Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07974; 27 May 91 23:53 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12684; 27 May 91 22:06 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa25293; 27 May 91 20:59 CDT Date: Mon, 27 May 91 20:45:05 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #401 BCC: Message-ID: <9105272045.ab21758@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 May 91 20:44:56 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 401 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Technology Versus Money [Donald E. Kimberlin] Access Charge Goes UP [John Higdon] Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Larry Lippman] DTMF Decoder Chip Wanted [Steve Fenwick] Looking For Inexpensive Outside Wire [Steve Gaarder] Free Teletypes [Stanfield L. Smith] Telecom Export Controls [Marc Rotenberg] Re: Creative Loafing Editorial on CLASS Features [Kevin P. Kleinfelter] Re: 52x Area Codes [Carl Moore] Verbosity Correlation? [William M. Hawkins] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 26 May 91 22:13 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Technology Versus Money These pages often contain examples of technology limited, thwarted or prostituted to the greed of the "money people." The technology of telecommunications has suffered perhaps more than most, for beyond being a benefactor of human relations at greater distances than most, it is usually benign to the public safety. Airplanes can crash; ships can sink. Electrical power, gas, water and sewers run amok can kill people in their own way. But the relatively harmless technology, telecomunications, can be stretched and milked to its staggering and failing point, with little risk of arousing pulic ire from visible damage when it fails. The result is that when its capital suppliers decide to stress telecomm to failure, there's far less penalty than more generally "dangerous" technologies. There are many stories to illustrate this point, but I'd like to step over to the side of the stream, to bring you a quotation from a book that tells of how the world generally viewed two its the major characters of the 19th century, Napoleon Bonaparte, a killer emperor who pleased people because his killing brought them money anyway, and Michael Faraday, from whose discoveries we all benefit daily in untold ways ... but have forgotten. The words are so well told in the book, "A History of Electrical Engineering," by Percy Dunsheath, a retired President of the (British) Institution of Electrical Engineers and the International Electrotechnical Commission, that it's best quoted almost verbatim (with but a few insertions for clarity where Dunsheath's text refers to previous chapters of his book, indicated by parentheses): "Within a few weeks of the young bookbinder's apprentice, Faraday, making (his) historical notes of (Sir Humphrey) Davy's lecture at the Royal Institution in the spring of 1812, Napoleoon collected the Grand Army, a mighty host of soldiers from France and many other countries, armed and provisioned for a massive onslaught on Russia. As the defenders retired they laid waste the country before the advancing horde but Napoleon pressed on. At Borodino, where 100,000 dead were left on the battlefield, the last major obstacle was overcome and by the end of the summer Napoleon was in Moscow. This, however, proved to be a trap. Notwithstanding all his blandishments he failed to secure the co-operation of the Muscovites and, with the winter approaching only retreat was possible. Then followed one of the most tragic marches in history. Without food or shelter, the soldiers killed and ate their horses and died as they slept, covered by snow. Weapons and booty were abandoned and in the middle of December less than 20,000 ragged emaciated stragglers returned, all that remained of the 600,000 who had set out as a disciplined army six months before. During this same period Farady had bound up his notes of the four lectures and submitted them to Davy with a request to be found a post as an assistnat at the Royal Institution. As the stragglers from Moscow were re-entering France, Farady received a letter from Davy making an appointment which led to (Faraday's) long association with the Royal Institution during which he made so many fundamental contributions to electrical engineering. Napoleon and Faraday! What an interesting comparison and what an indictment of man's ingratitude! Napoleon, the creator of misery and death for hundreds of thousands, rests in solemn grandeur in Les Envalides (a huge marble rotunda in Paris, where Napoleon's coffin lies surrounded by the lesser heroes of France); Faraday, the great benefactor who, as founder of electrical engineering, did so much for human progress, lies in a modest grave at Highgate cemetery known to few." Dunsheath's anecdote here shows that the larger world has often and always accorded honors to the manipulator beyond those to the benefactor. Telecommunications (a true descendant of Faraday) is no exception. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 91 20:40 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Access Charge Goes UP Remember the famous "access charge" that a great many people believe has something to do with access? "On April 2, 1991, Pacific Bell filed with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for an increase in the "Network Access for Interstate Calling" charge that appears on your business bill. At the same time, we requested an increase in certain rates for special access services. "If rates are approved, they will go into effect July 1, 1991. "'Network Access for Interstate Calling' Charge "The 'Network Access for Interstate Calling' charge enables us to recover the cost Pacific Bell incurs in completing interstate calls. For the following customers who have more than one line, we have proposed an increase of about three percent, from $4.02 to $4.14 a month per line, for this access charge: *Multi-Line Business *Customer-Owned Pay Telephone (COPT) *Semi-Public Coin Telephones *Centrex "In the same filing we also requested an increase of about 28 percent in installation rates, from $346.50 to $445.00, for voice grade special access services." Would it not be a dream come true to have a business in which you could simply pull money out of your customers on a whim? Costs of completing interstate calls? Obviously, Pac*Bell figures that its customers were born yesterday. By the way, if you are a 200 line Centrex customer, the "access" increase amounts to a not-so-insignificant $24.00 per month. If you have a 200 line PBX with 30 trunks, the increase is only $3.60 per month. Centrex customers get screwed again. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Subject: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Date: 27 May 91 00:33:46 EDT (Mon) From: Larry Lippman In article YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick Broadhead) writes: > I had a similar experience just a few days ago. I dialed a number in > my own area code (416), exchange 392, and was quite surprised to hear > a double ring. This is the first time I have ever heard a double > ring on the calling end. Is it possible that you encountered a "line extender" for FAX and/or modem use, which *immediately* trips the central office ringing and supplies its own ringing signal? Under these circumstances, you may never get a chance to hear the CO ringback tone, with the resultant ringback tone being solely the product of the subscriber's line extender. > [Moderator's Note: I don't know if you meant it the way it came out, > but the telephone instrument has *nothing* to do with the ring you > hear as the caller. What you heard must have been some kind of fluke; > some temporary switch problem. PAT] The above explanation about a line extender notwitstanding, it *is* possible to hear a ringback tone modification cased by the subscriber instrument. In electromechanical CO's, such as SxS, XY and some No. 1 XBAR (if any is still left), ringback tone is usually supplied by capacitive coupling between the called subscriber line while it is being rung and the calling party side of the connector or intraoffice trunk. Some older telephones having electronic ringers may create audible signals on the telephone line due to the design of the ringer oscillator circuit. While such audible signals cannot modify the cadence of the ringback signal, they can provide a decided modification to its sound as heard by the calling party. I first noticed the above many years ago in an Ericophone (remember those?) having a electronic tone ringer. 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: steve@pro-hindugods.cts.com (Steve Fenwick) Subject: DTMF Decoder Chip Wanted Date: 26 May 91 20:46:49 GMT Does anyone know where to buy an inexpensive DTMF decoder chip? Preferable with easy interfacing capabilities. I want to build one of those turn-on-anything-from-anywhere gizmos. Thanks.... Steve CoSysop: pro-hindugods ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 02:17:36 EDT From: gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us Subject: Looking For Inexpensive Outside Wire A friend and I are planning to run some cable from my house to his, a distance of about 1000 feet, and are looking for advice on where to find suitable wire at minimum cost. The plan is to go underground right near the houses, and overhead through the trees in the intervening woods. We need at least two pairs carrying RS-422 data, and an extra pair or two for some sort of voice link would be very nice. I have scrounged some underground phone cable and some drop wire, but not enough yet. One possible source of cheap wire is military surplus WD-1 field telephone wire. I've been told that it is steel wire, or possibly a combination of copper and steel. Does anyone know which, and what kind of resistance per unit length the stuff has? Also, any gotchas about using wire intended for underground use overhead? Any other ideas? Thanks, Steve Gaarder gaarder@theory.tc.cornell.edu gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us [Moderator's Note: For only a thousand feet, why not go underground for the whole trip? It will be less conspicuous to vandals and others, and avoid the problem of trees getting cut down and winter ice storms pulling the wire down, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon 27 May 91 18:29:41 From: "Stanfield L. Smith " Subject: Free Teletypes ATTENTION Telephone equipment collectors/aficionados, HAM's, TDY support people and those involved with junior telephone groups. In a past life, I bought, sold and refurbished all types of teletype equipment. As a result I have a collection of equipment and spare parts that I am willing to donate to any person/group that can make use of them. The following is by no means a complete listing: Model 15 teletypes - Newswire vintage, 5 level baudot, gears for any standard speed. Approximately 25 units with covers, very few tables. Model 19 teletypes - Same as the 15, but on a larger table with a TD on the side and tape punch on the keyboard. Model 28RT - This unit is about 5 ft tall and the girth of a household icebox. It contains two complete and independent sets of automaticq tape repeaters. These units were used for message store and forward. Model 32ASR - This is a 5 level baudot machine capable of 75 words per minute. Looks like a Model 33 but has a 3 row keyboard. Model 33ASR and KSR - 110 baud ASCII machines. Model 35ASR and KSR - 110-150 baud ASCII machines. Intended for heavy duty continuous use. Have extra typing units for sprocket feed paper. Miscellaneous - Support supplies, gears, motors - everything needed for ongoing support of teletypes. If you are interested in any or all of this, or know someone who is, please contact me. Stanfield L. Smith stan@seadog.cns.com 516-737-2238 Lake Ronkonkoma, LI, NY (50 miles east of NYC, near Islip Airport) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 12:58:30 -0400 From: mrotenberg@cdp.uucp Subject: Telecom Export Controls The {New York Times} reported on Saturday that the Committee for Multilateral Export Controls ("Cocom") has decided to ease hi-tech export control restrictions. According to Allan Wendt, the State Department's senior representative for strategic technology policy, "The new list will provide stronger controls on truly strategic items while freeing from control those items that are are needed to modernize the economies of the proscribed countries that are no longer considered militarily critical." ("US and Allies Move to Ease Cold War Limits on Exports," {New York Times}, May 25, 1991, at A1.) The Times story does not indicate whether there were changes in the restrictions on the export of encryption technology, such as DES. According to the Times, "under the new rules agreed to late Thursday in Paris after a year of often tense talks, restrictions will be lifted on the export of almost all personal computers. Controls will remain on items like night-vision systems and supercomputers that are considered essential to maintain the Wests' superiority in military technology over the Soviet Union. American computer and telecom- munications equipment makers said that while they were generally pleased with the liberalization, they felt that the changes did not go far enough in two area, computers and telecommunications equipment. [The revised list] is expected to result in a 70 percent drop in the number of computer-export applications submitted to the commerce department. [PCs up to 486 will be decontrolled, but RISC- based machines will remain on the list]. The ability of US telecommunications equipment makers to sell more advanced fiber-optic telephone equipment to the Soviets will also be restricted under the new rules. The source for most of these concerns [upgrading Soviet telecommunications] in the United States was the intelligence community, particularly the National Security Agency. 'No one is trying to keep the Soviet Union in the Stone Age,' Mr. Wendt said. 'What the Soviet Union needs is good old-fashioned telephones.' Cocom officials vowed to strengthen export control procedures on the smaller number of items that will be restricted." Marc Rotenberg CPSR Washington Office ------------------------------ From: "Kevin P. Kleinfelter" Subject: Re: Creative Loafing Editorial on CLASS Features Date: 27 May 91 19:19:57 GMT Organization: Dun and Bradstreet Software, Inc., Atlanta, GA > The right to privacy? That's one option the phone company isn't > offering at _any_ price. Sure they do ... and at a bargain price! No phone == $0. If privacy is the essential element one desires, the mere ringing of the phone is an intrusion. Unless one has a severe medical problem, the phone is NONESSENTIAL, and is an intrusion by its very nature. No, this is not the same as saying that you don't have to take a drug test if you don't want the job. You DO need employment to live within the civilized community. Kevin Kleinfelter @ DBS, Inc (404) 239-2347 ...gatech!nanoVX!msa3b!kevin ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 91 16:34:48 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: 52x Area Codes 52x "area code" did appear on 1982 tape from AT&T. They definitely were not dialable that way then. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 91 23:25:09 CDT From: "William M. Hawkins" Subject: Verbosity Correlation? It seems to me, as I thumb through the Digest, that submissions by folks talking about Cellular Phones are mostly much longer than others. Is this because a limited number of people submit Cellular articles, and many of them (but not a valid cross section of humanity) are verbose? Or is it because people who are so wrapped up in communication that they carry a portable phone are also naturally verbose? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #401 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10608; 28 May 91 0:56 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa08402; 27 May 91 23:12 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab12684; 27 May 91 22:06 CDT Date: Mon, 27 May 91 21:27:20 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #402 BCC: Message-ID: <9105272127.ab24510@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 May 91 21:26:36 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 402 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Calling US 800-Numbers From New Zealand [Claus Tondering] Re: International Calling to 800 Numbers [Philip Gladstone] Re: ONA Offers New Horizons for Telesleaze [John Higdon] Re: I Was Caught In a Big Halon Discharge [Macy Hallock] Re: 9's in Telephone Numbers [Tim Irvin] Re: Bell Atlantic's Guardian Plan [Mike Berger] Re: DAA Help Needed [Jon Sreekanth] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Steve Pershing] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Jon Sreekanth] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Claus Tondering Subject: Re: Calling US 800-Numbers From New Zealand Organization: Dansk Data Elektronik A/S Date: Mon, 27 May 1991 06:42:54 GMT cbmvax!.UUCP!robert@uunet.uu.net (Robert L. Oliver) writes: > Contact AT&T (1-800-CALL-ATT) and find out about getting a USA DIRECT > card. I bet you could use that to make 800 calls from abroad. Anyone > know for sure? > [Moderator's Nore: With USA Direct, I think you pay for a call to the > IOC, and it is then dialed out to the desired 800 number. PAT] I tried that a couple of years ago, but the USA Direct operator would not connect me to an 800 number. Claus Tondering Dansk Data Elektronik A/S, Herlev, Denmark E-mail: ct@dde.dk ------------------------------ From: philip@beeblebrox.dle.dg.com (Philip Gladstone) Subject: Re: International Calling to 800 Numbers Organization: Data General, Development Lab Europe Date: 27 May 91 17:57:59 > [Moderator's Note: I believe the way this is handled by AT&T in their > 'USA Direct' program is you pay for a call to the International > Operating Center in Pennsylvania, then an 800 call is dialed out from > a line there. PAT] Around a year ago, I had to help an American friend who had her credit cards stolen while visiting here. Happily she had a copy of her most recent bill -- this listed the 800 number to call to report a loss. No amount of calling AT&T via their direct dial number in the UK would persuade them to connect us to an 800 number. They tried to be helpful and called the 800 number on our behalf to try and find 'the real number'. Unfortunately, it was late at night on a weekend and the operators at the credit card company didn't seem too helpful -- the AT&T operator was unable to get a real phone number out of them. Eventually we started calling friends in the US and persuaded one of them to call the 800 number. By the end of this hassle, I'd have been happy to pay operator- assisted transatlantic charges to get through! Come on British Telecom, there is money to made here. Philip Gladstone Dev Lab Europe, Data General, Cambridge, UK [Moderator's Note: Well, what I have heard lately is that if you are willing to pay for a call to the IOC, they will put it through to that point then it'll be dialed back out from there to the destination. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 01:26 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: ONA Offers New Horizons for Telesleaze Gordon Burditt writes: > This sounds like yet another scheme to jack up the rates for data > users. Many modems will abort the call if they detect voice on the > line. Ads will do wonders for call completion rates. Yes, indeed. Most sleazeTel LD companies use "software answer supervision" for determining when to start the clock on billing. The routines depend on voice detection to "guess" at supervision. If it hears any SIT, then the call is considered failed and no billing is done. On the other hand, if the asymetrical patterns of voice are detected, the call is assumed to be complete and charging begins. COCOTs also use this scheme. Currently, there is a major problem dealing with unavailable cellular phones. Most cellular providers do not use the SIT, but have a dry announcement stating that the called phone is not available. Any carrier not using hardware answer supervision will bill for the call. This would also occur for every call that had commercial matter between rings. And imagine this: you reach for your ringing phone after only one ring and you get a recording that says, "the person trying to reach you is still listening to an important announcement. Please hold until you are connected." John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 91 14:03 EDT From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: I Was Caught In a Big Halon Discharge Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 [ good discussion about Halon deleted ] >> I watched a test of a Halon fire supression system installed at Yale a >> number of years ago. The testers remained inside the room as the >> system was set off; they seemed quite unconcerned. > I suspect that the test you witnessed was performed with a dummy > substance in the tank rather than Halon. This is true. In a decent size computer room, a Halon 1301 dump can cost $10k-30k. For this reason, testing is done using another gas. The tests I particpated in (one of the companies I own does fire alarm work, and I hold a valid State of Ohio Fire Alarm Installer License) used CO2. I was told CO2 dispersed in a similar fashion as Halon and cost far, far less. All personnel were evacuated prior to the test. The only people remaining in the room had breathing gear on. (It looked like fire/mine type assisted breathing apparatus to me) The discharge itself was rather spectacular, and sure stirred up the air. A slight mist/fog could be seen. The air temperature dropped several degrees, according the the evironmental systems. Frost formed on the manifold and pipes above the tanks, and on the halon tanks themselves. The sound was impressive, too. I'm told the actual change in the air mixture in the room is rather rapid and when either halon or CO2 is used, should not be deadly. However, the possiblility of accidental asphyxiation is possbile, either by incomplete dispersal (the high discharge veolcity is intended to even mix/disperse the gas) or for physical reasons (poor health, etc>). Accordingly, the correct procedure is to evacuate without delay, and reenter only with assisted breathing apparatus until the room's atmosphere is returned to normal. Later, after I was off site, some idiot got to fooling around with the room's fire alarm system and dumped the real halon. The bill was around $20k at this site (a major insurance company), and the idiot tried to blame our fire alarm system. We had to demonstrate the system operated well within spec and also got written statements from several other people in the computer to resolve the issue. Sigh. I really didn't want to learn about Halon systems to the extent required by the situation. Note that the computer room involved was actually smaller than most major central office ESS equipment rooms are. I now notice that some of the local telcos and carriers are installing Halon systems. They are also breaking up their offices into smaller areas and using firestops and doors to compartmentalize their Halon systems and fire risks. Its about time. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG 216-725-4764 Home macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG Note: macy@ncoast.org is best reply path to me. uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy [No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you] ------------------------------ Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: 9's in Telephone Numbers Date: Mon, 27 May 91 09:29:03 +22323328 From: irvin@northstar105.dartmouth.edu In TELECOM Digest V11 #393, John Higdon writes: > irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu writes: > > What is really strange (off the subject -- sorry Pat), is that any of > > these numbers gets a recording (in fact any unused number in the area) > > that says, "The number you have reached X-X-X X-X-X-X is being checked > > for trouble, please try your call again later." > When ever you hear the "being checked for trouble" message, that > simply means that telco is forwarding the number to the referral > machine and that nothing has yet been programmed in to the machine > itself. That part I did understand, what I was complaining about is their choice of default messages. "being checked for trouble" implies that this is a valid number but that the line is temporarily out-of-order. A better message would be "this line is not in service", or the old standby "this line has been disconnected, or is no longer in service". Here there is no possibility of confusing this with a working line. Tim [Moderator's Note: We also have one here which says, 'the number you dialed, XXX-XXXX yet be connected. Please try your call again later.' The 'may' and 'not' are run together like one word. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Berger Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic's Guardian Plan Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Mon, 27 May 1991 14:48:48 GMT cml@cs.umd.edu (Christopher M Lott) writes: > I believe Mr. Collins is mistaken; the Guardian plan as I understand > it explicitly DOES cover all customer telephone equipment, and > includes a loaner phone while the offending instrument is in the shop. It only covers repairs on phones you rent from Bell Atlantic. However, you do get a loaner while yours is in the shop (limited time). > On a related note, I'll be moving into student housing run by the > University in July. I had to sign a statement acknowledging receipt > of a copy of the C&P Line Maint. policy (will check for time before ... > Is there anyone living in an apartment who has used this insurance? > Where was the problem (according to them)? What was the resolution? > Does anyone know who is responsible for maintaining the punchdown > blocks etc. that pertain to telephone service for apartment complexes? > Is it telco? If your toilet breaks, are you responsible for the plumbing bills? You should not be responsible for problems with building services. Whether the phone company is responsible or the landlord isn't your concern. YOU aren't responsible for it. > I sorta figure I should get the $.85 insurance because if anything at > all goes wrong, the morons in the housing office will be quick to > charge me, I'm certain. ``Hey, you were warned. You signed the > receipt.'' Mike Berger Department of Statistics, University of Illinois AT&TNET 217-244-6067 Internet berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell generally assumes responsibility up to the point the wire comes in your apartment *in older buildings with house pairs going back long before divestiture.* In newer buildings, they sometimes pass the house pairs off as the landlord's problem. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jon Sreekanth Subject: Re: DAA Help Needed Date: Mon, 27 May 1991 16:37:41 GMT In article Paul Sutter writes: > 1) FCC Part 68 says the dc on-hook impedance should be 5 megohms. > EIA-470 says at least 25 megohms. Which should I follow? iI is much > easier for me to exceed 5 megohms than 25. The way it was explained to me, for a "DC REN" of 1.0, the DC on-hook impedance below 100V should be 25 Meg. Since a max of REN 5.0 is permitted, the minimum DC impedance is 5 Meg. I've seen the EIA spec, but it can't be mandatory, because I have a Rat Shack gadget which has detailed specs, and lists its resistance as 10M on-hook, 300 ohm off-hook. The only issue is whether you expect other parallel connected devices (extension phones, etc) sharing the line with your device, in which case you don't want to use up the REN 5.0 budget. > 2) Many DAA circuits I have seen include the following surge > protection: > (tip) ----/\/\/\/\/----+-------- | (varistor) | > (ring) ----/\/\/\/\/----+-------- > With 5 ohm resistors, how are the wattage ratings determined? I have > seen anything from 1 watt to quarter watt resistors used. likewise I > have seen variation in the varistor used. Since these are for surges, > how do you calculate the necessary ratings? The way I've done it is figure out the maximum "regular" voltage on the phone line (48V + 1.4*150 ... FCC ring B has a max of 150V). Varistors seem to have a broad range of breakdown voltage, not a crisp zener like voltage, so I've ended up using a 360V nominal varistor. The resistors should have enough wattage not to blow under the FCC simulated lightning strike (25A of 10*560 uS surge at 800V). I actually use a slow blow fuse in place of the resistors; that gives me UL1459. Regards, Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems Fax and PC products 346 Lincoln St #722, Marlboro, MA 01752 508-562-0722 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World From: Steve Pershing Date: Mon, 27 May 91 14:22:52 PDT Organization: Questor - Free Internet/Usenet*Vancouver*BC::+1 604 681 0670 john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > If you really want your phones to ring with a cadence separate from the > one supplied by your central office, then you will have to invest in > some sort of phone system, be it a PBX, hybrid, or a key system. Not to belabour the point, but there are tone-ringer chips from many chip manufacturers which can be relatively easily configured to produced whatever ringing cadence one wants, given a bit of electronic knowledge. Chips from Motorola and Mitel come to mind. I think a simple circuit consisting of a CMOS 555-type timer powered by a bridge rectifier across the telephone line (and isolated by means of neon lamp) would do the job. The 555 could be used to trigger and/or power the Tone Ringer chip as I think it can supply around 20ma current (if memory serves me correctly). 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: Jon Sreekanth Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: Mon, 27 May 1991 17:29:39 GMT In article YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick Broadhead) writes: > Are there any telephones on the market for a residential line that > produce a double ring? Or is such a feature restricted to PBX system > phones? > [Moderator's Note: I don't know if you meant it the way it came out, > but the telephone instrument has *nothing* to do with the ring you > hear as the caller. What you heard must have been some kind of fluke; > ome temporary switch problem. PAT] You may have reached a fax switch, or some similar hack. These units pick up the line on hearing a ring signal, and send out a "phantom ringback", waiting to sense a fax or modem carrier tone. A lot of them generate a pretty yucky ringback (= single stage filtered square wave). Since the ring at the called end and the telephone company ringback sent back to the caller are un-synchronized, and these boxes pick up the line very fast, it's possible that the only "ringback" the caller hears comes from terminal equipment, not telco ringback. Though it's surprising that they should generate a non-standard ringback, instead of the standard US ringback. At least one fax switch I know of (CCI, Colorado ?) has an EPROM upgrade to generate different countries' ringbacks. But to get back to the main thread: is it "mandatory" for all US exchanges to generate the familiar ringback ? Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems Fax and PC products 346 Lincoln St #722, Marlboro, MA 01752 508-562-0722 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #402 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13308; 28 May 91 2:01 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09829; 28 May 91 0:18 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab08402; 27 May 91 23:12 CDT Date: Mon, 27 May 91 22:51:56 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #403 BCC: Message-ID: <9105272251.ab21279@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 27 May 91 22:51:49 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 403 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? [Donald Kimberlin] Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? [haynes@cats.ucsc.edu] Re: Why a Twist in Modular Cables? [Macy Hallock] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 May 91 18:05 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? Responding to the Moderator, writes: > I'm looking at ... (Radio Physics Course ... that tells about > talking movies ... The Vitaphone system developed by Bell Labs > used approx 15-inch diameter records turning at 33-1/3 rpm. Must > have been a gutsy way to make movies, since the sound was recorded > at the same time as the filming and you couldn't edit the record. > Obviously the reason for the large slow record is to make it last as > long as a reel of film. It sure was, and a gutsy way to show them, too. While the original Vitaphone-by-disk method was long gone by the time I came along to work in movie theatres as a teenager, the Vitaphone disk turntable was still there, mounted on the rear of the projector lamp bases. I was told the projectionist had to be a slip-cueing DJ, playing the record for the current reel in as close to lip sync as possible. Even though sound-on-film came along and killed disks in the projection booth, the Vitaphone name lived through several techniques. If you look carefully at the title screens of Warner Brothers Looney Tunes, you'll see the Vitaphone name listed there. Haynes continues: > While this format didn't last long in the movies it did carry over to > radio broadcasting. Up until the 1950's broadcast radio stations had > libraries of "transcriptions" on 15-inch 33-1/3 rpm disks. These > contained all kinds of stuff: music, sound effects, historical > speeches, etc. At WTSP in St. Petersburg, FL we did all those things, right up into the late 1950's. We had two major "transcription libraries," The World Transcription Service and the Standard Transcription Library. Both were 33-1/3 rpm recordings on "16-inch" disks, as the size was called. Western Electric's piece of this was evidenced on the Standard transcriptions, which were "vertical cut," that is, the needle action was vertical in the groove as opposed to lateral in consumer records. There were claims that "vertical cut" was higher-fidelity than lateral cut. To play them back, we had "transcription heads" on the turntables that could be switched to use either vertical-sensitive or lateral-sensitive pickup windings. (Yes, windings ... these were BIG, clunky, long playback arms that while very well-balanced, weighed a pound or so it seemed. To play a warped record, we'd set a line of lead type from the composing room on top of the playback head! Other stations had to use a 50 cent or dollar coin.) The standard transcriptions bore WECo's mark in the form of a patent license notice for use of the vertical technique. Haynes continues: > Also programs could be distributed in this way; > programs not considered important enough to rate real-time wire > network transmission. Some stations had recording equipment so they > could record important events broadcasts on disks. Absolutely. Among the things WTSP's library contained was all two thousand or so episodes of the "Lone Ranger." Every weekday evening at 7, I played the one scheduled on the log for that day. And, tape recording was not yet all that trusted yet, so we "delayed" many programs by cutting our own acetate disks off the network line, holding them hours or days, and playing our locally-made "e.t." when scheduled. Perhaps the wildest form of this was delaying Sunday baseball games until local blue laws permitted broadcasting a sporting event. There, we'd be recording the game in 15-minute segments, then playing the disks back in sequence an hour or two into the game. Few people know that WECo was heavily into broadcasting equipment. Bell Labs, of course, did the basic design, but had been into building a wide variety of radio equipment since very early days. The entry of Bell interests into radio broadcasting with WEAF at New York brought to radio, among other things, the "commercial announcement," as AT&T fully expected radio broadcasting to be a "message service" for sale, every bit as much as a letter, telegram, or telephone "message." In a set of relations so complex as to defy sorting out, AT&T and RCA both cooperated and competed in various forms of early radio. These included Bell's use of RCA transmitters at Rocky Point for the low-frequency New York-London SSB radio, numerous Bell Labs experiments at Deal Beach, NJ, and experimental station 3XN at Whippany, NJ. 3XN was reported in a 1928 book to use a Western Electric 7-A transmitter with a capacity of 200 kilowatts, operated at 50 kilowatts, equipped with Western Electric-made water-coooled power tubes. Another paragraph of the 1928 book said that WCAP in Washington, DC had been recently closed due to "complicated legal difficulties," but that it had been operated by the Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company for three years. This was likely part of the action around that time in which AT&T withdrew from operating radio broadcasting outlets. WCAP's transmitter was said to have been designed by a 'Mr. Colpitts of the Western Electric Company." (Radio people certainly recognize the name Colpitts!) WBAP at Fort Worth was said to have a Western Electric transmitter, made with "two 250-watt oscillators and two modulators of the same power" (500 Watts of modulated oscillator? Egads!). In fact, well into the 1950s, WECo was a major player in the supply of radio broadcasting equipment for both the studio and the transmitter. At WTSP, our three antenna towers had been supplied by the Blaw-Knox Company, ordered through the Graybar Supply office in Tampa, FL, in order to support our WECo-made FM antenna that was fed from our WECo 405B FM transmitter, whioh was full of WECo tubes, from the smallest to the largest, a 10 kilowatt VHF amplifier. There were numerous WECo AM transmitters and WECo 25-Type studio audio consoles still in use by the late 1950s. While RCA, Collins, GE, Westinghouse, Federal and Gates all made broadcasting transmitters, it can fairly be said that Western Electric was the standard of excellence in that era of broadcasting -- top price, but admittedly most durable. It was an earlier consent decree agreed by AT&T that took WECo out of the broadcasting supply business. Up into the very late 1950's, WTSP was still buying odds and ends like WECo tubes and patch cords from the Graybar office at Tampa (and we could buy WECo telephones, too -- ostensibly for the purpose of "broadcasting order wire use). But WEco was at sea, also. An illustration from the 1928 book shows a "Western Electric 50-Watt combination Radiotelegraph and Telephone transmitter, Type T-1-A, enclosed in protecting cabinet on board a 75-foot patrol boat of the U.S. Coast Guard." It is matched with a Western Electric Type CGR-1-A superheterodyne receiver. The frequency range is described as 1700 to 2500 kilocycles. Also, a "new type of calling apparatus," by the name "CGR-9 Transmitter attachment" and "CGR-10 reciever attachment," made by Western Electric. Any worker with early mobile radios of the 1950s will recognize these mechanical keyers and selectors as the same technology used 25 years later by local Telcos for mobile phones. And WECo's early days seem to have included manufacture overseas, too. A 1928 description of the British radio behemoth, GFEX, operating on 16 kilohertz (egads!) with an output of 540 kilowatts that produced 600 amps of RF current in a 1-ohm antenna that was 2-3/4 miles long, was reported to use power tubes that were "all Western Electric water-cooled, made at New Southgate, England. The power unit consists of 18 valves, having each an output of 10 kilowatts ... " Thus, to produce the 540 kilowatts output, three of these `power units' were paralleled to add the 180 kilowatts output of three together. This beast produced an RF current of 700 amps in its antenna. Back to recordings: John Levine writes: > Western Electric had a long-standing interest in sound recordings. > During the 1930's they had a project to make ultra-hi-fi recordings > far beyond the then-standard 78 RPM records. They recorded things > like Beethoven symphonies played by famous orchestras. I've heard > transcriptions of a few and the sound is even by modern standards > excellent. With its reason for interest in high-quality sound for radio broadcasting and motion pictures, the art of recording sound on film had produced the most noise-free recording medium of the era preceding magnetic recording. I have recall, but no documentary sources, of WECo's engaging in mastering sound recordings on film; these may have been part of the (at that time) superb sound quality of the Standard Transcription Library. One reason so far as consumer sound recording was concerned is described by Roland Gelatt in his "The Fabulous Phonograph: 1877-1977" (Macmillan, New York, 1977, 2nd ed.): He says that by 1933, "... the record business in America was practically extinct," referring to almost 70 years of virtually no development beyond Edison's basic acoustic methods. Apparently, the record industry had not of its own accord adopted any of the advances that electronics could bring. Even so, my 1928 reference book shows a phono pickup and states that, "Modern electric phonographs, usually combination phonograph and radio broadcast receiver ..." But, another limit had been set for WECo in a 1926 settlement between RCA and AT&T that took AT&T out of radio broadcasting operations: WECo was barred from competing with RCA in the manufacture of consumer radio broadcast receivers; thus, a WECo-made consumer radio could not contain a phonograph. So, while it might seem that the Great Depression was sounding a death knell for the record business, "The Movies" were coming on strong. Yet another director for WECo to stick with its industrial products. For all its various activities, Western Electric of the period after 1930 or so seems to have been interested only in commercial products and sales of its systems to industry. Meantime, Haynes concludes with: > Oh, and my grandmother had a Western Electric sewing machine. It seems that around WW I days, Western Electric was into many sorts of products. I located one reference to early days of things electrical that described an Edison product called an "electric pen." It was a 4,000 rpm electric motor with a short crank connected to a stylus used to punch many tiny holes in copying stencils. The reference says, "The pen was widely advertised and when the Western Electric Co. took it up large numbers were sold. At one time, more than 60,000 were in use..." I also have vague recall of Western Electric having been involved in a wide variety of products over its early years, but have no good single history of the company. Since it was of Cicero, IL origin and was so important there for so long, perhaps there is some Chicago-area history describing the full breadth of Western Electric's ventures over time. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? Date: Mon, 27 May 91 10:32:42 PDT From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu, aynes@cats.ucsc.edu Re: 16-2/3 RPM recordings - I suspect they are still in use as "talking books for the blind" though they may have been supplanted by cassettes by now. Your public librarian could probably tell you. At one time a blind person could get the loan of a player, from the Library of Congress as I recall, and the materials for the blind were mailable free or at very low rates. There was also a project by I think it was Chrysler to produce an automobile record player at that speed. This was maybe mid-50s, long before cassettes and eight-track cartridges. And for some reason that reminded me of yet another recording format. I vaguely recall a short-lived product from mid 60's that involved a disk record and player that were supposed to be small enough to fit in your hip pocket. Or maybe it was just the records, and they were flexible so if you sat on one that was OK. Which is getting pretty far from telecom. [Moderator's Note: I've done volunteer work for ten years for the Chicago Public Library producing programs for visually-handicapped people. The 16 2/3 rpm records were gone *long* before I started. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 May 91 13:39 EDT From: Macy Hallock Reply-To: macy@ncoast.org Subject: Re: Why a Twist in Modular Cables? Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 >> Can anyone tell me why there is an electrical twist in most (US) >> modular cables? >> I got to thinking about this recently when I started using these >> cables for RS-232. If you're clever about pin assignments, this twist >> can be useful for RS-232. > If the plugs are crimped on so the wires go straight through, and all > adapters are wired that way, you will have no problems. Not always true. Phone people generally think in terms of all punch on type jumper wiring up to the wall jack. This is straight thru type operation ... until the base cord to the instrument is reached. Now, most telecom equipment is designed to take this type of wiring scheme and reflects it in their documentation. If the phone system is using direct connections to its terminating blocks, then the system is setup for one reversal ... the one in the base cord to the set. If the system uses RJ11 or RJ14 type connectors, it usually expects two reversals (one at the system's connection to the building wiring and one at the instrument base cord). Use of intermediate patch panels has been a problem to many, including my company. We have tried using staight thru path cords on intermediate panels with some success ... and try to use an oddball length (read short) to help make them easy to tell from standard base cords. Our unofficial policy is: two and four conductor cords are always standard reversal type base cords. Six and eight conductor cords are either, but straight thru cords are to be labeled "DATA" or "STRAIGHT" or "PATCH" at both ends. Most straight thru patch type cords are three feet long here. We are looking for a source of reasonably priced cord stock in a distinctive color for use in making up straight thru cords ... red or blue would be ideal ... we have a lead on getting black, white and brown stock, but have not yet received pricing. Bear in mind that some electronic phones and data equipment can be messed up by a reversal. > That is the way the DATA industry generally does it. In many sites > 'PHONE" cords have caused needless confusion and are BANNED. With > polarity guards built into modern TT dials, and ringing being across > the line and not to ground, many sites make life simple and ALL > modular cords, both EIA DATA and 'phone' cords are wired straight > through. FWIW most folks use six or eight wire cords for everything, > and cords that come with phones are generally four or even two wire, > so the problem ones are easy to spot. This may be true on sites manned and operated by data people who are not trained/acclimated to the telecom way of things. Here, we find we must live with both worlds. Frankly, I would like to see us use DEC type RJ connectors exclusively for data, but this is not really practical ... much of the wiring we install is set up to be used either way. I have a high regard for AT&T's standards and many of the WE designs, but I think they blew it on this one ... of course I think we all only thought in terms of phone lines and tip/ring when modular phones first came out in the 70's ... and WE though only in terms of its own production efficiency. I have spent many an evening working out RS-232 DB-25 to RJ-45 adaptor wiring schemes with the operations guys ... I'd like to see how others are setting up their RJ type wiring schemes, especially in multiuse wiring schemes involving LAN, RS-232, balun and phone operations. I will happily publish a summary ... email me at macy@ncoast.org ... fax is +1 216.778.6239 Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG 216-725-4764 Home macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG Note: macy@ncoast.org is best reply path to me. uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy [No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #403 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17797; 28 May 91 4:10 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa00863; 28 May 91 2:27 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13660; 28 May 91 1:19 CDT Date: Tue, 28 May 91 0:26:25 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #404 BCC: Message-ID: <9105280026.ab03014@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 May 91 00:26:12 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 404 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Future Shock in India [Donald E. Kimberlin] New Mexico Cell Questions [Douglas Scott Reuben] NY/Metro One Switch "Update" [Douglas Scott Reuben] Potential Telesleaze Countermeasure [Jack Winslade] Thanks For Your Help [John Higdon] 101 ESS and Ringing Tones [Jack Winslade] BITNET in Wroclaw, Poland Aftermath [Richard Budd] Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? [Dave Levenson] Ringing Tones, etc. [Jack Winslade] Re: Some Comments on History of AIOD [Dave Levenson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 28 May 91 01:23 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Telecom Future Shock in India India has long been a favorite of Western writers largely because its society and culture displays nonstop contrasts to a Western mind. The recent funeral of Rajiv Ghandi is no exception, but now telecommunications adds a new dimension. The following AP dispatch appeared in Sunday papers, 26 May 91: "ASTROLOGY VIA FAX: OLD AND NEW COLLIDES IN INDIA "NEW DELHI, India (AP) - The Shankaracharya of Sri Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam, a Hindu holy man is heartsick. He says Rajiv Ghandi ignored a telefax he sent warning that astrological signs were all wrong for Ghandi's campaign visit to southern India. "The Shankaracharya's story, related in was but one of the ways in which Ghandi's assassination and funeral this week brought out the odd mixture of old and new in India. "Ghandi was slain Tuesday in what authorities believe waa a suicide bombing using plastic explosives. He was cremated Friday in traditional Hindu ceremonies going back 50 centuries. "The ancient and the modern battle daily here, sometimes refereed by a bloated beaurocracy and 19th century civility bequeathed by the former British rulers. Rich and poor eye each other warily and sometimes collide. "In the air-conditioned splendor of New Delhi's five-star hotels, a glance out the window shows the poor taking refuge from the 100 degree-plus heat, dozing on wood-and-rope cots set under dusty trees. "On Saturday, the day after Ghandi's funeral, newspapers carried a story on police using bamboo clubs to drive away the unruly masses outside the cremation grounds. Another told of fires sweeping through more than 400 huts in two poor villages near the capital. "Then there were the usual Saturday supplements directed at the 100 million of India's 844 million who are middle-class. Advice was offered on how to mix a tequila sunrise. An essay, full of winks, wondered why public relations managers of major hotels are always pretty women who swirl about in sumptuous saris. "In this jumble, it's not surprising that swashbuckling Indian film hero Amitabh Bachchan, a friend of Ghandi's family, used a walkie-talkie on Friday to help organize the 5,000-year-old Vedic ritual for the former prime minister's cremation." ------------------------------ Date: 27-MAY-1991 22:42:16.92 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: New Mexico Cell Questions Hi ... I'll be spending some time in New Mexico in about a week, and after talking (extensively) to the A and B systems there, I still could use a few answers. -> For the "A" systems: Centel seems to operate out of Santa Fe. They do NOT (according to them) have "Nationlink" (aka "Roam America, the "A"'s version of Follow Me Roaming.) Metro Mobile, in Albuquerque, does have Nationlink. Metro Mobile is DMXed to Centel, ie, you can drive from system to system and still get paged and have your Custom Calling features work. Thus, if one calls the Santa Fe roam port to reach a mobile customer, such a mobile customer will be reachable in both the Santa Fe system and the Albq. system. (This is true in other "real" DMX areas, like RI/Boston, Jersey/Phil/Wilmington, NY/Northern NJ/CT/W.Mass, etc.) My question is: Let's say I go to Albuquerque, activate Nationlink, and then spend most of my time in Santa Fe. Will I be able to get calls in Santa Fe due to the DMX? My exeprience with other systems tells me the answer is "Yes", yet I am wondering if anyone else has actually tried this out. -> As to the "B"s: Is there a "B" in Santa Fe? No one was sure about this, and there was some suggestion made that a new system had been set up but no info was available yet. Any word on this? Guess that's about it ... It should be interesting to roam around there and try out the systems. I'm just wondering how Metro Mobile/CT will manage to mess up my bill this time. They can't pass off the blame to someone else, since THEY service Albuquerque as well! Thanks in advance for any info, Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: 27-MAY-1991 22:58:46.70 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: NY/Metro One Switch "Update" In case anyone uses Metro One in the NY/NJ area, I am told that on June 14th, they plan to update their switching equipment to Ericson switches. When I asked Metro One/NY if they anticipated any outages, they replied that calls may be blocked for a few moments evey now and then after business hours when they are updating the system, but they don't anticipate any major downtime problems for extended periods of time. I recall that when they've had previous updates, there were outages of a few minutes to about an hour or so, so I'm inclined to agree. Note that DMXed customers from Cell One/South Jersey and Metro Mobile/CT who are in the area (or who have callers use the NYC roam port, which Metro doesn't like ...;) ) served by Merto One may also experience problems receiving calls AND completing OUTBOUND calls. The degree of service interruption tends to vary, so sometimes you can dial out as long as you use the full number with area code (which you don't have to use normally if you are calling to your home area), whereas at other times, all outgoing calls are blocked. I've noticed that DMXed roamers, ie, those from South Jersey, Connecticut, and Western Mass are more frequently blocked than "other" roamers. I've been told there is a correlation due to the DMX, but not one could explain why. The furthest I've ever got was "Oh, it's just the way the software works." Hmmm .... Anyhow, just though I'd mention the update. I'm told that the new switches are very dynamic, and have a great deal of new "roaming" features. Anyone have any idea what this means? Nationlink? Something else? Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 18:40:46 CST From: Jack Winslade Subject: Potential telesleaze countermeasure In a recent article, DONALD E. KIMBERLIN writes: > (Just think of listening to a 900 pitch EVERY time you place > a call!) > *LECs will derive yet a tertiary revenue source by tariffing a > monthly charge to *stop* the telesleaze on your order (Do we have > any *7n codes left for an "ad blocking" option?). (An aside here. Think of the controversy between per-line and per-call sleazoid blocking. ;-) Yes, and how about a magic box that detects the 'real' ringback signal and blanks audio between the rings. I can see a real market for those. I guess that THEY (the ubiquitous 'they') will then come up with the technology to fool those boxes into passing the slime through, but then a NEW IMPROVED box will have to be developed at twice the price. > ... and so on. The mind boggles, once the nausea subsides. I agree. Good Day! JSW ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 20:28 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Thanks For Your Help I would like to thank all of those who have sent material on Thrifty Tel via e-mail and FAX. It will be very useful in tomorrow's radio discussion. One thing has emerged as something worthwhile. There is an industry publication known as "Fraud Alert" which is a rag that discusses security and enforcement issues as pertain to the IEC business. One further point that I wish to emphasize: In no way do I or any of my associates condone or encourage fraudulent use of telecommunications facilities. When one uses a service, he must expect to pay for it. I believe this and I live it. But that does not mean that irrational and uninformed terrorization of people in the name of telecom security is to be tolerated. Particularly if that "enforcement" is simply a vehicle to enhance the sagging profits of an otherwise marginal business. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 18:35:50 CST From: Jack Winslade Subject: 101 ESS And Ringing Tones Larry Lippman writes: > The 101 ESS was also used for Centrex-CU (sometimes referred > to as Centrex-CE). The 101 ESS had internal capability for AIOD > without requiring the hardware described above. GAAAAaack! Don't remind me of that one. Up till the mid '80s we had a 101 at work. It was slaved off of a 5 crossbar and was one of the more ill-behaved of the modern switching systems. I know there are all kinds of stories of funky step switches and EAX offices, but this was right up there with them. It supposedly had all of the features such as transfer, forwarding, etc., but they never seemed to work like the book said they should. One thing that NOBODY could answer, including the two telephone types who were 'stationed' on campus, was why the ringing tone was so irregular. When a call was completed, the first ring was always quite long, sometimes as long as three or four seconds. It then settled down to a more or less one on, two off cadence. (For electronics types, it was almost as if the ring on/off was controlled by a 555 timer in the astable mode, where it took longer to charge on the first cycle. ;-) During periods of high-volume calling, it would almost never gracefully overflow into an all circuits busy condition. Sometimes it would appear to die -- no ring, no busy, no ATB, no nothing, and other times it would sputter a bit and return dial tone. It's no wonder to me why Ma Bell ash-canned these as soon as possible. Good Day! JSW ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 22:49:22 EDT From: Richard Budd Subject: BITNET in Wroclaw, Poland Aftermath A few months ago I asked TELECOM Digest readers for information about BITNET in Wroclaw, Poland and how an engineering student there could join the network. Wojceich, the Wroclaw student, has obtained an EARN address from the Technical University and tonight sent a message of appreciation for all the advice on obtaining access to the network. BTW, Poland now has two receiving nodes (Warsaw and Wroclaw) anchoring a network serving eighteen universities throughout the country. To handle the demand, the University of Warsaw is installing an IBM 3090 mainframe donated by IBM through its Academic Initiative Program. Richard Budd | E-Mail: Internet-rcbudd@rhqvm19.vnet.ibm.com VM Systems Programmer | Bitnet -klub@maristb.bitnet IBM - Sterling Forest, NY | Phone: (914) 578-3746 Please note new INTERNET address. ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? Date: 28 May 91 04:01:45 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: > Most readers of telecom who know a little about the fascinating > history of AT&T know that the Western Electric subsidiary was into a > number of things besides strictly telephones, per se, as was the Bell > Labs. I saw a genuine Western Electric washing machine and dryer at an antique show a couple of years ago! The washer was electric, and contained neither a rotating drum nor a rotating agitator. It looked like a rectangular tank (with hot and cold taps to allow the user to fill it) containing a washboard and a brush. An electric motor apparently moved the brush back and forth accross the washboard, slightly below the water-level. I think the articles being washed were placed on the board and the brush was then lowered into place before the motor was started. The dryer was another machine placed next to the washer. It apparently used to dry the washed clothes by squeezing them between rubber-coated rollers. They apparently made wringers before they started making ringers! The washer and dryer were probably from the late 1800's and had the old WeCo trademark with the lightning-bolt. No mention of 'The Bell System' or AT&T. 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, 27 May 91 18:48:43 CST From: Jack Winslade Subject: Ringing Tones, etc. YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick Broadhead) writes: > I've also noticed that busy signals and ringing signals can vary > WITHIN a country. For instance, in Canada and the United States, > these tones vary depending on the exchange dialed. ... And the Moderator Noted: > One sounds one way, another some other way. PAT] It's not only that they SOUND different, equipment that listens for the call progress tones BEHAVES differently as well. One particular prefix, 212-569 (this may have been upgraded in the last few months) still uses the older 'city ring', which has a different (lower) pitch but the same cadence as the modern 'standard' ringback tone. When my system used to dial a system on this office, it could not tell if there was a valid ring, a busy, or if the call was accidentally intercepted in Never Never Land. For example, if it called and found the system busy, it would not immediately abort and log a busy attempt, but it would wait for a timeout and log a failed session. Same for a ring with no answer. A minor inconvenience, but somewhat annoying. It's that older tone that many of us (yes, showing my age, I know) always learned as >>THE<< ringing tone when we first learned to use the phone. After I learned a bit about telephone hardware, I discovered that this tone (and it's accompanying tone, the rude, raucous busy tone -- a klaxon compared to the polite tweet-tweet of today's busy tone) was found mostly on the old panel and #1 crossbar systems, as well as some of the older #5 crossbars. These tones were generated by huge mechanical generators and used in the larger metropolitan offices. There was a discussion of ringing tones in a local conference a while back (but I can't find it now) which discussed this. It made mention of a certain suburban Omaha office which until recently had a vibrating reed tone generator. It was remarked that it sounded like the passing of gas. ;-) Good Day! JSW msged 1.99S ZTC * Origin: [200:5010/2@metronet] Interuniverse Gateway (200:5010/2) ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Some Comments on History of AIOD Date: 28 May 91 03:33:06 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > I don't believe there was ever any non-WECo apparatus that provided > an AIOD interface. When I was in the interconnect business, selling Mitel SX-200 PBX equipment, I used to notice references to AIOD in the documentation for that product. We never used the feature, or equipped a customer's system to use it, so I have no first-hand experience with it, but the SX-200 PBX, apparently, was AIOD-capable. Anybody at Mitel care to comment on this? 