3 543 1944 Telecom Research Laboratories | +61 3 543 3339 P.O.Box 249, Vic. 3168, Australia | Email: a.lim@trl.oz.au ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Apr 91 12:20:59 EDT From: Steve Pozgaj Subject: Information Needed About DemoSource I am trying to find out who rep's this California company here in Canada. They make a voicemail PC-based product which I would like to know more about. If you can help, please send me some mail, or call at 1-800-268-8183. Thanks in advance. Steve Pozgaj @ Digital Media ...!{{utzoo!scocan}|geac}!dmntor!steve} ------------------------------ From: Julian Macassey Subject: Mitel Smart-1 Dialer - Docs Wanted Date: 21 Apr 91 13:09:32 GMT Reply-To: Julian Macassey Organization: Tonsured Hippies Hollywood California U.S.A. I have come into possession of a Mitel SMART-1 dialer. It also says on it: "PAV Chaining. Positive Account Code Verification with Chaining". It has an RJ-45 jack, DB-25 female and power connector. Does anyone have any Docs for this beast? Does anyone have any simple instructions? I will happily pay repro and postage costs. Yours, Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Apr 91 13:32:34 EDT From: "Thomas B. Clark III" Subject: The Third Number in a Hunt Group Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine I have two lines in my home, arranged in a hunt group such that when line one is busy it rolls over to line two. Last night I received several wrong numbers from a woman who insisted that she had dialed a third number, a number in my exchange but unknown to me. Checking with my GTE service rep today, I finally found out that in fact there is a "third number" associated with my two "real numbers." The service rep explained that it is necessary to have such a number "for repair purposes" in any two-line hunt group, and that it is normally transparent to the customer. The only time it causes trouble is when it gets wrong numbers. The wrong numbers come in on line one. If the "third number" is busy, it will not roll the call over to line two. Anyone know the why's and wherefore's of this? Tom Clark [Moderator's Note: In some older central offices a higher number can be hunted from a lower number; that is, 1234 can hunt to 1235 when it is busy; 1235 can hunt to 1236 when it is busy, etc. In offices where 'jump hunt' is possible, the higher numbers being hunted need not be one digit apart, but can in fact be numerically quite some distance apart, as long as the number being hunted is higher than the one doing the hunting. Not all of the real old offices still out there can support 'jump hunt'. The hassle comes when a higher number is not available for use as a 'second line'. Then, a numerically lower number has to be used, but since hunting won't work backwards in the older offices, a third phantom number has to be tied on to the first line which is numerically lower than the 'second line'. I am not sure of the wiring, or the reason it works that way. By chance is the number on your 'second line' lower than the number for the main line? Perhaps someone will write with a more technical explanation. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "John C. Sieg" Subject: U-Lowell Colloquium, April 24 Organization: University of Lowell Computer Science, Lowell MA Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1991 22:23:57 GMT COLLOQUIUM ANNOUNCEMENT Computer Science Department College of Arts and Sciences, University of Lowell DATE: Wednesday, April 24, 1991 TIME: 3:00 p.m., refreshments at 2:30 PLACE: University of Lowell Wannalancit 116 (175 Cabot St., Lowell, MA) (directions available from john@ulowell.edu) SPEAKER: Professor B. G. Kim Department of Computer Science University of Lowell Lowell, MA 01854 TITLE: New Developments in Networking and Telecommunications: Gigabit Networks, MAN, and Broadband ISDN ABSTRACT: This presentation focuses on recent developments in communication network protocols and in telecommunication networks, which are envisioned to be the networks of the 21st century. Research continues to provide faster and more reliable service in data communication networks. With the introduction of 100 Mb/s FDDI (Fiber Distributed Data Inter- face) products, researchers are looking beyond 100 Mb/s speeds to 1-10 Gb/s speeds. Several proposed protocols will be discussed. Telecommunication industries, spearheaded by AT&T and the baby Bells, continue to build faster networks as well. A 45 Mb/s MAN (Metropolitan Area Network) and 150 Mb/s Broadband ISDN are two key thrusts. Details of the MAN architecture will be explored, followed by a brief introduction to the Broadband ISDN. The presentation will conclude with a brief excursion into some open research problems. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Apr 91 01:46 CDT From: "Michael P. Andrews" Subject: A Very Sophisticated ACD From Dytel WordPerfect Corp. has an amazing system from Dytel on their customer support lines. You hear a pleasant female "traffic reporter" on connection and every few minutes thereafter with reports that sound just like radio traffic reports: "Network support has a five minute wait with five calls holding; Macintosh has a three minute wait with two calls holding; WordPerfect has a seven minute wait with eight calls holding ... waits this morning have been moderate." It's hard to believe that the system is entirely automated. A friend who worked at Dytel tells me that they electronically assemble these reports from digital snippets just like the "The number you have reached 5 - 5 - 5 .." messages from Ma Bell. ------------------------------ From: "Steven S. Brack" Subject: Caller*ID From US PBXs Reply-To: "Steven S. Brack" Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix (sponsored by U. of Denver Math/CS dept.) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 91 20:07:18 GMT In article 443114@acadvm1.uottawa.ca (Eric Skinner) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 283, Message 3 of 8 > Bell returns the number of the calling trunk, which may be the correct > number to call, or which may be an outgoing-only trunk leading from a PBX. > The company's main number or a DID number would be appropriate in this > case. When I dial the local Pizza-Hut delivery number, their display returns the number of the outgoing trunk (614) 291-276X I'm on, not my phone number. It kind of surprised me that local businesses were getting any ID at all from Ohio Bell, as I didn't think Ohio Bell was approved to offer a service that looks & acts exactly like Caller*ID. Anyway, some details about our system: The University runs its own switch, and you can dial nearly any University phone directly from off campus by dialing 29N-XXXX, where N-XXXX is the on-campus extension number, N being a 2 or a 3. My questions: (1) What will Caller*ID show as my number? (2) What does E911 get as my number? (3) What would an Ohio Bell trace show as my number? P.S.: Any telecommers in the Columbus area: you may be interested in the tour of Ohio State's Telecommunications Center. Steven S. Brack Steven.S.Brack@osu.edu I don't speak for OSU. BitNet: Steven.S.Brack%osu.edu@ohstvmsa.bitnet ------------------------------ Subject: The Dangers of Cellular Car Phones Date: Wed, 17 Apr 91 07:19:34 MST From: Geoff Goodfellow From: dmturne@ptsfa.pacbell.com (Dave Turner) Subject: Noted from Herb Caen Keywords: funny, true Excerpted From Herb Caen's column in the {San Francisco Chronicle}, Monday, April 8, 1991. TALKSHOW: KQED radio announced a few days ago that due to lack of funding, it was canceling its "Perspectives" commentaries. Next morning, Doug Edwards was checking the call-in tape for listener reaction and came across this from a women on her car phone: "My name is Julia. Longtime listener. I'm very upset that you're canceling 'Perspectives' and I'm considering canceling my support. Please reinstate --," followed by the sound of squealing brakes, a crash, shattering glass, and Julia yelling "Oh s---, you've made me so mad I just rear-ended the f---er in front of me. Have to go now." Click. Poor Julia. Funds were restored, and "Perspectives" is back on the air. [KQED is a listener supported public radio station.] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #297 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14842; 23 Apr 91 2:22 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa00059; 23 Apr 91 0:45 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06895; 22 Apr 91 23:38 CDT Date: Mon, 22 Apr 91 23:36:44 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #299 BCC: Message-ID: <9104222336.ab16461@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Apr 91 23:35:40 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 299 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Contel/GTE Merger [John Higdon] Cellular 611 Not Always Free [David E. Sheafer] 'Dumb' PBX Wanted [Larry Rachman] Bitview Data Line Monitor [Ken Mandelberg] US Answering Machine in Israel [Joel Spolsky] You Can Run But You Cannot Hide [Tim Irvin] Cellular Phone Helps Catch Robbery Suspects [Mark Brader] Re: Radio Reception on Telephone [Nick Sayer] Re: Radio Reception on Telephone [Robert Dinse] Re: Radio Reception on Telephone [H. Peter Anvin] Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted [Jeff Carroll] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 20 Apr 91 22:13 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: The Contel/GTE Merger Here is the party line presented to Contel customers as quoted from my bill insert (heaven help us): "Shareholders of Contel Corporation and GTE Corporation have approved the merger of the two companies, following an offer to merge made by GTE in July, 1990. The merger will be the largest in the history of the telecommunications industry. The merger is going through various regulatory approvals and is expected to close as late as the second quarter of 1991. "As a result of the merger, Contel will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of GTE Corporation, headquartered in Stamford, Connecticut. The deal calls for Contel shareholders to receive 1.27 shares of GTE common stock for each share of Contel common stock. "Contel serves over 3.2 million customers in 30 states, and provides cellular service in 36 metropolitan cellular systems in the US. "GTE provides local phone service to more than 14 million customers in 31 states. [I had no idea so many people were being screwed by GTE!] It also provides cellular phone service in 34 metropolitan areas. "The combined company's local exchange operations would be the nation's largest, with a total of 17.7 million telephone lines, and its cellular telephone business would be the nation's second-largest with a service territory containing 50 million potential customers. "In the interim, there will be no change in the way you do business with Contel. We will keep you informed of developments." How depressing! Actually there will be no need to notify Contel customers when the takeover is complete. While GTE most probably will not replace all of the digital equipment with SXS, some way will be found to muck up the service. When calling the business office, the customer will be greeted by a snippy GTE droid whose job it will be to terminate the call as quickly as possible. Repair service will no longer guarantee repair within twenty-four hours (or your monthly service is free for the month), and will start tearing up repair tickets and call them "resolved". It is the end of an era for many happy Contel customers. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: "David E. Sheafer" Subject: Cellular 611 Not Always Free Date: 22 Apr 91 12:04:12 GMT Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA I recently go my last Nynex Mobile bill and was suprised to see the following charge: 207 000-0611 ROAM 1 min 0.52 Since I though 611 was free no matter where you were I called Nynex customer service and asked them. The woman said she though 611 was always free and to hold while she checked with her supervisor. A few minutes later she came and she told me that 611 isn't always free when roaming. So it looks like Maine Cellular charges roamers for dialing 611. Has anyone else had similar occurrences? David E. Sheafer internet: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu or uucp: samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b GEnie: D.SHEAFER Cleveland Freenet: ap345 Bitnet: Sheafer_davi@bentley [Moderator's Note: I did some roaming of my own with two cellular phones (one each A and B carriers) on the trip to Kansas and plan to discuss my experiences soon. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 91 06:54:07 EDT From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@compuserve.com> Subject: 'Dumb' PBX Wanted Does anyone out there know of a 'dumb' pbx product. By that I mean a box that would connect between a group of stations and a group of trunks, and switch calls between them, but not under its own control. Control information would come via a serial (or similar) port; eg. the PBX and control device would communicate with messages like: PBX> 'Line 5 is ringing' CTRL> 'Connect Line 5 to station 7' PBX> 'Station 3 dialed 9' CTRL> 'Connect station 3 to trunk 12' I have heard rumors of 'open architectures' for PBXs, but my limited research indicates that they are only rumors. Also, cost *is* a consideration, so the latest UltraTech ZX-10,000 is probably not what I'm after. Size of the system would initially be about eight each trunks and stations, but would grow to about twice that. One of those 'make your PC into a PBX' products that seemed to be all the rage a few years ago might be just the ticket, if it came with the right driver software, or docs, but I haven't heard much about these products lately? Any pointers, or other comments. Larry Rachman, WA2BUX 74066,2004@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: Ken Mandelberg Subject: Bitview Data Line Monitor Date: 22 Apr 91 14:17:59 GMT Organization: Emory University, Dept of Math and CS Bitview sells a data line monitor for $595. This is a handheld box about the size of a breakout box, that monitors RS232 and displays the traffic on a LCD display. It has an 8K buffer. I've used fancy full size data analyzers before, and have found them useful for tracking down all sorts of problem. Having a relatively low cost portable monitor sounds like a great idea. Has anyone tried the Bitview? Is there any competition? Ken Mandelberg | km@mathcs.emory.edu PREFERRED Emory University | {rutgers,gatech}!emory!km UUCP Dept of Math and CS | km@emory.bitnet NON-DOMAIN BITNET Atlanta, GA 30322 | Phone: Voice (404) 727-7963, FAX 727-5611 ------------------------------ From: Joel Spolsky Subject: US Answering Machine in Israel Date: 22 Apr 91 16:37:04 GMT Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158 Hi, Does anybody know if an American answering machine will work in Israel? Thanks, Joel Spolsky spolsky@cs.yale.