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 #404 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18292; 28 May 91 4:27 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab00863; 28 May 91 2:33 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab13660; 28 May 91 1:19 CDT Date: Tue, 28 May 91 0:32:59 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: Special Mailing - Patent Office Request BCC: Message-ID: <9105280033.ab32288@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> I received this message from Mr.Riddle and decided to pass it along to you as a special mailing rather than as an issue of the Digest because of its length. If you are interested in responding, do so direct as shown in the message. PAT From: "Michael H. Riddle" Subject: Computer-Related Patents: Request for Comments Date: Mon, 27 May 91 16:59:59 CDT Patrick: I know you closed the subject, but you might wish to reopen it just a little. Many of those who commented on the Hayes patent litigation had firmly held beliefs that software patents, at least as currently applied, were poor policy. Additionally, most of the submissions were intelligent and articulate, and the posters have an expertise bearing on the subject. The Patent and Trademark Office recently issued a Request for Public Comments on this very subject. If I could borrow your "bully pulpit" for a moment, might I pass on their (very lengthy) request? Thanks, Mike 56 FR 22702-02 NOTICES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office Request for Comments for the Advisory Commission on Patent Law Reform Thursday, May 16, 1991 AGENCY: Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. ACTION: Notice; request for public comments. SUMMARY: The Advisory Commission on Patent Law Reform Commission will be submitting a report to the Secretary of Commerce by August 1992 on the state of, and the need for, any reform in the United States patent system. To ensure that the Commission recommenda- tions represent a true consensus of the American public and the patent user community, public comments are invited on the issues to be considered by the Commission. DATES: Written Comments must be submitted by July 15, 1991. ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to E.R. Kazenske, Executive Assistant to the Commissioner, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Box 15, Washington, DC 20231. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Jeff Kushan, Commission Special- ist, or Paul Salmon, Commission Specialist; U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Box 15, Washington, DC 20231. Phone: (703) 557-3071. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission requests public comments on the issues set forth below. Each issue should be individually addressed. Submissions should be concise statements of position, including supporting material where relevant, and should be limited to the questions framing each issue. All submissions must include the name and/or professional affiliation of the contributor. To ensure full consideration by the Commission, the submissions should be received by July 15, 1991. I. Protection of Computer Related Inventions The principal issue to be examined is whether the current U.S. patent laws provide adequate and appropriate protection of novel computer program-related inventions. The relationship of patent protection for computer program-related inventions to other forms of intellectual property protection will also be considered. (a) What problems, if any, exist in the current framework of laws which protect computer-related inventions (b) What changes, if any, should be made in the domestic and international systems for protection of computer-related inventions (c) The Supreme Court has found that new and useful computer program-related inventions are eligible for patent protection. What rationale, if any, exists in law or policy for Congress to now remove patent protection for this field of science and technology (d) What evidence exists, if any, that patents issued on new and useful computer program-related inventions do or do not provide an incentive to conduct research and development on new products, and that such patents do or do not promote the development of new technology (e) What conflict or overlap is created by the existence of a patent for a new and useful computer program-related invention and either (1) a copyright for original expression embodied in the computer program fixed therein, or (2) a mask work in the inven- tion; and if any exists, is it harmful or helpful (f) Should Congress legislate the boundary for patents in the computer program area, or is it preferable to permit the courts to continue to define the outer boundary (g) Are the tests of patentability for computer program-related inventions implemented by the USPTO in the notice published in the Official Gazette on August 9, 1989, consistent with the patent statute and/or court decisions If there are inconsistencies, what are they (h) What concrete steps should be taken, if necessary, to revise the PTO examination procedure for computer program-related inventions in order to achieve high-quality issued patents, particularly with respect to: 1. Providing patent examiners with complete, up-to-date prior art; 2. Providing patent examiners with training in this field to raise/maintain their expertise; 3. Recognizing computer science as a "science" for the purpose of qualification to take the PTO registration examination and recruiting computer scientists as patent examiners; 4. Providing an optimum system of classification to maximize the searchability of inventions in this field; and 5. Taking steps to reduce the PTO pendency time for patent applications in this field (i) What procedures, not currently available, should be consid- ered to correct problems caused by improperly granted patents (i.e., post grant oppositions, court nullification), and how would these procedures particularly relate to computer program-related inventions II. Federal Protection for Trade Secrets Trade Secret statutes now exist only at the state level, and are not uniform in the states wherein they exist. The principal issue to be examined is whether Federal Statutory protection should be enacted and if so, how it should relate to state statutes (a) Is there a need for a Federal law on trade secrets What problems have been caused by the absence of such a law What problems would such a law create (b) If there is need for a Federal trade secrets law, on what legal theories (i.e., tort, contract, etc.) should it be based How should it relate to state laws and to what extent, if any, should it preempt state laws (c) If there are specific areas of trade secrets that are inadequately protected by present state laws or by their nature cannot be adequately protected by state laws, would it be possible to enact Federal laws in those areas only, leaving to state law what is currently adequately protected Would such a bifurcated system create more problems that it would solve III. Cost and Complexity of Patent Enforcement Although many patents are enforced through negotiation, resort is frequently made to either litigation in the Federal district courts or to arbitration or one of several other forms of alterna- tive dispute resolution (ADR). Patent litigation is said to be complex, expensive, unpredictable and heavily dependent on the ability of the judge to exert fair and effective control. Arbitration and other forms of ADR would seem to offer significant advantages in many types of dispute, but are not frequently used. (a) Is the cost of patent enforcement too high If so, what can be done within the existing Federal Rules to achieve determinations of validity, infringement and damages more efficiently and economically Which, if any, of the Federal Rules should be changed to improve patent litigation, and how Would provisions in the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 improve patent litigation (b) Is there a need for a "small claims" type of patent proceed- ing in the Federal courts, with simplified procedures and limited recovery If so, describe the characteristics such a proceeding should have, e.g., how procedures would be simplified, what the limits on recovery should be, etc. (c) Should the use of arbitration and other forms of ADR be increased How What, if any, deterrents are there to using ADR and how can they be overcome What additional forms of ADR should be considered for patent disputes IV. Grounds for Holding Patents Unenforceable In the United States, a party charged with infringement of a patent can raise an equitable defense of unenforceability which, if sustained, may preclude exercise of the patent rights even though the patent is valid and infringed. Historically, the defense has usually been based on alleged misconduct occurring after the patent is granted, e.g., restrictive conditions in patent licensing agreements. In more recent years, conduct before the Patent and Trademark Office has frequently been claimed to give rise to the defense, e.g., misrepresentations or alleged failure to comply with the standard for disclosing to the Office information in the patent applicant's possession. Such claims, some argue, are often frivolous and unsupported. (a) What are the benefits and drawbacks of permitting an unenforceability defense in patent litigation, based on alleged misconduct either before or after patent grant (b) Should any change be made in the present Patent and Trademark Office standard relating to the submission of prior art informa- tion, recognizing the need of the Office to consider information bearing on patentability before the patent issues (c) Are existing judicial procedures and standards for resolving unenforceability defenses adequate If not, is legislation desirable and, if so, what kind Discuss any other changes believed desirable. (d) Once inequitable conduct has been found, whether based on conduct before or after grant, is unenforceability the appropriate remedy If not, what other types of remedies might be applied and in what types of situations V. Licensee Challenges to Patent Validity Since 1969, when the U.S. Supreme Court in Lear v. Adkins, 395 U.S. 653, abrogated the doctrine of licensee estoppel, the courts have been dealing ad hoc with a variety of issues flowing from that decision. These include the right of the patent owner to terminate the license agreement and sue for patent infringement, the right of the licensee to recover royalties should the patent be declared invalid, the extent to which the parties should be permitted to contract in advance for the various eventualities, etc. It is asserted by some that this has created considerable uncertainty. Some would provide for all post-Lear eventualities by statute. Others would permit a licensor and licensee to bargain for provisions necessary to protect their respective interests. (a) Is legislation desirable to clarify the results of the Lear decision If so, what should it provide (b) Should any restraints, beyond the normal law of contracts, be imposed on the rights of licensee and licensor to bargain for the results of a potential challenge by the licensee of the licensed patent's validity IV. First-to-File System In the United States patent system, when more than one patent application is filed claiming the same invention, the patent is awarded to the applicant who establishes the earliest acts of invention in the United States and who has not thereafter sup- pressed, abandoned or concealed his invention ("first-to-invent" system). In international treaty negotiations aimed at more uniform patent laws throughout the world, particularly the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) patent harmonization proceedings, the United States is being urged to adopt a different procedure, almost universally used in other countries, under which we would award the patent to the first applicant to file a patent application for the invention ("first-to-file" system). The principal issue presented is whether the United States should change from a first-to- invent procedure to a first-to-file procedure (1) only as part of a comprehensive treaty to harmonize all of the world's patent systems, (2) without regard to a harmonization treaty, or (3) not at all. The following questions are designed to help frame this issue: (a) What benefits do United States patent holders and the public realize from the first-to-invent procedure What detriments are there, particularly those that might not be addressed by further simplification of the procedure to determine priority of inventor- ship (b) What benefits are United States patent holders and the public expected to realize from a first-to-file procedure What deteriments should be expected (c) What benefits are United States patent holders and the public expected to realize from a harmonization treaty What detriments should be expected (d) If the United States retains the first-to-invent procedure, a partial step toward harmonization could be a change permitting applicants to establish dates of invention by reference to knowledge, or sue, or other activity in foreign countries in addition to such activities in the United States. Should such an expansion of admissible evidence of inventorship be adopted (1) only as part of a comprehensive treaty to harmonize all of the world's patent systems, (2) without regard to a harmoniza- tion treaty, or (3) not at all Should such an expansion of admissible evidence of inventorship be adopted (1) only in respect to foreign countries that provide for practicable and effective judicial discovery of foreign inventorship activity, (2) only on a limited basis reflecting credibility of the foreign evidence, or (3) without regard to the legal procedures available in foreign countries (e) If the United States adopts a first-to-file procedure, should it condition this adoption on a grace period during which activi- ties of the inventor or derived through the inventor will not be a bar to patentability by the inventor Should the oath and its attendant sanctions be strengthened in respect to the requirement of originality (f) If the United States adopts a first-to-file procedure, would it be desirable to codify the rights, if any, of a prior user of the invention If so, should such a user have (1) no defense or rights in respect to the subsequent patent, (2) a personal exemption to continue existing commercial use, or (3) some other right Should the prior user rights, if any, extend to one not an actual user, but who has made effective and serious preparations for such use Should it matter if the prior user had elected to practice the invention as a trade secret Should any prior user right be transferrable to someone else Should any such right extend only to use in the United States (a feature in other patent systems) Should any prior user right extend to such users who were not originators of the invention (g) Would a first-to-file patent procedure run afoul of the reference to "inventors" in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution VII. Automatic Publication of Applications In the United States patent system, patent applications are held in confidence by the Patent and Trademark Office and not published until a patent is granted. Patent rights begin on the date of grant. In international treaty negotiations aimed at more uniform patent laws throughout the world, it has been proposed that patent applications be published and confer provisional protection commencing on the date of publication. The Japanese and European patent systems provide for publication of patent applications 18 months after their effective filing dates and feature provisional protection, generally a right to compensation from infringers with actual notice. The principal issue is whether United States patent applications should be published before grant of a patent (1) only as part of a comprehensive system to harmonize all of the world's patent system, (2) without regard to a harmonization treaty, or (3) not at all. The following questions are designed to help frame this issue: (a) What benefit do United States patent holders and the public realize from keeping patent applications confidential until a patent is granted What are the detriments (b) What benefits are United States patent holders and the public expected to realize from a procedure requiring automatic publica- tion of patent applications What are the detriments (c) Should U.S. patent applications be published by some fixed time measured from their U.S. or foreign priority filing dates Does the need for a pre-grant publication differ depending upon whether patent terms are measured from filing date or issue date (d) If pre-grant publication becomes part of the U.S. patent system, is there a need for provisional protection starting from the date of publication Does the need for provisional protection depend upon how the term of the patent is measured (e) If provisional protection is appropriate, what should it include VIII. Patent Term In the United States patent system the term of a patent is 17 years from the date when the patent is granted. Many other countries provide a 20-year term for their patents from the date when the application for the patent was filed. The appropriate term for a patent is under consideration in negotiations aimed at more uniform patent laws throughout the world, as well as in the negotiations on the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPs) in the current General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Round. The principal issue is whether the United States should measure the life of a patent from the date when the application for it was filed (1) only as part of comprehensive treaties to harmonize all of the world's patent systems, (2) without regard to harmonization treaties, or (3) not at all. The following questions are designed to help frame this issue. (a) What benefits do United States patent holders and the public realize from measuring the life of a patent from its date of grant What detriments are there (b) What benefits are United States patent holders and the public expected to realize from a procedure that would measure the life of a patent from its filing date What would the detriments be (c) If the term of a United States patent is to be measured from the filing date, should the term be extended to compensate for delays due to (1) secrecy orders, (2) marketing delays due to FDA or EPA regulatory procedures, (3) NASA or DOE ownership proceed- ings, (4) appeals, or (5) any other delays outside of the control of the patent applicant (d) Should a United States patent application be permitted to rely upon the date of more than one foreign-filed application for priority, and, if so, should the term of the United States patent be measured from the earliest priority date (recognizing that a modification of the Paris Convention probably would be necessary for adoption of any procedure to measure the life of a patent from any foreign priority date) (e) If the term of a United States patent is to be measured from a filing date, should that date be (1) the earliest United States filing upon which priority is based, (2) the earliest filing upon which priority is based, be it foreign or United States filing date, or (3) the filing date of the application on which the patent is granted (f) If the United States adopts a patent term based upon a filing date, should that term be 20 years If not, how long should the term be IX. Deferred Examination United States patent laws permit an applicant to petition for a deferral of the examination process only for a short period, and then only for "good and sufficient cause." Deferred examination at the option of the applicant is a feature of several foreign patent systems. (a) What would be the benefits of a procedure whereby a patent application is not examined in due course, but instead, the applicant is given the option, for a period of years, to request that the application be examined What would be the detriments (b) If optional deferred examination were adopted, what necessary or desirable companion changes (such as mandatory publication of applications) should be made, if any, in the United States patent law or procedures Should a third party have the right to request examination (c) If optional deferred examination were adopted, should a patent application be deemed abandoned if the applicant fails to request examination within a fixed time after filing Should the applicant be permitted thereafter to re-file an application for the same invention (d) Should the applicant have the option, in lieu of requesting formal examination, to obtain a lower-cost patent of shortened term and reduced enforcement rights X. In re Hilmer Under the interpretation of United States patent law in the case of In re Hilmer (and other cases), a United States patent has a patent-defeating effect (becomes a "reference") as of the earliest filing date in the United States to which it is entitled, but not the earliest foreign filing date to which it is entitled. In other patent systems, patents or applications are effective as references as of their earliest filing date, be it domestic or foreign. (a) If the effective date of a United States patent as a reference should be based on a foreign application filing date, should that foreign priority date be the effective date for anticipation purposes only and not for obviousness purposes so that the Hilmer rule is partially retained in that the United States patents with a foreign priority date are effective only as a reference for obviousness purposes as of the filing date in the United States (b) Is there rationale for abolishing the Hilmer rule totally so that foreign- origin United States patents will be effective as references for all purposes as of their foreign priority filing dates (c) What changes in procedure, if any, should the Patent and Trademark Office adopt to ensure adequate consideration of the disclosures in foreign-origin United States patents in the examination of United States patent applications (d) Should bilateral reciprocity be applied when deciding whether or not a United States patent is entitled to an earlier foreign filing priority date in a particular country for reference purposes XI. Reexamination The reexamination statute permits any person to file, with the requisite fee, a request for the reexamination of a patent in view of prior art limited to prior patents and printed publications. Issues of inequitable conduct, public use and sale, and the like, may not be addressed in reexamination. If the USPTO determines that the request raises "a substantial new question of patentability," the patent is reexamined under the same procedures applicable to the examination of new applications and concludes with the issuance of a reexamination certificate. The reexamina- tion process is basically ex parte in nature, with very limited participation by a third party requestor. Since the present system of reexamination was established by Congress in 1980, there have been numerous proposals to modify reexamination to increase the degree of participation of the requestor and/or to enlarge the scope of reexamination. (a) Do you believe the present reexamination system is working effectively If not, identify each deficiency that you believe exists in the system. (b) Do you believe that the present reexamination system should be modified to permit complete inter partes participation by a protestor at all phases of the reexamination proceeding If so, explain why. If not, explain why. (c) If your answer to question (b) is "no," to what extent, if any, should third parties be allowed greater participation than at present in reexamination proceedings (d) Would you be in favor of modifying the present reexamination system to permit or require one or more of the following: (1) Permitting a reexamination petitioner other than the patentee to comment on any claims in their finally allowed form, so as to provide the examiner with the petitioner's views prior to a final decision as to whether to issue a reexamination certificate (2) Permitting a reexamination petitioner to appeal both to the PTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and to the Federal Circuit from any final decision favorable to a patentee in a reexamination proceeding (3) Conditioning the appeal noted in subparagraph (2) on the petitioner's agreement to forego litigating in any other forum any issue raised or which could have been raised on appeal (4) Precluding an accused infringer from relying as a defense on any prior art of printed publication unless that prior art or printed publication has been previously considered by the PTO either during the original prosecution of a patent or in a reissue or reexamination proceeding involving that patent (5) Precluding a party or its privies, against whom a judgment of invalidity of a patent claim or claims has been entered, from seeking or maintaining reexamination of that claim or claims (6) Requiring that claims of a reexamined application be construed under the same standards as those claims would be construed in a district court infringement proceeding (e) Should the scope of issues considered by the examiner during reexamination be broadened If so, how (e.g., by permitting consideration of public use or on sale bars, section 112 issues, inequitable conduct, etc.) (f) In what other ways, if any, should reexamination proceedings be changed XII. Assignee Filing of Applications The United States currently requires the actual inventor or inventors to file patent applications, subject to a few limited exceptions such as death, unavailability, or insanity. Each application must be accompanied by an oath from the actual inventor which states that the applicant believes he was the first to invent the claimed invention. Nearly all foreign patent systems permit the owner of an invention (whether the actual inventor or the assignee) to file the patent application without an oath signed by the inventor. (a) Should the United States allow filing of patent applications by assignees (b) What benefits and drawbacks would occur by allowing filing of patent applications by assignees (c) What contours should an assignee filing proposal have, including possible safeguards for inventors and the public XIII. PTO Funding and Fee Structure The Patent and Trademark Office historically recovered its costs through a combination of fees and funding from general tax revenues. The major patent fees are filing fees, and issue and maintenance fees in a two-tier system with lower rates for small entities. These fees have undergone substantial increases recently as Congress and the Administration have changed from a policy under which applicants and patent owners paid only a portion of these costs to one under which they pay full costs. (a) What impact, if any, will a system in which PTO costs are almost entirely user-fee funded have on (1) U.S. inventors generally, (2) on small entities, including independent inventors, and (3) the public (b) What realistic and practical alternatives can you suggest, other than user-fee funding, for funding PTO operations (c) Congress historically has provided fiscal oversight for the PTO. Will this attention by Congress continue at the same level in the absence of a significant allocation of taxpayer funds and, if not, what other fiscal oversight is appropriate (d) Should the more public-oriented functions of the PTO, e.g., public search room operations, be funded by user fees, or should such operations be supported by appropriated funds (e) Would it be desirable to increase the average application pendency time in the PTO to a level above 18 months if such increase permitted a significant reduction in PTO fees (f) What are the advantages and disadvantages of retaining a two-tier fee structure (g) Should large entities subsidize small entities in a two-tier structure, or should public funds be used to supplement small entity fees (h) As part of a two-tier fee structure, what would the pros and cons be of (1) redefining a small entity to include fewer than 500 employees, (2) providing a tax credit (e.g., 50%) in lieu of part or all of the 50% subsidy for small entities, (3) denying 50% subsidy benefits, on a need basis, to small entities who receive a defined minimum (e.g., $200,000) in technology transfer fees during the preceding year, and (4) imposing a flat (e.g., 10%) across-the- board fee increase if this permitted the continuance of the current small entity reduced fee structure (i) A major current cost of the PTO is that of automating the search files and system. How should this cost be recovered, if not through fees (j) Is there a mechanism in the Government for long-term investments, such as computer equipment, to be capitalized and paid off over their useful life Would it be possible and desirable to have such investments paid for by a bond over a period of years (e.g., 20 years) instead of by user fees) Should the current relation among filing, issue and maintenance fees be changed and, if so, how Are there other fee strategies which will better balance the need to recover costs and the need to keep the patent system accessible to inventors (k) Should the current relation among filing, issue and mainte- nance fees be changed and, if so, how Are there other fee strate- gies which will better balance the need to recover costs and the need to keep the patent system accessible to inventors (l) In discussions of patent harmonization, the question of pre-issuance publication of U.S. patents has been raised. Given the possible reluctance of Congress to fund the costs of such publication from general revenues, would you support such publica- tion if its cost were totally user-funded Dated: May 8, 1991. Harry F. Manbeck, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks. 56 FR 22702-02   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10105; 29 May 91 1:22 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12728; 28 May 91 23:45 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa05518; 28 May 91 22:38 CDT Date: Tue, 28 May 91 22:35:52 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #405 BCC: Message-ID: <9105282235.ab19197@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 May 91 22:35:48 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 405 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? [Chuck Bennett] Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? [Scott Dorsey] Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? [Jack Powers] Re: A Very Simple ISDN Question [R. Kevin Oberman] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Tony Harminc] Re: Viewer-Controlled Cable TV [Ralph W. Hyre] Re: Cheap 9600 bps Modem [Toby Nixon] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 28 May 91 08:42 EST From: "Chuck Bennett (919)966-1134" Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> writes: > At WTSP in St. Petersburg, FL we did all those things, right > up into the late 1950's. We had two major "transcription libraries," > The World Transcription Service and the Standard Transcription > Library. Both were 33-1/3 rpm recordings on "16-inch" disks, as the > size was called. Western Electric's piece of this was evidenced on the > Standard transcriptions, which were "vertical cut," that is, the > needle action was vertical in the groove as opposed to lateral in > consumer records. There were claims that "vertical cut" was > higher-fidelity than lateral cut. > To play them back, we had "transcription heads" on the > turntables that could be switched to use either vertical-sensitive or > lateral-sensitive pickup windings. (Yes, windings ... these were > BIG, clunky, long playback arms that while very well-balanced, weighed > a pound or so it seemed. To play a warped record, we'd set a line of > lead type from the composing room on top of the > playback head! Other stations had to use a 50 cent or dollar coin.) The "verticle cut" transcription was of higher fidelity for various reasons. One was that very little equalization was applied (as I recall there were only two or three curves where as lateral had two families and about three or four members in each family), another was that the disks themselves were virtually impervious to the rough treatment that was typical at a radio station (a radial scratch or abrasion was not picked up by the vertical, "hill-and-dale", tracking cartridge). The tonearm was the WEco 5A. Typically in black crinkle finish it had a five pound lead counter-weight. The cartridge was the WEco 9A also in black crinkle or natural satin finish and weighed in a 1 pound! The cartridge had a four pin, male connector that mated with the 5A arm and a thumb screw on top that secured it to the arm. These were the (I believe) very first "moving coil" cartridges which are so much in vogue in highend audio circles today. The stylus was removable/replacable and was a 3 mil spherical diamond on a short vertical shank. My dad did some of the design, engineering and testing of these devices as well as WEco's line of speakers. There is a picture of him in the anechoic chamber at Bell Labs in either Murray Hill or Whippany, NJ. Chuck Bennett INTERNET: uchuck@med.unc.edu Medical Sciences Teaching Labs BITNET: uchuck@unc CB# 7520 University of NC PHONE: 919-966-1134(w) Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7520 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 08:55:45 EDT From: Scott Dorsey Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? Organization: NASA Langley Research Center In article TELECOM Moderator writes: > It is still sort of a thrill to watch an old motion picture from the > 1930-40 era and see a notation in the credits saying 'sound by Western > Electric'... when did they get out of the motion picture sound > business? The late forties. They still licensed their "light valve" technology for many years to the film industry. A number of theatres in this area are still using old WE soundheads. > But of more interest to me now was Western Electric's involvement in > phonograph records. It must have been very minimal and limited to the > early days of sound recordings. > Going through my *very old* (1948-49) phonograph records and tapes I > came across "Bach on the Biggest", a recording made of the organ at > the Atlantic City (NJ) Auditorium. It was a 'complimentary/radio > station copy' provided to a station here for promotional purposes, and > the advertising material with it said it was produced "using the > latest and most modern 'sound-capture' techniques of the Western > Electric Company ..." The first 33 rpm records began appearing late in > 1948 as I recall. 