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: You Can Run But You Cannot Hide Date: Mon, 22 Apr 91 12:44:16 -0400 From: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu I recently moved from Tennessee to New Hampshire. My phone service in Tennessee included (among other lines and features) a main number and a distinctive ringing number. This service was disconnected 2/1/91, with a recording placed on each number to direct calls to my new main number and distinctive ring number respectively ( the point of which is that these numbers are as yet not reassigned -- as you would imagine anyway ). Well, I got my final phone bill at the end of February, which was paid, and I said adios to my old service (or so I thought). Then a couple of days ago I get a "Revised Final Bill" from South Central Bell containing one AT&T long distance phone call made in March some number I had never heard of (in Tennessee) to Ohio and charged to my distinctive ring number. Total charge $2.42. The bill also contained a "Message" stating that "This Revised Final Bill contains charges not previously billed to my account. [paraphrasing from memory here] If you can not make payment in full at this time, call the business office to arrange a convenient payment schedule." Gee, I wonder if I should finance that $2.42. Well, anyway I called SCB and told them that I had not made this call. The rep said it looked like a Third-Number call, but I would have to call AT&T to clear it up. (BTW, have any of you called AT&T recently? Their reps are extremely irritating these days, "Thank you for calling AT&T, how can I provide you with EXCELLLLLENT service today??" and at the end of the call "If my supervisor were to call you would you say I provided EXCELLLLLENT service?") Sorry, I digress.... Anyway, called AT&T, said hey this ain't my call. I explained to her that the bill it was on was for xxx-xxxx (Main number), and that the call was billed to yyy-yyyy (my distinctive ring number) -- which confused the **** out of her. She then read off the number the call was placed from and told me that THAT was my old phone number -- I disagreed. She looked it up and told me it belonged to a Hotel and according to her computer was linked to my old distinctive ring number. She removed the charge, and told me to call SCB back to tell them to remove the link. Well, not wanting to get billed for every phone call coming from a hotel, I did just that. Well, the SCB rep was confused, said such things are impossible, and that I have nothing to worry about (we'll see I guess). She also mentioned that the AT&T rep had failed to remove the local tax from my phone call ($.16) and that I had better call them back or my account would end up being delinquent. Nothing like spending an hour to save a couple bucks, huh. And hopefully I would receive a bill next month for every LD call made by the guests of this hotel. Tim Irvin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1991 15:59:00 -0400 From: Mark Brader Subject: Cellular Phone Helps Catch Robbery Suspects Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada A story printed in the {Toronto Star} on March 2 has just come to my attention. It seems that a 25-year-old businessman ("Dave") in the Toronto suburb of North York was in his bank to make a deposit when three masked people came in, one carrying a rifle. Dave quickly returned to his car, where his assistant ("Sanka", 22) was waiting. She called 911 on the car's cellular phone. The robbers left the bank (with about $10,000) and drove off before the police could arrive. Dave gave chase. The story notes that speeds "topping 100 km/h (60 mph)" were reached on side streets, and that "At one point, Dave drove through a red light, trying to attract the attention of a nearby police cruiser." That car and other police cars soon joined in the chase ("following Sanka's directions" -- so did he really need to attract attention as stated, or was that really just to continue the chase?). After "about six minutes", the pursued car went out of control and three suspects were arrested. Dave and Sanka were praised by police for their assistance. (Discussion of high-speed chases on side streets is not relevant to TELECOM Digest, of course.) Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com ------------------------------ From: Nick Sayer Subject: Re: Radio Reception on Telephone Date: 22 Apr 91 04:06:36 GMT Organization: The Duck Pond, Stockton, CA herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes: > In article , lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue. > edu (Kyler Laird) writes: >> A friend of mine has a problem with radio reception on his home >> telephone. The FCC told him to use a choke. That's it!? He hasn't >> tried this yet, but I'd like to know what his other options are. >> Also, I'd appreciate knowing the theory behind this. > Perhaps the basic idea is to find the person operating the transmitter > and choke him. Dan just lit my fuse. I am an amateur radio operator and have been on the receiving end of an irate neighbor who had a shoddy "Time Magazine" phone. My transmitter, operating legally, and in total compliance with FCC regulations (and then some!) was blamed by the idiot because, of course, nothing ever went wrong when I was not transmitting. In RFI troubleshooting, being "the cause" and being "at fault" are two different things. It's stupid and irresponsible remarks like Dan's that continue to