33 rpm was originally used for transcription disks in the 1930's, and was quite common for professional use. The transcription disks would use 2.7 mil styli or so, like the 78 rpm recordings. Microgroove 33 rpm records didn't come out until 1949 or so. WE made a number of demo recordings, as well as some live recordings at the 1939 World's Fair which were distributed to radio stations. I am told that they did some recordings at later fairs but have never seen any. > An accompanying tape was a 'modern reproduction' of a wire recording > (anybody out there remember wire recorders? Of course! I knew some of > you would!) made many years earlier by Western Electric apparently for > promotional purposes. The wire-recording converted to 'modern magnetic > tape media' (1949, har har!) was of Henry LeMare, municipal organist > for the City of Atlantic City during the 1920's era. Don't knock 1949 magnetic tape media. I have a pair of 1950 Ampex machines that are in daily use at WCWM, and sound a hell of a lot better than any cassette deck made. Wire recording, granted, is pretty poor overall, primarily because of the lack of AC bias. > Western Electric worked with all the major movie studios back in those > days, but I didn't realize they also worked on phonograph records and > wire recordings ... or did they? Are these antiques just special > things they did for promotions, etc? Any ideas? They are probably promo recordings, but WE made a lot of promos in those days. From time to time you'll even find Vitaphone disks, which are just standard 16-inch transcription disks, wide groove, start in center records that are intended for synchronization to a film. Transcription recording started in the early thirties and every station in the thirties through the fifties had a 16" turntable to play transcriptions with, so a lot of the promo records and stuff designed for radio distribution only was made at 33 rpm. Make sure you use the right stylus to play these back; modern microgroove styli will destroy wide groove records very quickly. scott [Moderator's Note: WECo did recordings at the Century of Progess Fair in Chicago in 1933-34 also according to the late Virgil Fox in a commentary he added to one of his records. Speaking of whom, you are absolutely correct -- one hundred percent -- about the quality of the old records and tapes. A recording in my collection of Fox dates from 1946 at Columbia University: it takes the cake! It is superb, and you could never tell its age by listening to it. The giveaway is the heavy disk, and the old-fashioned way RCA Victor printed their labels. It was a 78 rpm and RCA copied it onto 33 rpm three years later. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 15:15:12 PDT From: POWERS@ibm.com Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? I know that Western Electric produced equipment to play phonograph records; I have seen turntables they built. Around 1960, I worked as a projectionist in an old theater that had a Western Electric sound system. This included (massive cast iron) bases for the 35mm projectors and carbon arc lamps, the optical "sound head" assemblies, takeup reel assemblies, all the electronics, and the loudspeakers. The bases had mounting holes and mechanical drive for the turntables, which I found in a back room in a fit of exploration. That's right, an early form of sound movies used sound on records, and this place was equipped (originally) for both kinds of production! I don't know the speed used, but one record would have had to hold 22 minutes of sound to match the duration of a 2,000 foot reel of 35mm film. I seem to recall that the turntables were larger than 12 inches. The installation dated from around 1930. DC power was originally supplied by a battery rack that was charged during non-operating hours; this had been replaced by a motor generator set. The amplifer was capable of five (count'em!) watts. The speakers were conical horns with field coils; the small one in the projection room was still in use, but the immense horn still hanging from the stage ceiling behind the screen was no longer used (an Altec "Voice Of The Theater" unit had taken its place). The electronics was housed in black metal cabinets with Bakelite panels, and every important circuit had a meter on it (including the filament current to the sound head lamps). Audio level controls were of the multi-tap attenuator variety, with the wiper sweeping over a circle of metal buttons right on the panel. Everything was built like the proverbial brick outhouse, and the only real problems I had were with the (also massive) motors. I always wondered where their maintenance man found those old fashioned tubes with different sized pins ... but I never had one burn out in the several years I worked there. Jack Powers powers@ibm.com jackp@well.sf.ca.us Opinions, if any, are mine, if anyone's. ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: A Very Simple ISDN Question Date: 28 May 91 16:36:07 GMT In article , zweig@parc.xerox.com (Jonathan M. Zweig) writes: > oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov writes: > GACK! This is in direct disagreement with the existence of POTS > interface doohickies I have seen demos of. Basically a box that has > an RJ11 jack for a vanilla phone, and just enough ISDN smarts in it to > accept dial strings, produce ring voltages, etc. > I admit it's pretty horrid to think of turning my data into analog > screamishness so it can get redigitized a meter away, but it would > certainly work to plug a Trailblazer into the analog jack of a > suitably equipped ISDN phone. 64,000 digitizations per second is > 64,000 digitizations, whether my CO's 5ESS switch does it, or the box > on my wall. I have become aware of such things, and I'm sure they work for many applications, but when AT&T bid on our phone system, they promised such a capability. They failed to deliver and, I assume, paid a penalty for failing to meet contractual obligations. 64 KHz is 64 KHz, (but not really 64,000 digitizations per second). But that does NOT mean that plugging in a TrailBlazer will just work. In fact, Trailblazers don't work on some multiplexed analog lines. I am nowhere nearly expert enough on the details of V.32 or PEP to say what difficulty might be encountered, but AT&T told us that "it is not possible". And paid for the opportunity to say it. That does NOT make it right. In fact, it's probably wrong. But it does imply that it is not trivial. And they made it clear that an analog connection to handle answering machines was a lot easier, though not as trivial as it sounds. Things like ring voltage and lack of feedback to the ISDN side of the circuit make it trickier than it seems at first. 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. Especially anything gnu. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 13:21:34 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World "Robert L. Oliver" writes: > Well, I can understand the slight differences in tones, etc. But > something rather odd occurred today: I dialed a number in 703, and > instead of receiving the standard U.S. single ring, I received a > non-US double ring. I realize that the equipment can produce whatever > it wants (indeed, our PBX uses double-ring to indicate outside calls, > but the outside caller still hears the US single ring). Isn't there > some sort of BellCore standard that says that the CO has to produce a > US single ring? The CO doesn't produce the ringing tone in the case of Direct In Dial to a PBX. The PBX produces all the call progress tones, unless for some reason the CO can't reach the PBX trunk (PBX is down, trunks are all busy, etc.) I often hear the double ring when calling PBXs in North America. It does seem curious that the double ring was assigned to the external rather than the internal calls, though. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ From: "Ralph W. Hyre" Subject: Re: Viewer-Controlled Cable TV Date: 28 May 91 17:35:36 GMT Reply-To: "Ralph W. Hyre" Organization: AT&T OSS Development, Cincinnati In article Jeff Carroll writes: > whatever happened to the interactive cable/videotex service that > was pioneered in the 70's in Columbus, OH ? The QUBE system was nuked when Warner Cable got into some financial trouble in the early 80's and the decided to not throw away any more money on it. (They also relinquished their Pittsburgh franchise to TCI around the same time -- I don't know how they could have lost money there -- almost EVERYBODY 'needs' cable TV in Pittsburgh due to wierd reception characteristics.) There weren't very many applications for it. I recall there being a game show that allowed the viewing audience to win prizes. QUBE sites in Columbus, Cincinnati, and someplace in Texas (Dallas, I think) were linked for the game. The other application was to choose pay-per-view movies. We never had a videotex application in Cincinnati. ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Cheap 9600 bps Modem Date: 28 May 91 17:19:39 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , newsham@wiliki.eng.hawaii. edu (Timothy Newsham) writes: > As I understand it, V.32bis is still not an official protocol. The > CCITT people are still "considering" it and still have not made the > proposed protocal official, although it is a foregone conclusion by > most folks that it will soon become the next modem standard. CCITT V.17 and V.32bis were both unanimously adopted by the CCITT on February 22, 1991. They are presently being prepared for publication at this time, but since there were no changes made to the "ballot version" released last November most manufacturers have had copies of the "final text" for a long time. > For those who don't know, V.32bis will the standard for communication > at the real speed (not effective throughput) of 14,400bps. And then > if you have a V.32bis modem with V.42 error correction and V.42bis > data compression, you'll have a maximum effective throughput of 56k > bps (ISDN! :). Well, but ISDN is 64000bps raw synchronous throughput, and with V.42bis on top of V.120 you'll see effective throughput of over 250,000bps. > Forval already makes a V.32bis V.42bis modem (also with MNP5) that > sells for about $1000. I want one! :) There are several other companies already shipping V.32bis modems, including Digicom, Penril, Codex, Prometheus, and US Robotics, and many that have announced the intention to do so (like Hayes). Most of these are under $1,000 (Penril and Codex a bit more, which is to be expected). Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 USA | Internet hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #405 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12411; 29 May 91 2:27 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06743; 29 May 91 0:51 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab12728; 28 May 91 23:45 CDT Date: Tue, 28 May 91 23:37:53 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #406 BCC: Message-ID: <9105282337.ab16820@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 28 May 91 23:37:45 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 406 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Free Teletypes [Dan Jacobson] Re: Analysis and Comment: 'Booby Trap' Toll Exchanges [Scott Hinckley] Re: International Calling to 800 Numbers [Jim Gottlieb] Re: Bell Atlantic's Guardian Plan [Christopher Lott] Re: ONA Offers New Horizons for Telesleaze [John R. Levine] The Case of the Missing Signature Line Solved [Robert L. Oliver] Re: C&P Telephone "Anti-Slam" Flag and Amazing Service [Robert L. Oliver] Re: C&P Telephone "Anti-Slam" Flag and Amazing Service [wts1] Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? [Adam J. Ashby] Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? [Guy J. Sherr] Re: Calling US 800-Numbers From New Zealand [Ehud Gavron] AT&T's Cornet [Jack Dominey] EDIF/VHDL CAE Surveys Wanted [Latvala Ari] Legal Ad for New England Tel ISDN Hearings [John R. Covert] 1-900-NO-CHIEF [Paul S. Sawyer] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dan_Jacobson@att.com Subject: Re: Free Teletypes Reply-To: Dan_Jacobson@ihlpz.att.com Organization: AT&T-BL, Naperville IL, USA Date: Tue, 28 May 1991 12:08:13 GMT On 28 May 91 01:29:41 GMT, Stan@li.psi.com (Stanfield L. Smith) said: > Model 15 teletypes - Newswire vintage, 5 level baudot, gears for any By the way, is it true that some "Newsradio" stations nowadays just pipe in teletype clicking to make their newsroom more newsy sounding? E.g., WBBM-AM in Chicago has this sound. ------------------------------ From: Scott Hinckley Subject: Re: Analysis and Comment: 'Booby Trap' Toll Exchanges Date: 28 May 91 14:01:33 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com Side note: When I used MCI to dial a 212-394-**** number I recieved the following message, aparently from the 394 exchange: "You have reached a non-working number in the 394 exchange. There is no charge for this call." MCI would not complete a call to a 976 number. 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 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 07:21:59 PDT From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: International Calling to 800 Numbers Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles In article the Moderator Noted: > [Moderator's Note: Well, what I have heard lately is that if you are > willing to pay for a call to the IOC, they will put it through to that > point then it'll be dialed back out from there to the destination. PAT] But only to AT&T 800 numbers. If it's another carrier's you're out of luck. Or use CCCS. They will connect you to any 800 number they can call from New Jersey. I have posted on these folks before. Jim Gottlieb E-Mail: or V-Mail: +1 213 551 7702 Fax: 478-3060 Voice: 824-5454 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 12:21:05 -0400 From: Christopher Lott Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic's Guardian Plan I double-checked the policy for this rip-off insurance, and found that the policy goes into force at the company's discretion but not any later than 30 days after you request it. So I guess you could be insured within minutes, if the rep is willing, or you could wait quite a while. chris ------------------------------ Subject: Re: ONA Offers New Horizons for Telesleaze Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 28 May 91 10:41:44 EDT (Tue) From: "John R. Levine" In article is written: > It seems someone has a patent to inject advertising messages > in the silent intervals between audible ringing signals. Worse yet, > the RBOCs seem to be all agog at this marvelous new thought about > getting revenue out of otherwise "dead air time!" I read about this several years ago when it first came out. It turns out that most of the technology is involved in injecting the advertisements at the caller's end, even though the ring is generated at the callee's end. The thought was that for a discount on the monthly service rate, a subscriber would consent to be subjected to ads. It seems to have occured to them that just sticking ads into rings heard by random callers would generate considerable ill will for the advertisers. For that matter, I don't know why companies with DID PBXes don't put their own ads into the ring sound now -- it wouldn't be technically hard. (Attention marketeers: Patent pending, don't try it. :-) I don't know why it's suddenly coming back now, except perhaps that the last of the old Bell System managers who thought of the phone company as a service are retiring, and the new ones have less shame. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: "Robert L. Oliver" Subject: The Case of the Missing Signature Line Solved Organization: Rabbit Software Corp. Date: 28 May 91 23:19:22 GMT cbmvax!.UUCP!robert@uunet.uu.net (Robert L. Oliver) writes: > Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 > 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM > [Moderator's Note: Mr. Oliver's signature did not say *which city or > state* he is located in -- I didn't truncate it! :) PAT] Our news software truncates signatures longer than four lines. And my signature was exactly four lines, BUT it started with the pseudo-standard "--" line, which our news software counted as a full line. Thus, it thought I had a five line signature and killed my city/state line. I've reformatted things a bit ... Hope this is better. Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM Malvern, PA 19355 ...!uunet!cbmvax!hutch!robert ------------------------------ From: "Robert L. Oliver" Subject: Re: C&P Telephone "Anti-Slam" Flag and Amazing Service Organization: Rabbit Software Corp. Date: 28 May 91 22:18:04 GMT c_bstratton@hns.com (Bob Stratton) writes: > I was recently ordering service from C&P Telephone (A Bell Atlantic > company) of Maryland, and I was repeatedly stunned to find what I > consider to be exceptionally accomodating service -- has anyone else > noticed this change from RBOCs?? I've received excellent service from Bell of PA, my local Bell Atlantic division. I had a recent complaint about an AOS and they were quite helpful. I wish I had the same service from my local Electric / Gas company (Philadelphia Electric Company). Now that Bell has given up the task, PECO now gives me reason to contact the PUC. If you're in PECO territory, beware: anyone can intentionally or accidentally call in and have all your service shut off and PECO will NOT require written verification or anything. ZAM no electric or gas. Happened to me while I was on vacation. And rather than being apologetic, all the management and claims adjusters are obnoxious. The customer service reps were nice, though. But I digress. Not all the RBOCs have cleaned up their customer service. Comparison: At the convention center in Washington, D.C., C&P had realized that the original number of payphones was insufficient, and had set up pods of auxilliary phones to address the problem. At the World Congress convention center in Atlanta for Comdex Spring '91, Georgia Bell had NOT done any such thing. People lined up waiting for payphones the entire week. So it's definitely an individual RBOC improvement in customer service on Bell Atlantic's part. Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM Malvern, PA 19355 ...!uunet!cbmvax!hutch!robert ------------------------------ From: wts1 Subject: Re: C&P Telephone "Anti-Slam" Flag and Amazing Service Organization: AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies - Burlington, NC Date: Tue, 28 May 1991 15:28:00 GMT In article strat@gnu.ai.mit.edu writes: > I was recently ordering service from C&P Telephone (A Bell Atlantic > company) of Maryland, and I was repeatedly stunned to find what I > consider to be exceptionally accomodating service -- has anyone else > noticed this change from RBOCs?? > This does not correspond with my traditional experiences in dealing > with C&P. Is it just Baltimore that's like this, or have all the areas > improved their service? I spent two weeks last winter begging C&P of > Virginia to tell me what kind of switch I was on, and when I could > expect CLASS services. *sigh* Well, if anyone wants to start collecting data points for improved RBOC service, I had a problem (5/17)that the operator said the business office would gladly handle and to call the business office tomorrow morning. When I reminded the operator that tomorrow was a Saturday (5/18), she said "the business office is now open on Saturday. Thank you for using Southern Bell, and have a pleasant day Mr. Sykes." I called Saturday AM, and sure enough, the office was open! Anyone know if this is just Southern Bell in NC, all of BellSouth, or other RBOCs also? First Class! William T. Sykes AT&T Federal Systems att!cbnewsb!wts1 Advanced Technologies Burlington, NC UUCP: att!burl!wts [Moderator's Note: The sisters all pretty much do things the same way at about the same time. Illinois Bell started having Saturday business office hours also, plus evening hours once or twice a week. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Adam J. Ashby" Subject: Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? Date: 28 May 91 16:01:20 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Division In article , bmontgom@hvtvm4.vnet.ibm. com writes: > Food for thought: British Telecom announced yesterday profits of 95 > pounds a second ie annual profits of 3000 billion pounds ... leading > to comments from competitors that BT charges too much for use of its > local lines. I don't know how this compares to US telecom operators, > but I think it could be described as somewhat excessive. A couple of points to mention here ... 1) I somewhat doubt the validity of your figures - especially as I remember not long ago everyone was aghast at BT making one million pounds a day - or one third of one billion pounds. 2) Is that a 'British' billion (1x10E12) or an 'American' billion (1x10E9)?? 3) Describing it as excessive is very subjective - it wouldn't seem so excessive if you were a shareholder, would it?? Adam Ashby ...!uunet!motcid!ashbya +1 708 632 7271 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 19:07 GMT From: "Guy J. Sherr" <0004322955@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? Patrick, You may wish to remind some of us that English notation given as a billion is actually a number with 12 zeroes, and not 9. 3000 billion pounds sterling would therefore be 3,000,000,000,000,000 pounds sterling written out, and I believe worth approximately 4.5 quadrillion US dollars (apologies to those following the exchange rate). This number seems to be inaccurate. It is more than 50 years of the United States's GNP. ------------------------------ From: Ehud Gavron Subject: Re: Calling US 800-Numbers From New Zealand Date: 28 May 91 18:00:27 GMT Reply-To: sunquest!alpha!gavron@uunet.uu.net Organization: Sunquest VMS Internals, Tucson AZ In article , ct@dde.dk (Claus Tondering) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: With USA Direct, I think you pay for a call to the >> IOC, and it is then dialed out to the desired 800 number. PAT] > I tried that a couple of years ago, but the USA Direct operator would > not connect me to an 800 number. A friend tried to reach my (US Sprint provided) personal 800 number from Saudi Arabia. She was informed that toll-free calls were not possible. Ehud Gavron (EG76) gavron@vesta.sunquest.com ------------------------------ From: jdominey@bsga05.attmail.com Date: Tue May 28 15:41:29 EDT 1991 Subject: AT&T's Cornet In V11#400, Steven S. Brack asks: >> The following is part of an AT&T letter dated May 6, 1991: >> Phone (317) 352-8500 Cornet 358-8500 Fax (317) 352-8468 > A quick, simple question: what is Cornet? Pat responded that Cornet is AT&T's internal phone system. Pat's partially correct. About three years ago, I recall seeing a company bulletin saying Cornet was being phased out in favor of an internal Software Defined Network. Cornet was limited to certain parts of the company (Bell Labs and former Western Electric locations?). In six years with AT&T, I've never directly encountered it, although I saw some references. If memory serves, Cornet was a tandem network. Much of the traffic was carried over dedicated lines running from switch to switch. It did provide seven-digit dialing anywhere in the country. Assuming I'm right, then AT&T Long Lines would have issued billing for the dedicated lines connecting the switches, WECo handled the equipment leasing, and millions of ratepayer dollars paid for the internal accounting! Jack Dominey, AT&T Commercial Marketing, Tucker GA V: (404)496-6925 AT&T Mail: !dominey ------------------------------ From: Latvala Ari Subject: EDIF/VHDL CAE Surveys Wanted Organization: Tampere University of Technology Date: Tue, 28 May 91 09:13:13 GMT Dear reader, Please email identification/publication info, if you know of recent survey (executed during last two years), concentrating to topics listed hereunder, from point of view of the industrial / academic user / R & D or project designer. Also commercial surveys are of interest. Please inform also your rating grade of referred survey: Topics: 1. Interfacing of EDA (electronic design automation) CAD/CAE - tools 2. Frameworks 3. EDIF and VHDL in daily use of industrial design projects. Robustness, future open system needs. 4. Design data flows in multiple sub-vendor, multiple customer EDA-service industry Motivation: We are executing this kind of a survey among industrial users in Finland, during next 6 months and are appreciating any reference survey information. We can negotiate from the mutual share of results. Thanks in advance. Ari Latvala ( latvala@cs.tut.fi) Research Institute for Information Technology TUT - Tampere University of Technology, POB 527, SF-33101 TAMPERE, FINLAND Tel: +358-31-162521 Fax: +358-31-162913, Internet: latvala@cs.tut.fi ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 May 91 23:06:31 PDT From: "John R. Covert 28-May-1991 0145" Subject: Legal Ad for New England Tel ISDN Hearings The legal ad for D.P.U. 91-63 has been issued, announcing a public hearing on NET's ISDN offering to be held on Thursday, June 13, 1991 at 10:00 A.M. in the Leverett Saltonstall Building, 100 Cambridge Street, Boston. NET proposes to offer ISDN Basic Service (voice and packet data over a single access line) as an add-on to one party residence and business main telephone exchange service and INTELLIPATH Digital Centrex Service. The filing also includes optional services including call management functions and display of call-related information. N.E.T. intended for the tariff to become effective on April 8th, 1991; the DPU intends to "investigate the reasonableness of the Company's proposal" and has suspended the tariff effective date until October 8th to allow time for hearings and investigation. john ------------------------------ From: "Paul S. Sawyer" Subject: 1-900-NO-CHIEF Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services Date: Tue, 28 May 91 22:54:33 GMT News item: The fire chief of Louden, New Hampshire resigned recently, after the town received a telephone bill for over $1,000 in 900- calls. It is said he made 84 calls to a "sex line" over a period of five hours. 