perpetuate the attitude that force Hams to constantly be on the defensive. Dan owes all of us (450,000 in the United States alone) an appology. Nick Sayer mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us N6QQQ [44.2.1.17] 209-952-5347 (Telebit) ------------------------------ From: nanook@eskimo.celestial.com (Robert Dinse) Subject: Re: Radio Reception on Telephone Date: 22 Apr 91 17:57:15 GMT Organization: ESKIMO NORTH (206) 367-3837 SEATTLE WA. In article , lairdkb@mentor.cc.purdue. edu (Kyler Laird) writes: > A friend of mine has a problem with radio reception on his home > telephone. The FCC told him to use a choke. That's it!? He hasn't > tried this yet, but I'd like to know what his other options are. > Also, I'd appreciate knowing the theory behind this. I am fortunate enough to live close to a 50 KW AM stations transmitter tower and it has the unfortunate side effect of turning everything into a radio receiver. A couple of .001 capacitors from each side of the line to ground seems to work adequately for getting the RF out of the phone here. But another thing that can complicate the issue, the RF would never be detected and become audio if it weren't for something non-linear playing detector. As it happens, phones generally have clipping diodes across the receiver, the purpose of which is to keep clicks from blowing your ear-drums out, but they also tend to make good RF detectors. ------------------------------ From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Radio Reception on Telephone Organization: Northwestern University Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1991 15:40:06 GMT >> A friend of mine has a problem with radio reception on his home >> telephone. The FCC told him to use a choke. That's it!? He hasn't >> tried this yet, but I'd like to know what his other options are. >> Also, I'd appreciate knowing the theory behind this. Well, a "choke" is a fairly simple device consisting mainly of capacitors and inductors and the purpouse of which is to short out the RF radiation before it gets detected in your phone. It can be effective sometimes, and totally worthless at times. > Perhaps the basic idea is to find the person operating the transmitter > and choke him. Aaahh, that is why you can always read in ham radio magazines about angry neighbours coming to the local ham to complain about RFI and TVI (Radio Frequency Interference and TeleVision Interference) BEFORE they even have gotten the transmitter out of the box. Yes, that seems quite common. IDENTITY: Anvin, H. Peter STATUS: Student INTERNET: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu FIDONET: 1:115/989.4 HAM RADIO: N9ITP, SM4TKN RBBSNET: 8:970/101.4 EDITOR OF: The Stillwaters BBS List TEACHING: Swedish ------------------------------ From: Jeff Carroll Subject: Re: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted Date: 22 Apr 91 18:48:20 GMT Reply-To: Jeff Carroll Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics In article bcstec!sleepy!allyn@uunet. uu.net (Mark Allyn) writes: > Try Boeing Surplus in Kent, Washington. They are the surplus outlet for > the Boeing Company and you find all kinds of incredibly wierd tools there. Yes, and most of them are broken. The usable stuff usually gets skimmed off before it ever hits the floor of the surplus store, diverted to area residents with contacts in the Boeing surplus department, or sold in bulk to quantity buyers. Case in point is the local cult of "I want a VAX in my basement" types, who are well connected to Boeing Surplus about the impending arrival of any DEC product. Last time I was there, though, there was a WHOLE BASKET of Anderson-Jacobson 300 baud acoustically-coupled modems going for $10 each :^). Sometimes you can find servicable used office furniture there, but IMHO it is definitely a hit/miss proposition. Jeff Carroll carroll@ssc-vax.boeing.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #299 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17329; 23 Apr 91 3:18 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa26786; 23 Apr 91 1:49 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab00059; 23 Apr 91 0:45 CDT Date: Tue, 23 Apr 91 0:00:14 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #300 BCC: Message-ID: <9104230000.ab00120@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Apr 91 00:00:03 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 300 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Comments on History of Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing [Larry Lippman] Re: Wanted: Answering Machine Autodisconnect Circuit [Tim Irvin] High Performance Computing Act (Nat'l Research & Education Net) [N. Allen] Re: Computer/Telex Interface [Nigel Allen] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Comments on History of Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing Date: 22 Apr 91 23:09:46 EST (Mon) From: Larry Lippman In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > North provided at least two notable innovations to the > telephone industry. First, North made the first Private Automatic > Exchange