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 #406 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16482; 29 May 91 4:38 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa10062; 29 May 91 3:01 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14884; 29 May 91 1:52 CDT Date: Wed, 29 May 91 0:48:59 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #407 BCC: Message-ID: <9105290048.ab15230@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 29 May 91 00:48:51 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 407 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? [Rick Farris] Bell of PA Toll Information [Scott D. Green] A Visitor Observes Phone Service in the UK [Alex Beylin] New PIN For My AT&T Card? [Douglas Scott Reuben] Cellular One Dialing Procedures [Ole J. Jacobsen] Strange Phone/Laptop Interference Problem [Bill Rubin] Re: Old Phone Museum Being Cranked Up [Bud Couch] Employment Opportunity: Telecommunications Position [Don Zarlengo] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rick Farris Subject: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? Organization: RF Engineering, Del Mar, California Date: Tue, 28 May 91 06:47:56 GMT Do all AT&T employees receive $700 credit on their phone bills each month? A local modem hobbyist is raising quite a stir by bragging about the $700 credit he receives each month as a "part-time computer security consultant" for AT&T. Because the only security for MS-DOS machines (the only computer *he's* ever seen) is physical security (maybe that's it; he's bolting computers to desktops ...), a group of us were wondering why he would be entitled to such a large credit for part-time work. On the other hand, a stipend and a large phone-bill credit would be just right for a paid informant; one that searches out pirate and phreak BBSs and reports on them. So is a $700 credit reasonable for part-time work? If so, geez, what kind of credit do full-timers get? Rick Farris RF Engineering POB M Del Mar, CA 92014 voice (619) 259-6793 rfarris@rfengr.com ...!ucsd!serene!rfarris serenity bbs 259-7757 [Moderator's Note: He may get that sort of allowance for being a snitch -- a 'part time computer security consultant' -- each month, since after all, he has to spend a lot of time on line long distance spying on sysops and users -- if that is what he does -- but I don't think that is a usual benefit for AT&T employees. What I've heard is that they receive either all or a portion of their long distance service for free; but I doubt that it runs $700 per month for most employees! But still, if he is tattling on naughty users and sysops, why would he say anything about it at all and blow his cover? Has anyone confirmed this? Is he just running off at the mouth? There are a lot of people who *wish* they could be ... uh hum! 'computer security consultants', you know. It might be just fanciful thinking on his part. Tell him you'll believe it when you see his AT&T bill with an adjustment like this on it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 12:41 EDT From: "Scott D. Green" Subject: Bell of PA Toll Information Some of you may have heard of Bell of PA's plan to eliminate the dialing of 1+xxx-xxxx for calls within the 215 area. This will become mandatory by Jan. 1, 1992 (I think), and is currently optional. Anyway, WRT no longer knowing whether our call will be local or toll, Bell has responded! Announced today (5-28) on "Bell of PA's Inside Line" is the Toll Information Line. By dialling 800-734-5910, one may learn whether one exchange is local or toll to another exchange within 215. [Sorry, I don't know if this number is available outside of 215.] Very simply, the system prompts the caller for the originating exchange (it does *not* assume [or does not ANI] the exchange you happen to be calling from at the time) and the destination exchange. It then reports "local" or "toll," (no rate information, though) and, if "toll," explains that the info is only valid for POTS, and if you subscribe to any extended calling plans, etc. to check your phone book. It also allows you to continue tapping in originating and destination exchanges, explains that your switchable pulse-tone phone needs to be in the tone position, and if your phone is rotary only to call "0." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 13:01 EDT From: Alex Beylin Subject: A Visitor Observes Phone Service in the UK Having just come back from a vacation in England, I thought I'd share some of my observations with Telecom readers. Please note that all information is based on personal experience and informal surveys and may be widely off-base. First and foremost - BT is replacing traditional red telephone booth with modern looking glass enclosures. I called the BT operator in Coventry and was transfered to a person responsible for sales of telephone boxes. Unforunately, he told me that there is a very long waiting list to buy them. He also indicated that only one in every three or four units are sold and the rest are thrown away due to damage. Now, if someone on the net with better BT connections then I could find out where they throw them away, I don't think painting and replacing some of the glass pannels would be that big of a job. I have some connections in Midlands to help ship a few of those to US. Could we arrange a group buy of those with BT? Also while I was there, BT released their profit statements and all hell broke loose in the papers. The common opinion seems to be that BT makes more money then they should. On the home front, majority of people I met still have BT as their one and only carrier. One of my friends just added Mercury to his business phone and observed 35+% drop in LD charges. He had to replace all his phones as the standard BT phone was not compatible with Mercury (no tones?). His current phone is made by Southern Bell. He has to dial an access number to get to the Mercury network. The state of pay phone confusion is unbelivable. BT phone cards are widely available but work only in BT phones. Mercury phone cards are also available, but work only in Mercury phones. In London most BT and Mercury pay phones will not accept coins - I was forced to carry both cards. Some BT phones do accept coins and even give change, contrary to the sign on the phone. None of the home phones I used (8-10) had tone dialing - pulse only. Well, enough rambling. As I said, all this is just personal observations and may not resemble truth in any way. Alex Beylin, Systems Specialist | +1 313 759-7114 alexb@cfctech.cfc.com | Chrysler Corp. MIS sharkey!cfctech!alexb | Distributed Systems Group ------------------------------ Date: 28-MAY-1991 16:00:34.60 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: New PIN for my AT&T Card? I just got this in the mail from AT&T: Dear Mr. Douglas Reuben, In a few weeks, you will be receiving a new AT&T Calling Card to replace the AT&T Calling Card you now carry. When it arrives, you'll notice that your new card looks different. It even has a DIFFERENT ACCOUNT NUMBER FROM YOUR CURRENT AT&T CARD. (Emphasis added). In order to comply with government requirements, AT&T is no longer sharing card numbers with your local telephone company. Now, AT&T is issuing new card numbers that are exclusive to AT&T. Your new AT&T Calling Card will continue to provide all the advantages you've grown to expect from AT&T. [Stuff about verifying the present account you have with AT&T] [They list a number for "changes to your account" as 800-447-2000. So does this mean that we will all need to know at least *two* PIN numbers now? And how is everyone supposed to know that "If it's a local call use my BOC card, while if it's an inter-LATA call use my AT&T card"? How many people actually can tell in advance what is a intra- compared to an inter-LATA call? Example: You are in Greenwich, CT. You want to call NYC. Who gets the call? NYTel or AT&T? You then want to call to Poughkeepsie, also in New York State. Who gets it? Finally, you want to call Fisher's Island, in area code 516 for Long Island, NY? (Ans.: NYTel, AT&T, AT&T.) Now I don't consider my friends, parents, and relatives to be all that ignorant on how to use a telephone, but I just can't see how THIS is going to be explained to them by AT&T and/or the BOCs. AT&T and the BOCs sure didn't do a good job when it came to warning people about AOSs until quite late in the game; I am wondering how much more confusion this nonsense will cause. Note that if I use MCI or Sprint, which have similar calling card setups (via an 800 or 950 number), I can usually make INTRA and INTER LATA calls on the same card, and even on the same call. (The charges may be higher for INTRA LATA calls than what the BOC/GTE/local companies charge, however). This works quite infrequently with AT&T's system, ie, rarely can you "sequence" (make multiple calls) from INTER LATA to INTRA LATA. In the event than any AT&T Calling Card people area reading this, all I can say is that this is quite disappointing. I assume His Honor managed to have something to do with this ("government" = Green, J., right? ;) ), but unless AT&T starts allowing local (INTRA) LATA calls to be completed on its card, I think I may just get ITT or MetroMedia or someone with free 950 access, where I can use the same card for both INTRA and INTER LATA calls. (No big deal to AT&T I'm sure, but a lot less trouble for me!) Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet [Moderator's Note: Did they specifically say you could NOT make local calls on the card or would NOT be able to use the local telco's card to make calls on the AT&T network? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 18:27:30 PDT From: "Ole J. Jacobsen" Subject: Cellular One Dialing Procedures Folks, I am trying to convince Cellular One here in the Bay Area that they need to start accepting "canonical numbers" from cellular phones in order to be in compliance with generally accepted industry standards. (I've heard that there is even an IEA recommendation for this.) If you can help me put forward my case I'd be grateful. By "canonical numbers" I mean 10 digit numbers of the form: (Area Code) prefix-number, e.g., (415) 962-2599. Dialling such a number should *always* work, even if you are in your "home" area code, i.e. in 415 in this case. When I first got my phone about three years ago, everything worked just fine, canonical numbers could be stored in memory and "dialled" (sent to the MTSO by means of the S(p)END button), regardless of whether the call was for within 415 or not. When Pac*Bell introduced 1+ dialling for long distance calls, Cellular One decided in their infinite wisdom to follow suit, and changed the dialling procedure accordingly. So, now you have to dial 1 202 555-1212 or whatever. They forgot (or so it seems) to enforce it for "local" calls, so until recently you could still call a 415 number using canonical style dialing: 415-xxx-yyyy. Then recently, they discovered this "hole" and now you can *only* dial "local" calls using seven digits: xxx-yyyy. While I can sort of understand their idea that "it should work just like a regular phone" the trouble is that you cannot store numbers in memory any more and use the phone while travelling. I am trying to get them to accept canonical dialling *AS WELL AS* their current silly scheme, but so far I have not had much luck finding anyone who even understands what I am talking about. Some of the answers I have received so far include: "All our calls are routed through Pac*Bell, so we have to follow Pac*Bell's dialling procedures!" "We do not have any plans to market the dialling procedure you requested at this time." "All of our switches are programmed from Toronto, thus you can't talk to the guy in charge of switch programming." Since cellular systems employ pre-origination dialling, i.e., the entire number is sent to the switch before any connection is made, then it is clearly a small matter of programming to make this work correctly, or is it not? Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions--The Interoperability Report Interop, Inc., 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040, Phone: (415) 941-3399 FAX: (415) 949-1779 Email: ole@csli.stanford.edu Direct: (415) 962-2515 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 00:24:01 EDT From: Bill Rubin Subject: Strange Phone/Laptop Interference Problem I was at my in-law's this past week, and ran into a strange problem. Maybe someone out there can help diagnose it for me. First, my setup. I have a Toshiba laptop, with the Toshiba brand internal modem. The machine works on batteries, so the only time I generally use it when it's plugged in is when I've run down my battery and haven't have a chance to recharge it. I was trying to use the laptop in a room where the phone and answering machine were connected using a line splitter at the wall jack, and the splitter didn't fit the jack very well, so it was sticking out and easy to pull out of the wall accidentally. There wasn't even any need for the splitter, since the answering machine had a phone out jack, and I was using that for my laptop connection. Anyway, I was using the laptop with no problem under battery power, but as soon as I plugged the computer into the AC, I started getting wierd stuff out of the modem - and it sounded like it was picking up a radio station! I tried a couple of different outlets, turning on and off the answering machine, but the only thing that could make the modem work was to unplug the machine from the AC, either at the laptop, or the outlet. Oh yes, when this was occurring, I was unable to dial using the regular phone as well, it got the same interference. So, my question is, what was going on? Is it possible that the very poor fit of the phone splitter was allowing phone signals to be jammed by whatever was coming out of the laptop? But if so, why should it only occur when I was using the AC? Any suggestions are appreciated. Bill rubin@watson.ibm.com ------------------------------ From: Bud Couch Subject: Re: Old Phone Museum Being Cranked Up Organization: Kentrox Industries, Inc. Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 04:07:08 GMT In article Ron writes: > The 5,400-square-foot building for the museum is being donated > by Pacific Telecom Inc., a company in Vancouver, Wash., that owns both > North-West Telecommunications and Cencom Inc., which operates some > local phone companies in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa. Pacific Telecom also bought out the old RCA Alascom system, and is "The Phone Company" in Alaska. Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew.. standard BS applies ------------------------------ From: Don Zarlengo Subject: Employment Opportunity: Telecommunications Position Date: 29 May 91 01:09:16 GMT Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA May 22, 1991 Sterling Software Permanent Position on the East Coast Telecommunications Network Management Specialist The position will operate under minimal direction, and will design, implement, manage and maintain complex nationwide multi-media telecommunication systems. The candidate must be fully capable in the use of advanced telecommunications modeling and design techniques. They must also be fully capable of making design trade-off decisions which result in fully interoperable networks consisting of supporting multiple communication protocols. They will provide technical guidance pertaining to all phases of telecommunications technology, including transmission media, protocols and performance, and the availability agents of large complex networks. They candidate must have one or two years of experience with Netview or with some other equivalent software. The position will provide guidance to diverse groups working on large projects on an agency-wide scale. They will analyze industry trends and apply these trends to the development of value added network solutions. They will become a recognized authority of network technology. They should have at least ten years telecommunication experience. A bachelor's degree in a related field and an advanced degree preferred. Contact: Dr. Don Zarlengo Sterling Software 1121 San Antonio Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 415 964-9900 415 969-3821 fax ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #407 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16556; 29 May 91 4:40 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab10062; 29 May 91 3:07 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab14884; 29 May 91 1:53 CDT Date: Wed, 29 May 91 1:46:02 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: New Telecom Archives Mail Server; Index to Archives BCC: Message-ID: <9105290146.ab23891@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> I am pleased to announce a new mail service is available for use with the Telecom Archives. It is just in the beginning stages, and will have more and more of our files on line as time goes on. My understanding is this service is *only* for the Telecom Archives at this time. Furthermore, this service is intended for NON-INTERNET sites who would otherwise not have access via ftp. If you can use ftp lcs.mit.edu, then you are strongly encouraged to continue doing so. The program described below was written by Doug Davis so that our many readers on the commercial mail services, Fido, and similar sites (Portal and Chinet for example) can also participate. FIRST, here is a help file, prepared by Doug Davis: From: "Doug Davis at letni.lonestar.org" Subject: Help File Date: 27-May-91 23:14:40 CST (Mon) This mail server is pretty simple minded, commands are sent as a single line in the body of the message. The ``Subject:'' (if any) will be returned as the subject line from the mail off of this site. This way you can keep track of your own requests. The following commands are available. Pretend the parser is stupid and spell and space them exactly as they are listed here. Anything else in in the body of the message will be quietly ignored. Path:{rfc-976/internet/@) return address for yourself} The parameter of this command should be internet style notation for your username. If your machine is not locateable on the internet via an MX record or gethostbyname() don't bother trying this, since the returning mail will undoubtably be lost. Command:[sub-command]{parameters/filenames} Currently the only supported subcommand right now is "send" with the parameters being the filenames separated via spaces to be sent via return mail to you. For example, to get the index file, send the server a message with the line below in the body of the message. Command: send index This will cause the index of available files to be sent back to you. Also, this is a system V site (hey it was cheap) so you will have to request the file via it's short time. Some later version of the server software will work with the longer names. Oh, yeah, in the above, means the space-bar, i.e. a character with the value of 0x20 hex. Not the word itself. Mailing addresses: telecom-archive-request@letni.lonestar.org: The mail server itself telecom-archive-server@letni.lonestar.org: Returning mail to you will come from this address. Mail sent TO this address will be silently ignored. doug@letni.lonestar.org: My address. Other notes, There is a 500k (per-day) limit on messages leaving the server. If the backlog has exceeded this you will be sent a short note saying your request is acknowledged and how many requests are in the queue before yours. Also presently the back issues of the Digest are being reformatted and are not presently available, my hope is to finish them by the first part of June. doug (Mon May 27 1991) ----------------- Pat again: What Doug means is the back issues of the Digest are not yet available *via this service*. If using ftp, then of course you can get the back issues or any other desired files. When this project is finished, I believe it will be set up so that individual back issues can be pulled, at least for the most recent volumes created here at Northwestern. (We may have some problems with lack of standardization from the JSol days ... time will tell how those old issues work out.) -------- Next, I have attached here the current index to the archives, for the benefit of ftp users. *This is not the same index as Doug will give you if you use his new program*. Same articles, but use his index to order via his service. Below is the main directory, and the sub- directory devoted to telecom.security.issues. I have not included here the sub-directories on Minitel, Tymnet or a couple other things. The back issues of the Digest are in sub-directories by year and volume number. Again, I stress this is the ftp version ... Doug does not yet have any back issues of the Digest on line. We are running TWO archives right now in parallel: the one at MIT which has always been there for users with ftp-ability, and the new one at Doug's site which is gradually being constructed, although quite a bit is available now. Bitnet people may continue to use 'bitftp@pucc.bitnet' if they wish, or they may use this new service. Internet people can use it if they want to see how it works, but please don't abuse it: keep the load down for the benefit of the folks who *must* use this system. Now here is the main directory for the Telecom Archives at lcs.mit.edu: (Up to date as of 5-27-91. The 'telecom-recent' file changes daily, since this is where the most recent issues of the Digest are stored until a group of 50 is collected. We break these at the fiftieth and hundredth issues.) total 3458 drwxrwxr-x 12 telecom telecom 5632 May 26 14:26 ./ drwxrwxr-x 24 root wheel 1024 May 26 01:02 ../ drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Mar 2 23:40 1981-86.volumes.1-5/ drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Mar 2 23:14 1987.volumes.6-7/ drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Mar 2 23:07 1988.volume.8/ drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Mar 2 22:54 1989.volume.9/ drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Mar 2 22:51 1990.volume.10/ drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 May 12 23:17 1991.volume.11/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 663 Jan 27 20:28 READ.ME.FIRST -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 25799 Sep 12 1990 abernathy.internet.story -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 68508 Mar 14 03:38 aos-new.fcc.proposals -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 68224 Nov 20 1990 aos-rules.procedures -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 60505 Feb 24 23:51 apple.data.pcs.petition -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 18238 Nov 9 1990 area.214-903.split -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 35017 Mar 2 21:24 areacode.guide -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 9397 Mar 2 21:26 areacode.program.in.c -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 20826 Mar 3 00:09 areacode.script-c.moore -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 21264 Apr 14 1990 areacode.script-dupuy -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 9078 Mar 2 21:29 areacode.script-revised -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 474 Feb 11 1990 att.service.outage.1-90 -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 18937 Aug 1 1989 auto.coin.collection -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 4788 Jun 10 1990 books.about.phones -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 21702 Nov 20 1990 braux.bill.call.blocking -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 10019 Jan 27 18:53 calendar.of.events.1991 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 61504 Jul 30 1990 caller-id-legal-decision -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 4569 Apr 14 21:03 caller-id-specs.bellcore -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 39449 Dec 14 21:20 cellular.carrier.codes -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 16188 Mar 14 03:22 cellular.fraud.abernathy -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2755 Mar 14 03:34 cellular.fraud.prevention -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 17016 Aug 5 1990 cellular.phones-iridium -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 24455 Feb 6 02:08 cellular.program-motorola -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 15141 Aug 1 1989 cellular.sieve -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 298 May 31 1990 cellular.west.germany -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 16292 Mar 18 1990 class.ss7.features -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 15023 Sep 30 1990 cocot-in-violation-label -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 38981 Oct 12 1990 cocot.complaint.sticker -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 70477 Sep 5 1990 computer.bbs.and.the.law -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 23944 Aug 1 1989 computer.state -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 9150 Jan 31 1990 country.code.list -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 11370 Feb 9 1990 country.codes.revised -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 11267 Feb 25 1990 cpid-ani.developments -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 436 Mar 16 16:54 deaf.communicate.on.tdd -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 15877 Sep 1 1990 dial.tone.monopoly -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 28296 Sep 29 1990 dialup.access.in.uk -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 39319 Aug 1 1989 docket.87-215 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 16367 Sep 1 1990 e-series.recommendations -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 3422 Jan 20 1990 early.digital.ESS -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 62602 Aug 1 1989 ecpa.1986 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 97987 Aug 4 1990 ecpa.1986.federal.laws -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 39956 Jul 14 1990 elec.frontier.foundation -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 5922 Feb 22 18:54 email.middle-east.troops -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 20660 Sep 5 1990 email.privacy -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 8504 Jan 27 1990 enterprise-funny-numbers -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 19836 Nov 20 1990 fax.products.for.pc -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 33239 Aug 1 1989 fcc.policy -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 19378 Aug 1 1989 fcc.threat -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 484 Jan 14 1990 fcc.vrs.aos-ruling -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 9052 Aug 1 1989 find.pair -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 47203 Aug 1 1989 fire.in.chgo.5-88 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 1998 Jan 27 1990 fire.in.st-louis.1-90 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 377 Jan 27 1990 fires.elsewhere.in.past -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 1247 Feb 10 1990 first.issue.cover -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 14105 Nov 24 1990 genie.star-service -rw-r--r-- 1 map telecom 102788 May 23 11:19 glossary.acronyms -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 43101 Jan 27 18:54 glossary.isdn.terms-kluge -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 42188 Jan 14 1990 glossary.phrack.acronyms -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 67113 Jan 14 1990 glossary.txt -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 68804 Feb 2 1990 hi.perf.computing.net -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2337 Jan 27 1990 history.of.digest -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 32625 Mar 29 1990 how.numbers.are.assigned -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 15302 Jan 20 16:21 how.to.post.msgs.here -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 1616 Nov 20 1990 index-canada.npa.files -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 411 Nov 20 1990 index-minitel.files -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 0 May 26 14:26 index-telecom.archives -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 1326 Jan 20 18:33 index-telecom.security -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 343 Jan 20 18:47 index-tymnet.info -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 936 Mar 3 00:06 intro.to.archives -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 12896 Nov 20 1990 isdn.pc.adapter-hayes -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 4816 Aug 1 1989 lauren.song -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 801 Aug 1 1989 ldisc.txt -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 2271 Aug 1 1989 ldnotes.txt -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 13675 Aug 1 1989 ldrates.txt -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 12260 Jan 20 1990 london.ac.script -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 12069 Mar 5 1990 london.codes.script -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 15604 Aug 1 1989 mass.lines -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 463 Aug 1 1989 measured-service drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Nov 20 1990 minitel.info/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 36641 Aug 1 1989 mnp.protocol -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 2450 Jan 20 1990 modems.and.call-waiting -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 7597 Feb 10 1990 named.exchanges -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 16590 Oct 21 1990 net.mail.guide -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 3014 Jan 27 1990 newuser.letter -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 32815 Mar 25 1990 nine.hundred.service -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 45105 Mar 2 22:14 npa.800-carriers.assigned -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 13779 Sep 19 1990 npa.800.prefixes -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 45109 Mar 2 21:28 npa.800.revised -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 33440 May 12 1990 npa.809.prefixes -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 15488 Nov 20 1990 npa.900-carriers.assigned -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 15099 Mar 8 06:42 npa.900.how.assigned dr-xr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Feb 2 01:41 npa.exchange.list-canada/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 16534 Feb 11 1990 nsa.original.charter-1952 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 9886 Jan 23 1990 occ.10xxx.access.codes -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 6847 Mar 2 21:28 occ.10xxx.list.updated -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 8593 May 5 1990 occ.10xxx.notes.updates -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 14354 Aug 12 1990 octothorpe.gets.its.name -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 8504 Jan 27 1990 old.fashioned.coinphones -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 2756 Jan 27 1990 old.hello.msg -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 70153 Aug 1 1989 pc.pursuit -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 5492 Aug 1 1989 pearl.harbor.phones -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 38772 Aug 1 1989 pizza.auto.nmbr.id -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 14189 May 6 02:39 radio-phone.interfere.1 -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 11696 May 6 02:40 radio-phone.interfere.2 -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 