for the Galion, Ohio High School in 1920. The first all-relay central office installation by the North Electric Company was made in Lima, Ohio in 1914. This apparatus design was largely based upon patents issued to Edward E. Clement beginning in 1906. > Its name, PAX, is the source of this term in the non-Bell > telephone industry. I always understood the term "PAX" to have been coined by the Automatic Electric Company. They certainly used it enough in their literature and technical manuals! My 1932 edition of "Telephone Theory and Practice" by Kempster Miller explicitly gives credit to Automatic Electric for the term "PAX". > From that point, in 1906, Kellogg grew to be one of the major > names supplying telephone equipment to non-Bell companies. Kellogg, > in fact, had many innovations to its credit before Bell did, among > these the "Grabaphone," a hand-held transmitter-receiver some years > before Western Electric's first one in 1926 ... and the Kellogg phone > was truly superior by 1933. My late-1920's vintage Kellog catalog describes their handset with the tradename "MasterphonE" (that's really a trailing uppercase E), "being the product of twenty years of development" - which is consistent with the 1906 date above. They also describe the handset as being constructed from "Kellite", which I suspect is either bakelite or hard rubber. It is also amusing to note that while this catalog gives an address for Kellog at 1066 West Adams St. in Chicago, they give no telephone number! In my opinion, not all Kellog products were winners, though. Kellog produced a bizarre dial intercom system during the 1930's and 1940's which used a single selector that was a cross between a rotary stepping switch and an X-Y switch (the mechanism is difficult to describe without a drawing). This was a dial intercom which had a basic capacity of 19 stations. The station numbering went 1, 2, ... 8, 9, 01, 02, ... 09, and 00. The stepping switch was positioned at the *total* of the dialed pulses. If you dialed rapidly (the inter-digit timing control was crude), you could reach station "8" by dialing 5 followed by 3, or station "09" by dialing 5 followed by 6 followed by 8, etc.! This intercom was really a piece of junk, though, and while the stations resembled standard dial telephones, they did not even have sidetone reduction networks. Somewhere in my collection I have one of these Kellog dial intercoms, plus other pre-ITT Kellog artifacts. I bought most of them about twenty years ago at a liquidation auction of the Larkin Sound Company in Buffalo, NY. Larkin Sound was a major distributor of Kellog products from the 1920's through 1950's. Larkin Sound was rather well known at one time, having been founded by a descendant of the family who operated the Larkin Products Company, which ran a mail order operation whose size rivaled that of Sears Roebuck and Montgomery Ward in the early 1900's. But I digress... > Kellogg remained a power in the non-Bell industry until ITT bought > it in 1952, ITT cleaned house at Kellog, with one of the first products to get the ax being the above dial intercom system! > GTE began buying companies and feeding business to > its own manufacturing subsidiary, Automatic Electric. GTE simply > decided in the 1950's to copy things that Bell had so successfully > clamped controls on a half-century earlier. In my opinion, GTE/AECo copied little from the Bell System. GTE did many things the AECo way. The GTE telephones were primarily descendents of the AECo "Monophone". The handsets, transmitters, receivers, network, dial and ringer were *pure* AECo, and had no design based upon WECo. As an example, the GTE/AECo "Styleline" telephone, which externally was similar to the WECo "Trimline", was totally different in internal design; even the handset cord connector design was different. Offhand, the only significant item of similarity was that the GTE/AECo 1A2 key telephone system used a clone of the WECo 584 panel. However, all KTU's and key telephone sets were of totally different design than that of WECo. An interesting GTE/AECo "innovation" was a synthesized music-on-hold generator card; whether its synthesized "music" (really!) was better than silence is debatable. :-) GTE/AECo relied heavily upon the Suttle Apparatus Company for connecting blocks, jacks, etc. GTE/AECo also provided modular jacks long before they became the norm in the Bell System. I first saw modular jacks from GTE/AECo around 1970 - before I ever saw them in the Bell System. I said to myself at the time that "these dinky plugs (as opposed to a 505A plug) will never work". Boy, was I wrong! :-) > Among things that > Stromberg and Carlson contributed to the industry was the first real > telephone set that was complete on a desktop on its own, including > magneto and ringer, instead of mounting on the wall. But, one of their > best clients, Rochester Home Telephone Company purchased control and > moved Stromberg-Carlson to Rochester, NY to protect their source of > supply from Bell predators. Stromberg-Carlson has led a checkered existence in the past twenty years. They