8452 May 6 02:40 radio-phone.interfere.3 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 17950 Jan 14 1990 rotenberg.privacy.speech -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 9764 Jan 20 1990 starline.features -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 46738 Jan 18 1990 starlink.vrs.pcp -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 103069 Apr 26 1990 sysops.libel.liability -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 3857 Aug 1 1989 tat-8.fiber.optic -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 27533 Feb 9 1990 telco.name.list.formatted -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 31487 Jan 28 1990 telco.name.listing -rw-rw-r-- 1 ptownson telecom 827380 May 26 14:24 telecom-recent drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Mar 14 03:32 telecom.security.issues/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 21831 Jan 20 14:32 telsat-canada-report -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 11752 Aug 1 1989 telstar.txt drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 512 Dec 10 02:49 tymnet.information/ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 26614 May 29 1990 unitel-canada.ld.service -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 116 Oct 22 1990 white.pages -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 37947 Aug 1 1989 wire-it-yourself -rw-rw-r-- 1 telecom telecom 4101 Aug 1 1989 wiring.diagram -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 24541 Aug 1 1989 zum.debate And here is the sub-directory 'telecom.security.issues': total 608 drwxr-xr-x 2 ptownson telecom 1024 Dec 2 21:19 ./ drwxrwxr-x 6 telecom telecom 5120 Jan 20 18:30 ../ -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 13343 Feb 25 1990 computer.fraud.abuse.act -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 27395 Jun 23 1990 craig.neidorf.indictment -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 9354 Jul 30 02:18 craig.not.guilty -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 67190 Jun 23 1990 crime.and.puzzlement -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 62602 Aug 12 14:29 ecpa.1986 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 97987 Aug 12 14:32 ecpa.1986.federal.laws -rw-r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 21918 Dec 2 21:20 illinois.computer.laws -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 28935 May 19 1990 jolnet-2600.magazine.art -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 30751 Mar 7 1990 jolnet-attctc.crackers -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 43365 Jan 28 1990 kevin.polsen -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 35612 Apr 1 1990 legion.of.doom -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 20703 Aug 12 16:16 len.rose.indictment -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 67099 Nov 4 01:11 telecom.usa.call.block-1 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 31995 Nov 20 10:34 telecom.usa.call.block-2 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 10833 Nov 20 10:23 telecom.usa.call.block-3 -r--r--r-- 1 ptownson telecom 14821 Sep 12 19:19 war.on.computer.crime People using Doug's new service will probably find the same file names as above in the index there ... but use his index to check exact spellings and any little differences there may be. Have fun! Do catch up on back issues you have missed as well as any special files you may have not seen before .... and remember to check Doug's index regularly since it will be getting larger as he gets his files completely on line. And why not send a note of thanks to Doug also, for his work over the holiday weekend in getting this up and running for telecom readers. From all of us Doug, thanks! Patrick Townson TELECOM Moderator   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08487; 30 May 91 5:33 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa03104; 30 May 91 3:54 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa08019; 30 May 91 2:31 CDT Date: Thu, 30 May 91 1:31:20 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #408 BCC: Message-ID: <9105300131.ab30103@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 May 91 01:30:55 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 408 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson John Higdon on KFI in Los Angeles [Steve W. York] Rebecca Bigeley and Thrifty Tel [John Higdon] Incoming lines from Telco [Robert M. Hamer] AT&T Long Distance Employee Concession [Edward Hopper] Caller ID Blocking Advertised [Tim Irvin] Fax Memory [Kath Mullholand] The Definitive ANAC Guide [Leryo Malbito] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve_W_York@cup.portal.com Subject: John Higdon on KFI in Los Angeles Date: Tue, 28 May 91 23:42:14 PDT [MODERATOR'S NOTE: LATE BULLETIN! THE REPEAT OF THE SHOW SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY AT 3 AM PACIFIC TIME HAS BEEN PRE-EMPTED DUE TO THE NEW ARREST OF RODNEY KING. JOHN HIGDON ADVISED ME BY PHONE WEDNESDAY NIGHT THE SHOW IS NOW RESCHEDULED FOR AT 3 AM P.S.T. PAT] When I read a few days ago that John Higdon was going to be on KFI in Los Angeles on Tuesday, it piqued my interest. I do a a show on KFI. So why not meet the scrouge of net. Seemed like a good idea at the time. Anyway, I called the show's producer and got his answering machine (twice). Left a message on the second call, and drove over to the studio. During the drive, I wondered how I would know who he was. I shouldn't have worried. I put my ID card in the reader to open the front door and went in and waved at the guard. Then up a flight of steps and waved at the receptionist who buzzed me through the next door. Then up another flight of stairs to the studios. I looked down the hall and saw the light on in the producer's office and figured that was a good place to start. I never got there. As I was walking, I glanced down a side utility hall. There, between two bathrooms was a man sitting on the floor, hunched over a milk crate. There was a laptop on the milkcrate and a wire running across the floor into an old frame room full of abandoned 66 punch blocks and 1A2 equipment. This obviously was HIGDON. He ignored me as I walked over to introduce myself. Eventually, he signed off and we met. Not exactly like meeting a prophet. But I wouldn't know what that's like anyway. His show went well, though one caller reffered to him as an idiot. That was his favorite call, at least he kept talking about it later. I'll let him tell you about the show. Afterwards, John, Joe, Tony, and I amused each other for a few hours telling and enjoying stories. For anyone who wants to hear the show, it will be repeated Thursday at 3AM. KFI is 640 AM, 50,000 watts clear channel. Should be audible by at least the Western third of the country. Fire up the cassette deck and get a copy for your kids. Steve York ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 15:49 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Rebecca Bigeley and Thrifty Tel The best way to describe Thrifty Tel is that it is a struggling reseller. The best way to describe Rebecca Bigeley is that she is a woman with a cause and a gigantic ego. Yesterday's experience talking with her was, at best, confusing. Her company is an attractive hacker nuisance. It has no ANI delivery on the 950 access, it has short authorization codes, etc. The emphasis is on "catching" the phreaks rather than stopping them. I asked her point blank off the air if she would be happy if all phreaking activity stopped tomorrow and her answer was in effect, "we want to send a message to these criminals." Her excuse for using FGB (with no FGD turnaround) was that it would cost her (and by extension her customers) money for upgrading. "Why should my customers pay for what these criminals are doing? The 'hackers' themselves (or their parents) should bear the cost." Just before a break, I pointed out that FGB was obsolete in any case and that FGD would provide additional protections against hacking. On the air, she kept insisting that this would not be the case and even at one point accused me of not knowing enough about the technical matters. During one of the breaks, the producer of the show asked that we keep the "jargon" to a minimum. Ms. Bigeley responded, "These guys are technicians -- that's just the way they talk. I, on the other hand, understand that this is not a technical matter, but a moral and ethical one." I have to hand it to her -- she is no dummy. She played her part very well. Those who heard the show will note that after all of her insistence that FGD would not help her and that FGB was perfectly reasonable for her company to use, despite its hacker invitations; she did not challenge my rather pointed pre-break condemnation of FGB. Maybe I am giving her more credit than she deserves, but I suspect that she knew what my next statement would have been if pressed on the issue. The only reason resellers cling to FGB technology, phreaker holes and all, is to allow intraLATA bypass in violation of tariff. Thrifty Tel does this as does a large number of other providers. Everyone in the business knows this. When I explained (off mike) that FGD presubscription with no casual calling (or even with it) would end her phreaker problems, her answer was the issue of "cost -- to her and her customers". This is the tone she maintained throughout. There were some strange callers. One suggested that all information everywhere should be free for the asking (taking). His (unsupportable) justification for hacking and phreaking illegally was somewhat off the wall. Another gentleman, who described himself as a "security systems" designer referred to my associate and myself as "idiots" because we were suggesting that Thrifty Tel might pay more attention to locking the door rather than running after the thieves. "There is nothing that is completely secure." Maybe not, but at a certain point most phreaks will give up on something that is not worth the effort. I asked him if he would put a computer on a phone line open to the world without a password. "Of course not, but that has nothing to do with it." One caller even brought up the (now discredited) flap about Prodigy as a platform to declare that all corporations were evil and that they should all be ripped off. Unfortunately, I think those at the station got more out of this in our post-mortem afterwards than came across on the air. We summed up at the end of the broadcast with the same words meaning different things. I suggested that lawmakers and the public needed to become better informed in the matters of computers and telecommunications technology so that the mystique that drives irrational prosecutions of people could be brought under control. Ms. Bigeley also advocated more education. More education of law enforcement personel so that they would be fired up to go after these "thugs and criminals" that are ripping off honest little businesses such as hers, and by extension, her customers. Her moral crusade tone created an atmosphere that caused any reason to be introduced into the discussion to appear as being "soft on criminal activity". To her it was very simple: if these people don't want their lives ruined then they should not tamper with her (very vulnerable) system. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: Remember, the re-broadcast will be , 3 AM due to pre-emption because of Rodney King's latest arrest. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 08:44 EDT From: "Robert M. Hamer" Subject: Incoming Lines From Telco Last Thursday my wife and I closed on a townhouse in Princeton, NJ. We moved in last Friday, although I'm back here in humid Virginia until the end of June. I inspected the phone connections and discovered the following: I can't find a network interface. Coming in from outside into the basement is a line with what looks like perhaps 10 or 15 twisted pairs. One of the pairs is connected to one of the old-fashioned terminals (with four screw-type poles) to which all of our in-house wiring is connected. (The inhouse wiring is a combination of what looks like standard quad phone wire and what looks like three-pair or four-pair twisted pair. Only one pair is in use. Red/green on the quad for tap/ring. Go figure.) I have an uncomfortable suspician that all these pairs coming into the basement go to other people's phone lines, and that in their basements, my pair is included among those terminated in their basements. I have heard of such arrangements for apartments, but would they have done it for townhouses? (There are about eight units in our building.) If that is indeed true, is there any way I might persuade the local telco to make some other arrangement so that my pairs aren't available for others to tap into; to make phone calls on, etc? ------------------------------ From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: Wed May 29 09:41:23 CDT 1991 Subject: AT&T Long Distance Employee Concession At present, full time management employees (at least lower ranking management employees like me) have the following deal on AT&T long distance within the USA: First $35.00 per month of calls - 100% discount (i.e., free). Next $65.00 worth of calls - 50% discount. Non-management employees do not get such a good deal. I recall something like $5 free and and 50% off on the next $25 or $35. Back in the old Bell days, the late Mountain Bell gave me free local service, free features (custom calling, touch tone) plus a smaller long distance discount ($15 free). This process is known internally as a "concession". "Concession" billing was also used by the BOCs for "offical" (i.e., internal) service. I remember pulling up the service records and bill on the Mountain Bell Centrex in El Paso, TX (before the barbarians at SW Bell took over). The bill was $0.00. This was for a three thousand line switch with massive amounts of 1A2 key equipment. In addition, by producing a valid ID badge at a phone center store one gets the "employee price" for telephone sets, answering machines, etc. Last week for example, I bought one of the digital answering machines for under $100. Regular price is $139.99. Sometimes sale prices at department/electronics stores on AT&T merchandise is better than this discount, sometimes not. Finally, various computers have been offered for sale. Sometimes these are good deals, sometimes not. The last deal was on a 6386/SX although I do not recall prices. Ed Hopper AT&T Computer Systems (for now) ------------------------------ Subject: Caller ID Blocking Advertised Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Date: Wed, 29 May 91 13:18:04 +22322638 From: irvin@northstar105.dartmouth.edu The following 1/4 page ad appeared yesterday, May 28, 1991, in the {Valley News}, (Lebanon, NH-White River Junction, VT, and surrounding area): +-----------------+ White River Junction Area Customers +------------------+ | | | | | I m p o r t a n t | | n o t i c e | | a b o u t C a l l e r I D | | B l o c k i n g. | | [note: This part took up 1/2 the ad. Large, bold letters] | | | | New England Telephone is offering response to this concern, New England | | White River Junction Area customers Telephone is now offering Per-Call | | a new generation of call management Blocking, a free method of "blocking" | | services. These new services are the transmission of your telephone | | call Phonesmart(SM) and are designed number to the Caller ID unit. | | to offer you increased convenience, {How to use Per-Call Blocking}. Since| | control and security. your line is already equipped for Per-| | One of the new Phonesmart services Call Blocking, all you have to do is | | is Caller ID. Caller ID enables a dial 1176 on a rotary phone or push | | subscriber to see the telephone num- *67 on a Touch-Tone phone equipped with | ber of a caller before picking up Touch-Tone service before dialing the | | the phone. When a phone call comes call you want blocked. | | in, the caller's telephone number If you have further questions or | | shows up on a small display device require assistance, just call your Ser- | connected to the subscriber's phone. vice Representative at the telephone | | However, in certain instances, some number listed on the New England | | people don't want their number iden- Telephone Itemization of Account | | tified by the person they're page of your bill. | | calling. In | | | | [The next lines were in {very} small print] | | These are services (products) whose prices are not regulated. Comparable | | services may be available in a more fully regulated form. [yea right, from| | whom?] Ask your local business office for a comparison with those | | services, and then decide whether you prefer these service offerings. | | | | {BELL LOGO} N e w E n g l a n d T e l e p h o n e | | A NYNEX Company | | | Note: All [] comments, and misspellings are mine. The formatting is a close as possible given a mono-spaced font. I wonder what these comparable services are.... I like how "In response to this concern, NET in now offering PCB....", makes them seem so understanding to customers' privacy concerns, when I am sure they must of fought tooth-and-nail to keep Blocking out all together. Tim Irvin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 14:28:38 EDT From: KATH MULLHOLAND Subject: Fax Memory Has anyone out there heard of a fax machine with partitioned memory? What is needed is for callers calling in to dial the seven-digit fax number, followed by an eighth digit that identifies a "mailbox" which then stores the fax until the fax owner goes to the fax machine and asks for all of the faxes stored in mailbox 'x'. I can see how this could be done with multiple faxes each with its own (huge) memory, but what they are looking for is a single machine that will do this. Storage needs are upwards of 100 pages of closely typed copy. Please reply directly to me -- k_mullholand@unhh.unh.edu -- and I will summarize the answers for the Digest. Kath Mullholand Durham, NH ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 16:38:24 -0400 From: Leryo Malbito Subject: The Definitive ANAC Guide "The Definitive ANAC Guide" (Compiled by Emmanuel Goldstein, so all credit goes to him. Typed in by me, all typos mine.) If it doesn't work, try prefacing it with a 1. It still might not work, as this is a somewhat old list (Summer 90), so please let me know (NOT Pat!) whether they all work or not. Some of them seem doubtful, as I would try the ones with nnx 970 frm payphones ... wouldn't want any of you to get burned ... and also the ones that are 211 seem somewhat questionable also, as (in 212) that is the Credit Operator. Any that DO work will work from anywhere for free, payphones, etc. I am assuming (I think correctly) that xxx.xxxx means any string of seven digits, and you all can get back to me on that too. experiment! 205 908.222.2222 212 958 213 114 213 1223 213 61056 214 970.xxxx 215 410.xxxx 217 200.xxx.xxxx 217 290 305 200.222.2222 309 200.xxx.xxxx 309 290 312 1.200.5863 312 200.xxx.xxxx 312 290 313 200.222.2222 317 310.222.2222 317 743.1218 401 222.2222 403 908.222.2222 404 940.xxx.xxxx 407 200.222.2222 408 300.xxx.xxxx 408 760 409 970.xxxx 414 330.2234 415 200.555.1212 415 211.2111 415 2222 415 640 415 760 415 760.2878 415 7600 415 7600.2222 502 997.555.1212 509 560 512 200.222.2222 512 970.xxxx 516 968 517 200.222.2222 518 997 518 998 602 593.0809 602 593.6017 602 593.7451 604 1116 604 1211 604 211 612 511 615 830 616 200.222.2222 617 200.xxx.xxxx 617 220.2622 618 200.xxx.xxxx 713 970.xxxx 714 211.2121 716 511 718 958 806 970.xxxx 812 410.555.1212 815 200.xxx.xxxx 815 290 817 211 906 200.222.2222 914 1.990.1111 914 99 914 990 914 990.1111 915 970.xxxx 919 711 [Moderator's Note: I just now tried the one for 312, and it did not work. Maybe others will have luck with theirs. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #408 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10450; 30 May 91 7:02 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21143; 30 May 91 5:12 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab03104; 30 May 91 3:55 CDT Date: Thu, 30 May 91 3:08:09 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #409 BCC: Message-ID: <9105300308.ab29453@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 May 91 03:07:24 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 409 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Neil Rickert] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [S. M. Krieger] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Henry Mensch] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Bud Couch] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Steve Gaarder] Re: Some Comments on History of AIOD [Macy Hallock] Re: DTMF Decoder Chip Wanted [Patton M. Turner] Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? [Bryan Montgomery] Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? [Martin Baines] Re: A Visitor Observes Phone Service in the UK [Martin Baines] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Neil Rickert Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Organization: Northern Illinois University Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 12:13:44 GMT In article DREUBEN@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes: > I just got this in the mail from AT&T: > In a few weeks, you will be receiving a new AT&T Calling Card to > replace the AT&T Calling Card you now carry. > When it arrives, you'll notice that your new card looks different. It > even has a DIFFERENT ACCOUNT NUMBER FROM YOUR CURRENT AT&T CARD. > (Emphasis added). In order to comply with government requirements, > AT&T is no longer sharing card numbers with your local telephone > company. Now, AT&T is issuing new card numbers that are exclusive to > AT&T. This sounds like a good move to me. Time to describe a personal experience. This happened perhaps seven years ago. A calling card (along with other cards, etc) were stolen. We notified AT&T who promptly issued a new card. A few weeks later when we had need to use the AT&T card, it didn't work. After much complaining, the explanation turned out to be that our original card had been issued by means of a request to Illinois Bell. The replacement was issued by AT&T. But because the original was ordered through Illinois Bell, it could only be cancelled by Illinois Bell. AT&T didn't think to do this when they issued the replacement. We didn't think to do so either, since the card said AT&T. I consider the separation a distinct improvement which can only serve to reduce this kind of confusion in the future. Note, that since the AT&T notice promises the same service, one presumes that local calls anywhere in the country should still be chargeable to the AT&T card. Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 10:39:03 EDT From: S M Krieger Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Organization: Summit NJ Douglas Scott Reuben writes: > I just got this in the mail from AT&T: > In a few weeks, you will be receiving a new AT&T Calling Card to > replace the AT&T Calling Card you now carry. > When it arrives, you'll notice that your new card looks different. It > even has a DIFFERENT ACCOUNT NUMBER FROM YOUR CURRENT AT&T CARD. > So does this mean that we will all need to know at least *two* PIN > numbers now? I already have my new AT&T Calling Card. Here is my understanding of it (DISCLAIMER: based entirely on the literature I got about it). It is more than a new PIN; it's a 14 digit number totally unrelated to the phone number. This number will be accepted by the local phone companies for intra-LATA calls, but it will not be accepted by other long distance carriers. (I believe the Calling Card number on the Universal Card works the same way.) This new calling card number (although I haven't tried it yet) will also be linked to the Reach Out America plan (which in my case, I pay $2.00 a month extra for no surcharge on Calling Card calls after 10:00pm and all day Saturday and Sunday until 5:00pm). From other literature I got (as well as phone call I made to AT&T confirming it), the new AT&T Calling Cards would not be sent to Universal Card holders, as they (we?) already have an AT&T Calling Card Card number. But Universal Card holders who are also Reach Out America customers (like me) can request the AT&T Calling Card so that an AT&T Calling Card number can be linked to the home phone number (the Universal Card number can't) for ROA discounts. Stan Krieger All opinions, advice, or suggestions, even AT&T UNIX System Laboratories if related to my employment, are my own and Summit, NJ do not represent any public or private att!attunix!smk policies of my employer. ------------------------------ From: Henry Mensch Date: Wed, 29 May 91 11:24:37 -0700 Subject: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Reply-To: henry@ads.com > [Moderator's Note: Did they specifically say you could NOT make local > calls on the card or would NOT be able to use the local telco's card > to make calls on the AT&T network? PAT] Hmm ... I just got a new Pac*Bell calling card and a new-style AT&T calling card ... the Pac*Bell card accompanying literature emphatically states that I can use my Pac*Bell card to make "long distance" (presumably out-of-state) calls and it should be good "almost anywhere." I'm not sure I want to test it that vigorously, tho. Henry Mensch / Advanced Decision Systems / ------------------------------ From: Bud Couch Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Organization: Kentrox Industries, Inc. Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 03:49:32 GMT In a recent post, our illustrious Moderator wrote: > [Moderator's Note: I don't know if you meant it the way it came out, > but the telephone instrument has *nothing* to do with the ring you > hear as the caller. What you heard must have been some kind of fluke; > some temporary switch problem. PAT] Most C.O. switches built in the last ten years *deliberately* divorce the ringback tone heard by the calling party from the acrual ringing sound at the called party's phone. This has been done to cut down on revenue "leakage" due to ringing code schemes: "Well, when we get to Aunt Gertie's house, we'll call and leave it ring three times." Modern switches, in general, return ringback both slower and asynchronously from the actual ringing in order to foul up those schemes. "Why did you answer? It only rang twice." "Twice? It started on the fourth ring here!" Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew standard BS applies ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 02:16:02 EDT From: gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Until about five or so years ago, a large, probably crossbar New England Tel office in Newton, Mass. (617-964) had a double ring as the normal cadence. This was the sound of both the actual ringer and of the ringback. The first time I called a friend there after they replaced the switch I heard a standard ringback and hung up, thinking I'd misdialed. Steve Gaarder gaarder@theory.tc.cornell.edu gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 28 May 91 21:12 EDT From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: Some Comments on History of AIOD Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 > When I was in the interconnect business, selling Mitel SX-200 PBX > equipment, I used to notice references to AIOD in the documentation > for that product. The Mitel SX-200 and SX-100 and SX-2000 have AIOD capability. This is still available, but nobody uses it ... it's basically an obsolete protocol. It was included in the products because telcos wouldn't buy a PBX that could not support AIOD. It was used mainly for Centrex CU type services. I'm told there are some telcos with an AIOD tarriff still on the books. Not so here. Most of the modern CO's are the same way ... they can do AIOD due to telco specs, but never install or implement the feature. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG 216-725-4764 Home macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG Note: macy@ncoast.org is best reply path to me. uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy [No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you] ----------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 May 91 00:35:49 CDT From: "Patton M. Turner" Subject: Re: DTMF Decoder Chip Wanted > Does anyone know where to buy an inexpensive DTMF decoder chip? > Preferable with easy interfacing capabilities. I want to build one of > those turn-on-anything-from-anywhere gizmos. Thanks.... I don't know of a single chip implementation of a DTMF decoder. Since nobody seemed to come up with anything, I will give you my solution: eight tone decoders in parallel (ECG part# 832). Each decoder handles a separate frequency, and the outputs are combined with NAND gates to obtain the number. The ECG tech manual includes an example of this implementation. If you can't obtain a copy of the data sheet on this chip, let me know and I can mail you a copy. Hope this helps. Pat Turner KB4GRZ pturner@eng.auburn.edu ----------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 May 91 14:56:11 BST From: bmontgom@hvtvm4.