were a division of General Dynamics that was largely based in Rochester, NY; however, General Dynamics closed most of the Rochester operation around 1970 and moved the corporate headquarters and much of the operation to Tampa, FL. Stromberg- Carlson did a significant amount of military business; I believe that General Dynamics may have absorbed that business into another division, while leaving Stromberg-Carlson as a provider of solely domestic telephone apparatus. I am not certain of the subsequent changes, though. The remains of Stromberg-Carlson changed their name to Comdial during the early 1980's, but may have now changed it back. I believe they may have also been acquired by Plessey. I have been out of the telephone industry mainstream for too many years to keep track of these things; perhaps another reader knows of their present fate. Interestingly enough, while Rochester Telephone may have once depended upon Stromberg-Carlson for switching apparatus, this changed significantly during the 1950's. For major central office installations, Stromberg-Carlson became one of the largest non-Bell customers of Western Electric, and installed No. 5 XBAR like it was going out of style. As soon as they could get it, Rochester Telephone installed No. 1 ESS, followed by TSPS and newer generation WECo ESS products. Rochester Telephone even had one of the first WECo No. 1 SPC's that was running an electronic tandem network (for Kodak?). They even had one of the first TSPS installations with an RTA, which I always thought was unusual considering how central the city of Rochester was to their operations. Their outlying CDO's may still have some X-Y, but most should have already been replaced by WECo (actually AT&T Network Systems) and Northern Telecom DMS-series apparatus. > The obvious Scandinavian bias of Stromberg's founders led them > to license manufacture of L.M. Ericsson mechanical telephone switching > technology known in the U.S. as the "Stromberg X-Y" switching machine. > X-Y was enormously popular in the non-Bell telephone companies just > after World War II. X-Y is a progressive control system, not unlike that of SxS. I have worked with X-Y apparatus and never liked it. In my opinion it was some of the most inferior CO apparatus ever built. The X-Y bank multiple wires are extremely fragile and prone to dirt and grease contamination that cannot be easily cleaned (as opposed to SxS rotary banks which are easy to clean). If the wires get bent for some reason (like by an improperly adjusted or inserted switch, or through careless cleaning), no amount of adjustment and cajoling will ever get them straight enough for continued, reliable operation. X-Y PABX's were common, especially the Stromberg-Carlson F40 (40-line) and F80 (80-line). > One more historic name one might run across is the Leich > Electric Company at Genoa, Illinois [close to Chicago!], based upon > buying the rights of North Electric's manual telephone equipment in > one of North's low points while North was getting into automatic > switches. Curiously, what made Leich famous was its development of its > own form of automatic switch, designed by a German who had worked at > North Electric, went to Germany to fight for the Kaiser, and came back > to the U.S. after the war. Leich's relay-switch most closely resembled > a crossbar switch for some decades before the term was coined, and its > unique style was quite suited to PBXs and very small telephone > exchanges. Leich enjoyed considerable popularity in this arena, and > supplied telephone sets that bore the Leich name. Leich was acquired by Automatic Electric before it in turn was acquired by GTE. The Leich switch mechanism is called "cross-point", and would be difficult to describe without illustrations. The Leich system is common control, but uses a very simple concept with the common control function being primarily a "link allotter" circuit. This type of common control is far simpler than say, a marker in a crossbar system. The Leich switch was used for small CO's up to a few hundred lines. The Leich switch was far more popular as a PABX, with the two most common models being the Leich 40 and the Leich 80. For many years these Leich products competed with the Stromberg-Carlson F40 and F80 for the lion's share of the independent operating telephone company small PABX market. In my opinion, the Leich PABX's were far more reliable than the X-Y PABX's since the Leich apparatus had no mechanical stepping and timing mechanisms. The crosspoint switch had hold and select magnets not unlike that of a crossbar switch; everything else were relays. The Leich relays were flat spring in nature; they were fairly reliable but once out of adjustment were a real bear requiring a special type of finesse. I have learned The Hard Way that the more one adjusts a Leich relay, the worse it gets! :-) The Leich PABX was also interesting in that it was a single stage switch that was non-blocking; i.e., all stations had access to all trunks. During the early 1970's GTE/AECo made a considerable effort to upgrade the Leich PABX line into the 40B and 80B models. They replaced a rather clunky looking console with one that was truly state of the art. They provided a touch-tone feature, and made numerous improvements in electrical and mechanical design. I suspect there are AECo/Leich PABX's still in service. GTE, in what may be viewed as an unusual move for the time, formed their own interconnect installation organization in the early 1970's. They not only sold the GTE/AECo apparatus to other interconnect companies, but in certain major cities installed it themselves. The GTE interconnect organization was headquartered in Stamford, CT. They had various major nationwide accounts during the 1970's, one of which was the Mariott hotel chain. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: Wanted: Answering Machine Autodisconnect Circuit Date: Mon, 22 Apr 91 12:43:34 -0400 From: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu In TELECOM Digest V11 #297, is written: > Could anyone give me pointers to a circuit which would automatically > disconnect an answering machine when at least one phone connected to > the line is off hook (picked up), and restore the normal operating > state of the answering machine, when all phones are back on hook. I have such a device, called PHONE ALONE. When any extension in the house is picked up, it disconnects whatever device is connected to it (in my case an answering machine), but it is advertised to be used with a phone extension (for privacy). When the extension is hung-up it resets to normal operation. I believe I got this sucker from The $harper Image. If you can't find it let me know and I'll try to find out where it can be had. Tim Irvin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Apr 91 00:30 EDT From: Nigel Allen Subject: High Performance Computing Act (Nat'l Research & Education Net) Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto I saw the following message in comp.misc, and thought it might be of interest to TELECOM readers. "Today" in Raul Rockwell's message is April 18. From: cs450a03@uc780.umd.edu (Raul Rockwell) Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: High Performance Computing Act (Nat'l Research & Education Net) Date: 18 Apr 91 19:20:49 GMT Organization: The University of Maryland University College I happened to notice that the House passed its version of the High Performance Computing Act today (H.R. 656, if I remember right). That's the beastie that would establish a multi-gigabit long-haul network (Nation Research and Education Network). This thing has been kicking around for several congresses, but this time it seemes to be flying through committees -- if I had to guess, I'd guess that it will become law sometime this year. Quick recap of the bill: (*) it directs a bunch of agencies to allow grant money to be spent on funding the network. (*) there are a batch of studies that are to be done, and Congress and the President are supposed to review some of these studies annually. (*) National Science Foundation is supposed to be connecting colleges, universities and libraries to the net. (*) DARPA does R&D for fiber optics, switches and protocols (*) NIST is supposed to adopt standards and guidelines (hopefully good ones). (*) NASA does research on high performace computing (mostly aeronautics, and remote sensing stuff). (*) supposedly, private industry is supposed to be kept in the action and there is stuff in there about user fees where practical. [I kinda hope this is more for high-volume activities that the new net would make possible, not "small" things like ftping to some college). Supposedly, the net is supposed to be in operation by 1996. The cost estimate is just a hair under two billion dollars. Raul Rockwell ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Apr 91 04:39 EDT From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Computer/Telex Interface Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Someone was asking about a computer-to-Telex interface. I just came across an advertisement in {Unix Review} for a fax server that can also interface with Telex. (Perhaps the company also makes a true Telex server, but I didn't check.) I know nothing about the company beyond its claims in the ad. The ad says that FaxLink: is a fax server allows multi-user systems to access the fax world from user's terminal is stand alone and hardware independent can send graphic letterheads and user signatures retries busy lines, or sends scheduled faxes after hours optionally, can Telex via Western Union* services saves time and money by directly sending a fax from the user's terminal integrates into applications easily For more information on Fax-Link, contact: Intuitive Technology Inc. 30 Colony Park Circle Galveston, Texas 77551 telephone (409) 740-3990 fax (409) 765-7073 *Yes, I know that Western Union sold its Telex business to AT&T. I'm just quoting from the ad. Perhaps other fax servers also have a Telex interface. The original poster may want to investigate this. I don't know much about fax servers myself. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #300 ******************************