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? Hello again, Someone is awake and noticed my mistake. I should have said 3000 million, well 3050 million (97/sec) pounds! Approximately 5500 million US Dollars per annum. Incidentally the title had been 'moderated from profits ... to excessive profits -- and I agree! BTW I hadn't realised the difference in 'billion' but million means 1,000,000! Thanks for pointing it out. You learn something every day! As far as it being excessive, isn't that why 'Ma Bell' was split up and de-regulation etc? Currently there is one other choice for non-local (incidentally ALL calls are timed), Mercury, they complain (justifiably?) that BT charge too much for local links. Hopefully with the governments new legislation there will be possibilities for change with British Rail, Water Boards (canals), as LD carriers but all still relying on BT for local links. Perhaps if we get modern technology like cable there will be opurtunities for other 'local' links. I'd be interested to hear any comments from others with experience of BT, et al. For all the moans and groans of the US system, it still seems to be light years ahead of ours, from my limited experience anyway. Does this make matters better (or worse?) Cheers, Bryan M. ------------------------------ From: Martin Baines Subject: Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? Date: 29 May 91 10:00:02 GMT Reply-To: Martin.Baines@uk.sun.com Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd In article , motcid!ashbya@uunet.uu.net (Adam J. Ashby) writes: > In article , bmontgom@hvtvm4.vnet.ibm. > com writes: >> Food for thought: British Telecom announced yesterday profits of 95 >> pounds a second ie annual profits of 3000 billion pounds ... leading >> to comments from competitors that BT charges too much for use of its >> local lines. I don't know how this compares to US telecom operators, >> but I think it could be described as somewhat excessive. > A couple of points to mention here ... > 1) I somewhat doubt the validity of your figures - especially as I > remember not long ago everyone was aghast at BT making one million > pounds a day - or one third of one billion pounds. You may doubt them, but they are true! Mind you (according to BT adverts) they reinvest #88 per minute of that. > 2) Is that a 'British' billion (1x10E12) or an 'American' billion > (1x10E9)?? Unfortunately for the English language, since Nigel Lawson started using the American Billion for reporting the budget in the early '80s the American Billion has taken over here when refering to money. A sad day: what was wrong with the (correct) term milliad? > 3) Describing it as excessive is very subjective - it wouldn't seem so > excessive if you were a shareholder, would it?? As a share holder I quite agree. Unfortuanately there are still some solicalist mined individuals in the UK who believe all profit is evil and privatisation was the work of the devil! Of course these are the same people no doubt who would like to go back to the '70s when the old GPO took 18 months to install my parents phone line *and* succeeded in lossing money on a monopoly service and hence needed tax money (top rate 98% !!!) to make up the difference. "You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment" Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager, Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK Phone Email UK: 0223 420421 JANET: Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun International: +44 223 420421 Other UK: Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk Internet: Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com ------------------------------ From: Martin Baines Subject: Re: A Visitor Observes Phone Service in the UK Date: 29 May 91 10:25:20 GMT Reply-To: Martin.Baines@uk.sun.com Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd In article , alexb@cfctech.cfc.com (Alex Beylin) writes: [preabmle and questions re red phone boxes deleted] > Also while I was there, BT released their profit statements and all > hell broke loose in the papers. The common opinion seems to be that > BT makes more money then they should. See my prior posting today! > On the home front, majority of people I met still have BT as their one > and only carrier. One of my friends just added Mercury to his > business phone and observed 35+% drop in LD charges. He had to > replace all his phones as the standard BT phone was not compatible > with Mercury (no tones?). His current phone is made by Southern Bell. > He has to dial an access number to get to the Mercury network. Depends where you live and when you got your phone as to whether it is Mercury compatible. If you live in an exchange that is digital (50% of exchanges, 75% of the population) then all you need to get Mercury is a tone phone. If you get a *new* phone from BT it may/may not be tone: it seems to depend what they have in stock (any comments?). If you live on a pulse exchange, to get Mercury you need a phone that can change from pulse to tone in the middle of dialing: the pulses to get to Mercury, then tones for your PIN and the number. A number of commercially sold phones have a "Mercury" button: this basically dials Mercury for you and (depending on model) may dial the PIN as well. This is just a convienience but often not understood by phone salesmen. > The state of pay phone confusion is unbelivable. BT phone cards are > widely available but work only in BT phones. Mercury phone cards are > also available, but work only in Mercury phones. In London most BT > and Mercury pay phones will not accept coins - I was forced to carry > both cards. Some BT phones do accept coins and even give change, > contrary to the sign on the phone. The signs on BT phones say that they only give change out of the coins you put in, not that they don't give change. E.g. If I put in a single #1 coin and only make a 10p call, I get no change; but if I put in 10 * 10p coins and make the same call, I get 90p back. As for PhoneCard verses coin availability: depends where you are. In most cases I can think of, BT usually puts at least one coin phone in every cluster of phones. I cannot think of *any* coin operated Mercury phone (although I am told they exist!), all the ones I have come across take MercuryCards (tm) *and* credit cards. I would love to see a common standard for pre-paid cards, but I would hate to be the person who worked out how to cross charge between phone companies for their use. An exercise for Oftel in their spare time perhaps? |> None of the home phones I used (8-10) had tone dialing - pulse only. This is basically customer lazyness: most people don't know the difference so don't bother to get tones. You can walk into any store selling phones these days and get a tone phone for same price as a pulse phone. There is no added charge from BT for using tones. If you live in an area that Mercury can do direct connect (lucky you!) tones are mandatory. "You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment" Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager, Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK Phone Email UK: 0223 420421 JANET: Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun International: +44 223 420421 Other UK: Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk Internet: Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #409 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28708; 31 May 91 3:48 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20431; 31 May 91 2:13 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11357; 31 May 91 1:03 CDT Date: Fri, 31 May 91 0:32:08 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #410 BCC: Message-ID: <9105310032.ab16333@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 31 May 91 00:31:56 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 410 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Talking Books For the Blind [Martin McCormick] Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? [Bill Vermillion] Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? [George Horwath] Re: AT&T's Cornet [William T. Sykes] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 May 91 14:48:58 CST From: mmccorm@d.cs.okstate.edu Subject: Talking Books For the Blind Part I In the discussion of Western Electric sound recordings, the subject of Talking Books for the blind was mentioned. Having been a user of the service for almost 35 years and having worked at the Oklahoma Library for the Blind and Physically Handicapped in one of my past lives, I would like to describe the details of how the system worked and how it works now. The Talking Book is administered by the Library of Congress. It began in 1939 and, even then, was quite innovative. The Talking Book records were 12-inch platters recorded at 33-and-1/3 RPM in the micro-groove format, just like modern albums. In the late 50's, the Library of Congress, ever interested in data compression, switched from 33-and-1/3 to 16-and-2/3RPM records. The voice quality of these disks was still excellent, but it only took half as many disks for any given Talking Book. The 1960's were a time of great technological change for Talking Books, just like many other things. The speed of the disks dropped to 8-and-1/3RPM where it is today, and the Library of Congress began using the new audio cassette tape format for some Talking Book issues. The disks, themselves, also underwent quite a slimming process from those first 33-and-1/3 RPM albums. Some time after the introduction of 16-and-2/3 RPM disks, the 12-inch diameter was changed to a 10-inch size. Also, in the late 60's, the Library of Congress introduced flexible disks. Most of you have seen these limber records as supplements to magazines and other such freebees. The first ones were, as I recall, terrible because the turntables of the 50's and 60's Talking Book players were covered with mats that didn't adequately support the flexible disks. Also, both shippers and users of the flexible disks had to get used to the fact that they weren't as forgiving of high heat, heavy feet, etc as rigid phonograph records. Today, the flexible disks are 8-inch black disks which at 8-and-1/3 RPM have about one hour of playing time per side. Since it is still cheaper to press large quantities of flexible disks than to produce a large quantity of tapes, the disks are still used for materials such as best-seller books and widely read magazines. Material with a more limited circulation such as specialty magazines are recorded on audio cassettes; I'll say more on this later. Some magazines, such as {Newsweek} are recorded on both formats. As the flexible disk and tape formats have matured, there have been some nifty innovations to make the materials easier to use. There is an audible system for indexing chapter headings or the beginnings of magazine articles which though very simple in concept, is pure genius. A low tone of about 50 to 100HZ is recorded for a second or two along with the reader's voice at the beginning of the important section. It is much like the 50 HZ slide synchronization tones used to trip the advance mechanism on 35MM film strip projectors. Under normal conditions, you don't hear the tone but if the disk or tape is played at several times the speed, the tone will be heard as a beep. This system works really well on tape-recorded material. For special reference materials such as cookbooks and dictionaries, there is a really neat system called Voice Indexing. It is done by superimposing a word or two onto a prerecorded tape at a much higher speed than the original recording. During fast-forward, the normal speech sounds like monkey chatter. The page or chapter index tones sound like occasional beeps, and the voice indexing information sound like a normal human voice telling you the name of the next section. When a Voice Indexed recording is played at normal speed, the Voice Index creates a sound like rolling thunder in the background. Those who look for hidden Satanic messages in rock music would have a field day with this technology, but I digress. Finally, while the cassette tapes used in the Talking Book program are the exact same tapes and cartridges used the world over for sound recordings, these days they would not be at home in a standard stereo or mono tape player. Just as with the disks, the Library of Congress has tried to fit more and more information into a smaller space. The early 70's saw a change from 1-and-7/8 ips tape speed to 15/16 ips speed. This is half the speed used for an ordinary cassette tape recording. The next big increase in efficiency occurred in the mid 70's when the four-track cassette was introduced. Today's Library of Congress Talking Books are recorded on either 8-inch flexible disks or 15/16 ips four-track cassettes. The Talking Book disk player, called a Talking Book Machine, looks like an average sized classroom phonograph. The lid can be removed so as to set the speaker somewhere else, but it usually works fine right on the machine. The controls are very basic and utilitarian, namely power, speed, volume and tone. They are marked in both raised large print and Braille. The tape players, about the dimensions of a large book, have a speed selector so as to be able to play 15/16 ips tapes or the normal 1-and-7/8 ips speeds. Their transport mechanisms have controls which would be familiar to anybody who has ever seen a cassette tape recorder. The buttons are molded with large raised international symbols such as < for rewind and > for fast-forward. In the second part, I will talk more about the Talking Books, themselves and what it is like to use them. Part II The Talking Book program of the Library of Congress is one of those government programs which works. It has, over the past 52 years grown and matured technologically, but it still performs it's original function of bringing otherwise inaccessible materials to people who are blind or otherwise physically handicapped so as not to be able to read a printed book. The Library of Congress distributes Talking Books and players to a network of regional distribution libraries in all 50 states. Any American citizen who is legally defined as blind or print handicapped can borrow a Talking Book disk player and a special four-track tape player free of charge. The actual Talking Book records and tapes are also loaned free of charge. A patron of the service need only ask his or her regional lending library for a certain title and it is sent if available. Every couple of months, the Talking Books Publishing division of the Library of Congress distributes a catalog of the latest new books they have put on disk or tape. They also give listings of recorded materials which are produced by private organizations. While not all of these privately produced materials are free, they provide another source of recorded information. Talking Book disk players and tape machines break, from time to time and their repair is free to the user. In many parts of the country, the Telephone Pioneers, an organization of AT&T employees, donates their time and technical expertise to repairing these machines. While I really know very little about the Telephone Pioneers, their handiwork is always very impressive and should qualify for a few articles in comp.dcom.telecom. The quality of the production of Talking Books is purely professional. The readers are actors, actresses, and even radio and television announcers. They are often paid for their work, but sometimes donate their time. Full-length books are recorded with scrupulous adherence to accuracy. Weekly magazines such as "Newsweek," and "U.S. News and World Report," are produced in recording marathons in which the content of the magazine is split up among several readers and then edited into one recording. Again, every effort is made to insure that the readers are accurate. A few of the books such as Alistair Cooke's book about the founding of the United States are actually read by their authors. Since virtually all of the books which are turned into Talking Books are copywrited, the Library of Congress or any other organization which wants to transcribe a book onto an audio tape must get permission from the publisher. Such permission is usually granted as long as the information in the book or article is not modified in any way. What kinds of books are on Talking Book? The selection committee at the Library of Congress uses the "New York Times Best Seller List" as one of the criteria for deciding which books to transcribe. The list of recorded Talking Book titles is a cross-section of the kinds of books that all Americans read. The Talking Book program and the support provided by such groups as the Telephone Pioneers is a good example of human ingenuity and good intentions forming a truly useful service. Martin McCormick Amateur Radio WB5AGZ Oklahoma State University Computer Center Data Communications Group Stillwater, OK ------------------------------ From: Bill Vermillion Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL Date: Wed, 29 May 91 03:01:49 GMT In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > He says that by 1933, "... the record business in America was > practically extinct," referring to almost 70 years of virtually no > development beyond Edison's basic acoustic methods. Apparently, the > record industry had not of its own accord adopted any of the advances > that electronics could bring. Even so, my 1928 reference book shows a > phono pickup and states that, "Modern electric phonographs, usually > combination phonograph and radio broadcast receiver ..." Some of the companies made the changeover to electric, but the budget companies stuck with accoustic, as there were no royalties to pay, and therefore they could get to market cheaper. > So, while it might seem that the Great Depression was sounding a > death knell for the record business, "The Movies" were coming on > strong. The other thing that was killing records, in conjunction with the great depression, was that new-fangled toy, radio. In the 1927-1929 era there were three records that were million sellers. My Blue Heaven - Gene Austin, Prisoners Song - Vernon Dahlhard, and I forgot the third one. Then in the depression era a good selling record was 50,000 copies. Next million seller didn't come along until 1942, Elton Britt - THere's a Star Spangled Banner Waving Somewhere. The first patriotic hit of that era. A good reference book for record industry is "From Tin Foil To Stereo - The Evolution of the Phonograph" by Read and Welch. The first edition was printed in 1959. I have the second edition printed in 1976. Highly recommended if you can find one anywhere. It was published by Sams. Bill Vermillion - UUCP: ...!tarpit!bilver!bill : bill@bilver.UUCP ------------------------------ From: George Horwath Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? Date: 29 May 91 12:56:41 GMT Reply-To: motcid!uunet.uu.net!motcid!horwath@uunet.uu.net Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL > But of more interest to me now was Western Electric's involvement in > phonograph records. It must have been very minimal and limited to the > early days of sound recordings. ^^^^^^^^^^ > Going through my *very old* (1948-49) phonograph records and tapes I ^^^^^^^^^^ Pat, I think we have a slight perspective problem here on the time line as far as the history of phonograph records goes. I've got some in my collection that date back to 1920 and I thought they were NOT that old since they were pressed with recordings on *both* sides. :) Yes, I do have a CD player!! :) The following is what I recall after having looked into the history of records about fifteen years ago. I don't have any references in front of me, so this is all from memory (which is poor, I admit). The round record (as opposed to the Edison cylinder) was invented by Emile Berliner who formed the Victor Talking Machine Company to market it and the record player used to reproduce the sound. (The "correct" term for this record player, BTW, is the gramophone. The phonograph is the name of the Edison invention.) The Victor Talking Machine Company was bought up by RCA and it was RCA Victor that marketed electrical recording (late 20's) and later marketed electrical playback (early 30's). By "electrical recording", I mean direct to disk. This also refers to the consumer market -- I didn't look at the "pro" market (i.e. transcriptions for radio/movies on 12+" disks). Did WE have a hand in the development or was it RCA? Good question. A much earlier "Bell" connection was due to one of good ol' Alexander's relatives (cousin?). He took Edison's invention and improved it and finally marketed it as the graphophone. This was the device that ^^^^^^^^^^^ [Moderator's Note: Did you mean 'gramaphone'? PAT] actually used wax cylinders, instead of foil, as Edison had done. Needless to say, lawsuits followed and Bell won - his method was termed "engraving" (i.e. material, wax, is removed in the process) while Edison used "embossing". > promotional purposes. The wire-recording converted to 'modern magnetic > tape media' (1949, har har!) was of Henry LeMare, municipal organist > for the City of Atlantic City during the 1920's era. It was also > recorded at the auditorium there. LeMare would have probably recorded > it on some earlier type of media; then it went to wire, then tape. It The following will help in dating your recording. The Atlantic City organ, with a 400HP wind plant and over 30,000 pipes, is the largest pipe organ in the world. (Unfortunately, not the largest *playing* pipe organ - it is in a sad state of disrepair. That title belongs to the instrument in the chapel at West Point.) It was designed by Senator Emerson Richards and built by the Midmer-Losh company of Long Island with the contract awarded in early 1929. Built during the Great Depression, it was about 50% complete by May, 1930 and still not finished by April, 1932. Edwin Henry Lemare (1865-1934) was an English organist who moved to the USA. He was quite a virtuoso and, at one time, was the highest paid organist in the world. At various times, he was the municipal organist of San Francisco; Portland, Maine; and Chattanooga, TN. I guess this would place the recording between 1932 - 1934. Motorola C.I.D. I speak for myself, not my employer uunet!motcid!horwath [Moderator's Note: Thanks very much for the detailed accounting of LeMare and Atlantic City. Unfortunatly, its not just the organ which is in a sad state of disrepair. All of Atlantic City -- the famed boardwalk area in particular -- has become a slum, and a crime and drug-infested one at that. Sad, sad, sad ... A contact at the New York Public Library (they have all LeMare's papers in the Special Collections Department) researched this for me today and called back to say his best estimate -- based on reading some stuff in the files -- was the recording had originally been made at the dedication of the instrument in the fall, 1932. If you think a telephone central office has complex wiring and relays, you should try looking inside the console at Atlantic City, or upstairs in the pipe chambers! PAT] ------------------------------ From: wts1 Subject: Re: AT&T Announces New Technical Reference 800 Number Organization: AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies - Burlington, NC Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 20:37:39 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Cornet is the internal phone network of AT&T. Like > many large nationwide corporations, they have their own internal network. > I wonder what they pay for it and who they get it from? :) PAT] Cornet is being/was(?) phased out of existance. It was old, archaic, and cost like heck to the user. It is/was replaced with AT&T's SDN (Software Defined Network?), a much cheaper way too go. (Why not use yourself what you are selling to the customer?). I hope to God that I have not revealed any proprietary information that AT&T uses telephones just like everyone else:-) William T. Sykes AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies Burlington, NC UUCP: att!burl!wts att!cbnewsb!wts1 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #410 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11093; 31 May 91 10:37 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ag27609; 31 May 91 9:36 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27475; 31 May 91 3:26 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab20431; 31 May 91 2:13 CDT Date: Fri, 31 May 91 1:08:25 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #411 BCC: Message-ID: <9105310108.ab20844@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 31 May 91 01:08:15 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 411 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? [Jack Dominey] Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? [Mike Eastman] Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? [J. Ackermann] Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? [Brian Kohn] Re: Old Phone Museum Being Cranked Up [Roy M. Silvernail] Re: AT&T's Cornet [Michael F. Eastman] Re: New AT&T Calling Card PIN [Douglas Scott Reuben] Re: Free Teletypes [Robert L. Oliver] Re: Free Teletypes [Floyd Davidson] Re: Cheap 9600 bps Modem [Patrick Hoepfner] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Alex Beylin] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [George Goble] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jdominey@bsga05.attmail.com Date: Wed May 29 10:13:41 EDT 1991 Subject: Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? In V11#407, Rick Farris asks: > Do all AT&T employees receive $700 credit on their phone bills > each month? > A local modem hobbyist is raising quite a stir by bragging about the > $700 credit he receives each month as a "part-time computer security > consultant" for AT&T. > So is a $700 credit reasonable for part-time work? If so, geez, what > kind of credit do full-timers get? It just so happens that today I was filling out my AT&T Form U1241, "InterLATA Toll Discount Plan and Business Reimbursement Approval Request". I certainly won't get back anything like $700! The most I can be reimbursed for personal calls is just under $70. And they'll pay for any business calls I make (assuming my boss approves!). They *won't* pay for overseas personal calls. The money comes back to me on my paycheck. Now I don't know anything about "part-time computer security consultants". He could be working for our Security organization, and who knows how they might reimburse him. There could be some funky credit arrangement. But I would be quite surprised if he were getting credited one penny more than his actual calling. If Mr. Farris' acquaintance is working for AT&T as a snitch, then he's being pretty stupid bragging about it. Perhaps someone who knows this guy should offer to call AT&T Security and let them know about his claims. I'd like to hear what develops. Jack Dominey, AT&T Commercial Marketing, Tucker GA V: (404) 496-6925 AT&T Mail: !dominey Not empowered to speak officially for AT&T. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 17:17:37 EDT From: Michael F Eastman Subject: Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article , rfarris@rfengr.com (Rick Farris) writes: > Do all AT&T employees receive $700 credit on their phone bills each > month? Unequivocally NO. For management employees if you spend a MAX of $100/month on long distance (AT&T, of course) you get $75 reimbursed. Non-mangement (bargaining unit/union) employees are a little different, but you get the idea. Mike Eastman att!ihlpy!mfe (708) 979-6569 AT&T Bell Laboratories Rm. 4F-328 Naperville, IL 60566 ------------------------------ From: John Ackermann Subject: Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department Date: Thu, 30 May 1991 12:30:22 GMT Since I don't work for AT&T (yet...) I don't have first-hand information about this, but I've heard that AT&T management types get a credit of something like $30.00 of free long distance per month, and some discount on the balance. John R. Ackermann, Jr. Law Department, NCR Corporation, Dayton, Ohio (513) 445-2966 John.Ackermann@daytonoh.ncr.com Packet Radio: ag9v@n8acv tcp/ip: ag9v@ag9v.ampr [44.70.12.34] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 91 14:03:31 EDT From: Brian Charles Kohn Subject: Re: Something Sounds Fishy: $700 Credit For AT&T Employees? Reply-To: "bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM" Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Quality Process Center [Since this is information related to a fringe benefit, and regards only me and my own personal finances, I assume that it's okay to discuss. God help me if it's not.] > Do all AT&T employees receive $700 credit on their phone bills each > month? No. > A local modem hobbyist is raising quite a stir by bragging about the > $700 credit he receives each month as a "part-time computer security > consultant" for AT&T. I'd assume that his work requires him to make at least $635 in phone calls on company business on his home phone each month. The company, as most companies, reimburses me for any expenses I personally incur in the course of doing company business. > [Moderator's Note: What I've heard is that they receive either > all or a portion of their long distance service for free; No. I get the first $35 reimbursed, and then a portion of the next $65; I'm a second level manager. I think that's the most generous of the reimbursement programs ... friends of mine who are occupational folk get less. Local phone company people have a better deal (IMHO) ... I think they get they monthly service fees covered ... and occupational folk there get about half of their fees covered. Brian Charles Kohn AT&T Bell Laboratories Quality Process Center Quality Management System E-MAIL: att!hoqax!bicker (bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM) Consultant PHONE: (908) 949-5850 FAX: (908) 949-7724 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Old Phone Museum Being Cranked Up From: "Roy M. Silvernail" Date: Wed, 29 May 91 19:35:11 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net (Bud Couch) writes: > Pacific Telecom also bought out the old RCA Alascom system, and is > "The Phone Company" in Alaska. One of the biggest, if I remember right. (and if I don't, Floyd will be happy to correct me :-) A couple years ago, Anchorage's mayor wanted to sell the local phone company, and there turned out to be only one bidder ... Pacific Telecom. There was quite a rucus, and the issue was forced to a ballot, where it lost the required margin (60%) but won the popular margin at just over 50%. One of the biggest points made by the opposition was that Pacific Telecom would own some 80% of the state's phone business, if it were to buy the Anchorage Telephone Utility. I used to have a list of the companies owned, but it's fallen into that tame black hole I use for a filing cabinet. Roy M. Silvernail roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu roy@cybrspc.uucp(maybe!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 17:09:16 EDT From: Michael F Eastman Subject: Re: AT&T's Cornet Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article , jdominey@bsga05.attmail. com writes: > In V11#400, Steven S. Brack edu> asks: > >> The following is part of an AT&T letter dated May 6, 1991: > >> Phone (317) 352-8500 Cornet 358-8500 Fax (317) 352-8468 > > A quick, simple question: what is Cornet? > Pat responded that Cornet is AT&T's internal phone system. > Pat's partially correct. About three years ago, I recall seeing a > company bulletin saying Cornet was being phased out in favor of an > internal Software Defined Network. > Cornet was limited to certain parts of the company (Bell Labs and > former Western Electric locations?). In six years with AT&T, I've > never directly encountered it, although I saw some references. If > memory serves, Cornet was a tandem network. Much of the traffic was > carried over dedicated lines running from switch to switch. It did > provide seven-digit dialing anywhere in the country. Cornet (CORporate NETwork) is indeed being phased out (if not almost all gone). It was used extensively at Bell Labs and Western Electric. CORNET was provided using a network of 1ESS Switches, and then replaced recently by 5ESS Switches. (This same service is/was sold to many large and medium-sized businesses.) This service was replaced by SDN. SDN provides for ten-digit dialing whether using private network facilities or more expensive public facilities. This means the user (employee dialing the phone) need not worry about that. The service provider (AT&T-NSD) takes care of this for the customer (Bell Labs) without each user having to understand any of this. Also, it eliminates the need to remember TWO phone numbers. Mike Eastman att!ihlpy!mfe (708) 979-6569 AT&T Bell Laboratories Rm. 4F-328 Naperville, IL 60566 ------------------------------ Date: 29-MAY-1991 16:57:02.09 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Re: New AT&T Calling Card PIN I just got off the phone with AT&T. I spoke to a helpful (as usual) AT&T representative who explained how the "new" AT&T cards work. She said that they were issuing new cards without your phone number, ie, a la Sprint/MCI/ et. al. Very much like the AT&T Universal *Calling Card* number, like in the format of: 507 001 5555 1234. The AT&T rep said that AT&T was doing this for a few reasons, mainly fraud, AOSs, and the possibility that in the future, the Fed will no longer "allow" AT&T cards to "handle" local calls (via the BOCs, GTEs, etc.), nor AT&T (and one would assume Sprint and MCI's 0+, ahem ... "services" ...) to handle BOC Card Long Distance calls. So basically, AT&T answered my question - everything will be staying pretty much the same - you can go on using your BOC card for AT&T and local calls. But you will get a new AT&T card that does not have your phone number on it at all. You don't have to use this (yet), and you can still go on using your BOC card if you have some special AT&T plan, such as their "Reach Out" Calling Card plan or some special WATS calling card, etc. (You may want to check this yourself to be SURE ...) When I asked why I should even bother trying to remember the new AT&T card when my old BOC card works fine, she said "Hmmm ... I don't really know ...", so that's as good a reason as any I've heard for ignoring this most recent and annoying divestiture-related change. The AT&T representative also asked me if I knew about the "10288" access code, since I use my calling card a lot. I told her I did, and she mentioned that I should be able to use this code on a lot more private pay phones now. (COCOTs) Seems like AT&T is really pushing the use of their code ... they've never mentioned that before. Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: "Robert L. Oliver" Subject: Re: Free Teletypes Organization: Rabbit Software Corp. Date: 29 May 91 20:58:33 GMT Dan_Jacobson@att.com writes: > By the way, is it true that some "Newsradio" stations nowadays just > pipe in teletype clicking to make their newsroom more newsy sounding? > E.g., WBBM-AM in Chicago has this sound. Absolutely. KYW 1060 AM in Philadelphia (three call letters, and a K east of the Mississippi!) is all news all the time, which translates to constant teletype clunking, and if you listen carefully, you can hear where the loop of tape starts over! Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM Malvern, PA 19355 !uunet!cbmvax!hutch!robert ------------------------------ From: Floyd Davidson Subject: Re: Free Teletypes Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 12:15:34 GMT In article Dan_Jacobson@ihlpz.att.com writes: > On 28 May 91 01:29:41 GMT, Stan@li.psi.com (Stanfield L. Smith) said: >> Model 15 teletypes - Newswire vintage, 5 level baudot, gears for any > By the way, is it true that some "Newsradio" stations nowadays just > pipe in teletype clicking to make their newsroom more newsy sounding? > E.g., WBBM-AM in Chicago has this sound. It was usually "canned" sound. Nobody would really want to work around that racket. The tty machines in well designed places were in rooms with sound proofing, and nobody had to listen to them. (At least that is the way it was in the middle 60's when I worked around that kinda stuff. Maybe earlier than that it was real.) Floyd L. Davidson | Alascom, Inc. pays me, |UA Fairbanks Institute of Marine floyd@ims.alaska.edu| but not for opinions. |Science suffers me as a guest. [Moderator's Note: In the old days of Western Union public telegraph offices, the clerks and 'telegraphers' had to hear that noise all day long from several machines behind the counter where they served the public who came in to send messages. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Patrick Hoepfner Subject: Re: Cheap 9600 bps Modem Date: 30 May 91 03:43:29 GMT Organization: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center There will soon be a quite a bunch of modems that do V.32bis, V.42bis, and MNP 5 (For old times sake). The US Robotics variety (Courier V.32bis) is selling for around $600! There is also a V.32bis, V.42bis, MNP5 and send/receive Fax modem from Prometheus selling for around $700! Get 'em while their hot! Pat --> hoepfner@heasfs.gsfc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 13:29 EDT From: Alex Beylin Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Organization: Chrysler Corp., Center Line, MI In article is written: > The strangest time, however, was when I gave it to the guard when it > was turned off. She *asked me* to turn it on for her! I asked why, > and she just said "turn it on please". Once it bleeped and blinked > for her, she was satisfied. I guess she was convinced that it wasn't > one of those "fake" phones that you can stash 50 tons of cocaine in or > something. I'm waiting for the day they yank the battery off... They usually do the same when I try to carry a portable computer on board. One of the security people always takes me to the side table and asks to see the computer work. Once the lights come on, they let me go. I've always wondered what they do with laptops that require AC power to operate. Is there a three-prong AC plug at the security station? Alex Beylin alexb@cfctech.cfc.com ------------------------------ From: George Goble Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network Date: Mon, 27 May 91 13:29:25 GMT In article bernhold@red8 (David E. Bernholdt) writes: > In article bowles@stsci.edu (Richard > Bowles) writes: >> mike@post.att.com (Michael Scott Baldwin) writes: >>> She *asked me* to turn it on for her! I asked why, >>> and she just said "turn it on please". Once it bleeped and blinked >>> for her, she was satisfied. I have never had any hassles carrying on a portable Motorola 8000 cell phone. I was usually using it at the gate prior to boarding, and when boarding starting, I always powered it off. A couple of times the attendent started to approach me, and I said I know about the FAA rule and would keep the phone powered off ... no problems. I also have a portable terminal I built in an aluminum "zero" equipment case. It has a Zenith Z-181 laptop, a Telebit 'Blazer+ modem and nineteen Radio Shaft "D" size high capacity Nicad cells. It also has power regulators, and all the associated wiring. It connects to my cell phone and can be used to "dial up" in MNP mode. This thing looks like one hell of a bomb on the X-ray. I usually tell the X-ray operator to "expect an eyefull" before he runs it ... and have gotten many odd looks. One of them didn't even want to open it, but asked me for the battery count! Only once or twice did anyone want it turned on (that seemed to start at Lockerbee time). Once, I was in line at the X-ray at Ft Lauderdale, and got a call about a dead system at Purdue (using Follow-me roaming, during its second week of operation). I set up the terminal on the floor about six feet from the X-ray, dialed up, rebooted the system, etc. When I was done, there was quite a crowd of guards, etc, looking on, and they were "amazed" that I had fixed some other system at Purdue. ghg ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #411 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11100; 31 May 91 10:37 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ah27609; 31 May 91 9:36 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab27475; 31 May 91 3:36 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac20431; 31 May 91 2:14 CDT Date: Fri, 31 May 91 1:55:16 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #412 BCC: Message-ID: <9105310155.ab22980@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 31 May 91 01:55:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 412 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Alexander Graham Bell Movie on AMC Friday Night [Tim Irvin] Re: Why Are *Telephone Keypads* Built Upside Down [Jeremy Grodberg] Re: Free Teletypes [Dan Jacobson] Re: International 800 Access [Ken Jongsma] Re: Cellular One Dialing Procedures [John Higdon] Re: Motorola PC-500 Problems [Skip LaSaker via Ron Heiby] Re: One City With Two Area Codes [Scott Barman] Re: 1-900-NO-CHIEF [Tarl Neustaedter] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Fred R. Goldstein] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Tom Gray] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Clive Feather] Re: New PIN For My AT&T Card? [David E. Sheafer] Re: The Definitive ANAC Guide [Tony Harminc] Re: Fax Memory [John C. Fowler] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Alexander Graham Bell Movie on AMC Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Date: Thu, 30 May 91 19:28:46 +22322638 From: irvin@northstar105.dartmouth.edu For those of you who get American Movie Classics on cable, tonight (Friday, May 31) at 9:00 pm EDT they are showing: The Story of Alexander Graham Bell (Biography, 1939) *** A fact-based account of the life of the Scottish educator-inventor who developed and perfected the telephone during the 1870s. Don Ameche (2:00) B/W. The above is from OnSat Magazine. Since, I don't subscribe to AMC (or any subscription channels), I guess I'll have to find someone with cable who will let me watch it ;). Tim Irvin ------------------------------ From: Jeremy Grodberg Subject: Re: Why Are *Telephone Keypads* Built Upside Down Reply-To: Jeremy Grodberg Date: Wed, 29 May 91 21:53:05 GMT The real question is why are *Adding Machine* keypads built upside down? Since we read left-to-right and top-to-bottom, and count low-to-high, the telephone keypad would be the obvious choice for layout. Jeremy Grodberg jgro@lia.com ------------------------------ From: Dan_Jacobson@att.com Subject: Re: Free Teletypes Date: Wed, 29 May 91 20:39:00 GMT I have painstakingly put together a summary of e-mail replies to article wherein I wrote: > By the way, is it true that some "Newsradio" stations nowadays just > pipe in teletype clicking to make their newsroom more newsy sounding? > E.g., WBBM-AM in Chicago has this sound. >>>>> On Wed, 29 May 91 08:24:28 EDT, Scott Dorsey >>>>> said: Scott> Yup. In the Tidewater area, WZCL has a tape cartridge with Scott> the teletype sounds, while WCCO uses a synthesizer called the Scott> "Eventide Harmonizer" to generate the background noise. The Scott> Harmonizer is a much nicer device, because it can also simulate Scott> a bandlimited channel with static and helicopter noises for the Scott> traffic report. Scott> God, how I hate commercial radio. >>>>> On Wed, 29 May 91 06:06 CDT, jtl%ddsw1@uunet.UU.NET (Joe Lynn) said: Joe> WBBM-AM's "teletype" sound is a tape. They've been using Joe> that effect for years. >>>>> On Wed, 29 May 91 09:00:25 CDT, ho@csrd.uiuc.edu (Samuel W. Ho) said: Samuel> Hey, WUFI Newsradio here in Champaign-Urbana pipes in - Samuel> dot matrix printer chatter. A Technological Advance. >>>>> On 29 May 91 10:11:22 EDT (Wed), johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us >>>>> (John R. Levine) said: John> Sure is. These days only the teensiest of radio stations would John> have anything as klunky as a real Teletype. More typically the John> newswire goes straight into the word-processing computer. ------------------------------ Subject: RE: International 800 Access Date: Wed, 29 May 91 18:50:48 EDT From: Ken Jongsma For what it's worth: Two years ago, I was in Australia and was unable to use USA Direct to reach a domestic US 800 number. However, several months ago, I was in the UK and had no problems with USA Direct. The AT&T operator placed the call with no questions asked. Billing was as the Moderator described. I paid for the international leg, the callee paid for the domestic portion. It caught me off gaurd when the bill arrived, as the international portion showed up as some place in Pennsylvania. Dialing that number reached an AT&T recording explaining the billing was for an internationally placed 800 call - a nice touch! Ken ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 18:19 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Cellular One Dialing Procedures "Ole J. Jacobsen" writes: > I am trying to convince Cellular One here in the Bay Area that they > need to start accepting "canonical numbers" from cellular phones in > order to be in compliance with generally accepted industry standards. When I read your post, I reached over to my GTE Mobilnet-served handheld and dialed '408 723-1395'. It worked just fine from my 408 mobile number. > but so far I have not had much luck finding anyone who even > understands what I am talking about. Some of the answers I have > received so far include: > "All our calls are routed through Pac*Bell, so we have to follow > Pac*Bell's dialling procedures!" Since Pacific Telesis is a major owner of Cellular One, this could be somewhat truthful. Interestingly enough, however, GTE seems to have no problem providing the dialing scheme you describe, even though its calls are "routed through Pac*Bell" just like Cellular One's. > "We do not have any plans to market the dialling procedure you > requested at this time." So it is a matter of marketing? Is everything "marketing driven" these days? Does it have to be salable to exist? > "All of our switches are programmed from Toronto, thus you can't > talk to the guy in charge of switch programming." That's a good one. I guess if the programmers are actually in Toronto, there are no telephone circuits there so it would be impossible to talk to them. On the other hand, GTE's switches are programmed from Houston and I have talked to programmers for that company. > Since cellular systems employ pre-origination dialling, i.e., the > entire number is sent to the switch before any connection is made, > then it is clearly a small matter of programming to make this work > correctly, or is it not? Obviously, since GTE seems to have no trouble. Your post has served as a great example as to why I left Cellular One for GTE Mobilnet. GTE hides its Houston base very well and comes off as a local operation that is actually interested and concerned about customer satisfaction with every aspect of the service. When I have had concerns and questions, not only did I speak to people who gave me concise and correct information, but in many cases there were follow up calls and local numbers were given to me in case I had additional comments or questions. Frankly, I think it might be worth your while to switch. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Ron Heiby Subject: Re: Motorola PC-500 Problems (was DiamondTel 99X Weakness) Date: 24 May 91 15:58:35 GMT Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL The following is being posted on behalf of someone without direct net access. Ron. Saw your message about your PC-500. You refer to a *dealer* dissatisfaction issue. Motorola loves its customers and your satisfaction is our number one goal. Publishing dissatisfaction with us rather than the dealer is counter-productive. You provide enough information to infer that the phone was NOT NEW. If used, warranty is NOT transferrable. Regardless, I would like to speak with you and resolve to your satisfaction. If your Oki was NEW and your PC-500 was NOT NEW, I say "No Fair." We stand behind our products and customers -- period! Our quality program is second to none. Our customers are our number one priority. Skip LaSaker National Sales Manager Motorola Cellular Group 708-576-8851 -- Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 14:21:20 EDT From: Scott Barman Subject: Re: One City With Two Area Codes Organization: National Broadcasting Company, Inc., New York In article : > In article , levitt@zorro9.fidonet. > org (Ken Levitt) writes: >> Are there other cities in the country with two area codes? If I sell >> another 500 copies of my program, how likely am I to run across >> another one of them? > And Our Esteemed Moderator Notes: >> I'd think that with the numerous area code splits >> going on in metro areas, your scenario could become quite common. How >> does your program now deal with (post office) New York, NY? > As an inhabitant of (post office) New York, NY, I make haste to inform > you that that locality has only one area code: 212, also shared by > Bronx, NY. > The 718 area code is divided into the USPS localities of Brooklyn, NY; > Flushing, NY; Jamaica, NY; Rockaway, NY; and Staten Island, NY. There > may be one other which slips my mind at the moment. It was announced not too long ago that the Bronx will be changed to 718 so that Manhattan will be the only borough with the 212 area code. Also, NY Tel also announced that a new area code (918, I think) will be used for cellular phones and beepers in New York City (with the possibility of bleed over into Long Island). I don't remember when this was announced nor do I remember when this was to take effect (I think 1/93). This should throw these databases off quite a bit!! :-) scott barman scott@nbc1.ge.com (This does not represent any opinions of NBC or affiliates) ------------------------------ From: Tarl Neustaedter Subject: Re: 1-900-NO-CHIEF Date: 30 May 91 09:53:02 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc. More interestingly, the fire chief who spent over $1000 in town's money on 900-sex calls, didn't just use his phone. He apparantely took an unused phone and hot-wired it into the sanitation department's phone line. He was traced back when the police tried to take an inventory of all phone equipment and that phone was missing. It suddenly re-appeared the day after, thus triggering suspicions. Tarl Neustaedter tarl@vos.stratus.com Marlboro, Mass. Stratus Computer Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for my opinions. ------------------------------ From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: 30 May 91 16:49:09 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick Broadhead) writes... > Robert L. Oliver (cbmvax!.UUCP!robert@uunet.uu.net) writes: >> But something rather odd occurred today: I dialed a number in 703, and >> instead of receiving the standard U.S. single ring, I received a non-U.S. >> double ring. > I had a similar experience just a few days ago. I dialed a number in > my own area code (416), exchange 392, and was quite surprised to hear > a double ring. This is the first time I have ever heard a double > ring on the calling end. A couple of possible causes of a double ring in the US: 1) Rolm PBXs use the double ring. If the call terminated on a DID trunk into a Rolm machine, then the PBX generated the ring. Note that DID service implies that the PBX, not the CO, generates the tones. Hence some Rolm oddities: If the line is equipped with Autopark, then if you listen to the busy signal for ten seconds, it goes away and beeps the called party. The caller doesn't pay until the callee picks up. Clever. 2) The No. 1 Crossbar generated double ring on some numbers. Few are left in service but 703 is PacBell so there may be a few left ... 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? ------------------------------ From: Tom Gray Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: 30 May 91 17:50:02 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article ivgate!Jack.Winslade@uunet. uu.net (Jack Winslade) writes: > YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick Broadhead) writes: > There was a discussion of ringing tones in a local conference a while > back (but I can't find it now) which discussed this. It made mention > of a certain suburban Omaha office which until recently had a > vibrating reed tone generator. It was remarked that it sounded like > the passing of gas. ;-) The UK has recently moved to the precise tone plan. However the definition of the previous dial tone was: a PURRING tone at about -15dBm. A more euphemistic way of describing the tone perhaps :-) Tom Gray ------------------------------ From: Clive Feather Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: Thu, 30 May 91 16:33:29 BST In 11-394, ct@dde.dk writes: > No! Denmark is ED, not BD. And the Moderator Notes: > And he really should have left the USA out of his list also, since > we have a wide variety of ringing and busy signals, depending on > where you call. The list that andyb@rags.coat.com posted was originally posted by me, and comes direct from a British Telecom publication. Please blame them, not Andy or me. Also, cbmvax!.UUCP!robert@uunet.uu.net writes: > I dialed a number in 703, and instead of receiving the standard U.S. > single ring, I received a non-US double ring. This could be because the number is connected to another country. For example, 1-800-XDESK-57 is located in Cambridge UK (it maps to a UK number, not the one in my signature), and so gives the double-ring that all UK numbers do. Clive D.W. Feather | IXI Limited clive@x.co.uk | 62-74 Burleigh St. Phone: +44 223 462 131 | Cambridge CB1 1OJ (USA: 1 800 XDESK 57) | United Kingdom ------------------------------ From: David E. Sheafer Reply-To: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Date: 30 May 91 10:00:34 GMT Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA I have an AT&T calling card, and a New England Telephone Calling card. Interestingly they both have the identical number and PIN. I also have an AT&T Universal card and in the past have used it to make calls for both Interlata (AT&T) and Intralata (New England Telephone). I wonder if this is going to change. I haven't received anything in th mail as of yet. David E. Sheafer internet: nin15b0b@merrimack.edu or uucp: samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b GEnie: D.SHEAFER Cleveland Freenet: ap345 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 91 15:05:05 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: The Definitive ANAC Guide In 416 the ANAC number is 997-nnnn. The catch is that nnnn changes quite often (monthly or thereabouts). No I don't know the current nnnn. Tony Harminc ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 91 17:05:25 PDT From: "John C. Fowler" Subject: Re: Fax Memory Organization: University of California, San Diego If security among the individuals is not a problem, this may be a case where technology is not the best way to go. Instead, just put out ten boxes. Arrange for fax callers to indicate the box number, and have the recipients sort out each other's faxes. You may say that this wastes time, but it will certainly be shorter than waiting for a 100-page printout. If the volume of faxes received per individual is so large that the above is not a viable option, then perhaps ten separate fax machines is the best idea after all. There's no reason to make the recipients wait for the printout. John C. Fowler, jfowler@ucsd.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #412 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11131; 2 Jun 91 1:48 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa00880; 2 Jun 91 0:19 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa30090; 1 Jun 91 23:13 CDT Date: Sat, 1 Jun 91 22:23:49 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #413 BCC: Message-ID: <9106012223.ab08152@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 1 Jun 91 22:23:40 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 413 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Looking For Motorola Service Manual [Cliff Yamamoto] 900 Numbers and Privacy [David Gast] Need Information on Voice Mail [Luesak Chowpradith] Voice Mail Under Apple Unix (A/UX) and Fax Modems [Greg Maples] Stationary Cellular Phone Wanted [Alex Beylin] E-Mail Addresses of Companies in the Telecom Business [Juergen Ziegler] Carrier Fraud Liability Citation Wanted [Peter Marshall] Texas (GTE) and Class [Bob Peterson] Remote ISDN Connection Wanted [Claudio Nieder] Printing Text Files on Fax From VMS [Claudio Nieder] Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone [R. Kevin Oberman] Another Embarrassed Employee? (was Hayes Wins Damages) [Daniel Herrick] Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Dave Levenson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cyamamot@kilroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Cliff Yamamoto) Subject: Looking for Motorola Service Manual Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA Date: Wed, 29 May 91 15:52:48 GMT Greetings, Motorola makes great stuff, but they never want to help the little guy who needs a service manual for some used stuff. I bought a model N1275A power amp used for 470-494 which I'd like to modify for amateur radio use. I after several phone calls I found the part numbers for the service manuals, but Motorola won't sell them to any Joe Blow. If anyone can help me locate or xerox the following manuals I'd appreciate it: Motorola part#: 6881020C85 Motorola part#: 6881070C60 Thanks in advance, Cliff Yamamoto - KA6JRG Internet: cyamamot@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov cyamamot@kilroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov Bitnet: cyamamot%kilroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov@Hamlet.Bitnet Uucp: uunet!kilroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov!cyamamot@uunet.UU.NET ames!elroy!jato!jpl-mil!kilroy.jpl.nasa.gov!cyamamot ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 17:43:22 -0700 From: David Gast Subject: 900 Numbers and Privacy Someone wrote yesterday: > At the end it reports that 900 numbers increasingly capture the > callers' numbers and translate them to addresses. According to Sprint > Gateways, the US Sprint 900 department, they are able "to identify the > names and addresses of the nine closest neighbors of the original 900 > caller. With this information, additional qualified prospects can be > identified for database marketing efforts." This service goes to show that even if one protects his/her privacy, others are there to invade it. What this service seems to imply is that you are like your neighbors. If one of them calls 1-900-KINKY-SEX (yes, I realize the X does not count as part of the phone number), then you can receive promotional literature or phone calls. If one of them calls, 1-900-4SPORTS, you too, can receive promotional literature. I am so happy to hear that I have the same interests as my neighbors. I expect to get a lot of material I can't read because I don't read all of languages they speak. Finally, I am curious about the nine closest neighbors. My guess is that it is nine numbers close by, probably arranged by address. I doubt that US Sprint actually has detailed maps indicating the location and configuration of every apartment and house on every plot of land. It would be interesting to know who my nine closest neighbors are or even the nine closest neighbors of my parents. Where do they measure from? Where the phone enters the building? The center of the property? All in all, I would estimate that Sprint is exaggerating its claims again. At least, I hope they do not have these detailed maps. David ------------------------------ From: ccicpg!conexch!luesak@uunet.uu.net Date: Wed May 29 13:36:21 1991 Subject: Need Information on Voice Mail Reply-To: luesak@conexch.UUCP (Luesak Chowpradith) Organization: The Consultants' Exchange, Orange County, CA. (714) 842-6348 I would like to know whether anybody could forward me some info regarding voice mail products. Right now I am trying to get more information about it before buying anything. Please e-mail any info to "luesak@conexch.UUCP" Thank you. luesak@conexch.UUCP ------------------------------ From: Greg Maples Subject: Voice Mail Under Apple Unix (A/UX) and Fax Modems Organization: DuPont Design Technologies Group Date: Fri, 31 May 91 00:38:27 GMT This may be a long shot, but here's what I want to do: Get a central voice mail processing card that stores digitized voice when a phone circuit rings over. I would then like to be able to store and forward this file to the intended recipient as mail. If a central system is available, it would be for a Sun 4/370 running 4.1.1 If the only possibility is a card per user machine, they would be for Apple Mac II's running A/UX. I would also like to be able to get a fax modem card at 9600/9600 for the Sun 4/370 that would do send and receive faxes via a network shareable server or queue like the 'lp' daemon. Another possibility would be a smart ethernet device to do this. Are there such devices as these? Who makes them? What are the limitations, features, etc. If there are enough replies and interest generated, I'll post a summary. Greg Maples | These are my opinions, not yours. Keep your Systems Group Leader | hands off 'em. They're also not the opinions DuPont Design Technologies | of my employer or yours. So there. (c) 1991 maples%ddtisvr@uunet.uu.net | The preceding is an opinion which is mine. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 15:30 EDT From: Alex Beylin Subject: Stationary Cellular Phone Wanted Organization: Chrysler Financial Corp., Southfield, MI I have a somewhat unusual set of requirements for a cellular phone unit and so far have been unable to find one that fits. Perhaps someone in the telecom land can help. This cellular phone needs to be transportable, but it will be moved at most once or twice a month, so size in not an issue. Most of the time this phone will be located inside of a house and will be used just as if it is a standard wired telephone. One of the primary requirements is ability to plug it into an AC outlet. The idea is to plug it in and forget about it till it needs to be moved. The feature set is not important. The only highly desirable feature is on-hook dialing. 20+ number memory would be a nice bonus as well. An important consideration is the price. I would like to buy this unit with Ameritech subscription and am willing to go to one of the applience discount shops (Fretter, Highland, etc) that get kick backs from Ameritech. Availability under $100 is best. Any suggestions are welcome. Does a unit like that even exist? Alex Beylin, Systems Specialist | +1 313 759-7114 alexb@cfctech.cfc.com | Chrysler Corp. MIS sharkey!cfctech!alexb | Distributed Systems Group [Moderator's Note: The Radio Shack CT-301 units in Chicago are attached to Ameritech. You can let them sit in the charging holster (which is plugged in) all the time, and take it out when you want to carry it somewhere. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 17:14 From: "Juergen, ZIEGLER" Subject: E-Mail Addresses of Companies in the Telecom Business Hi there, Is there a list of e-mail addresses available of all firms in the telecommunications business (telco, ld-carriers, vans, ... ) ? Thanks, Juergen BITNET : UJ32@DKAUNI2.BITNET Internet : UJ32@ibm3090.rz.uni-karlsruhe.dbp.de X.400 : S=UJ32;OU=ibm3090;OU=rz;P=uni-karlsruhe;A=dbp;C=de [Moderator's Note: Very likely there is not. Such a list would have thousands of entries in the USA alone, where there are 1400+ telephone copanies, large and small. There are printed directories. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Carrier Fraud Liability Citation Wanted From: Peter Marshall Date: Wed, 29 May 91 13:12:44 PDT Regarding this topic, can readers provide information about a recent FCC Notice and/or a Pacific Mutual Petition? Thanks. Peter Marshall The 23:00 News and Mail Service - +1 206 292 9048 - Seattle, WA USA PEP, V.32, V.42 ------------------------------ Subject: Texas (GTE) and Class From: Bob Peterson Date: Wed, 29 May 91 05:34:36 CST Organization: The Zeitgeist BBS, Plano, TX 214 596 3720 Yesterday evening I received a sales call from a very nice lady representing GTE, my local dial tone provider. She wanted to sell me call waiting, cancel call waiting, distinctive ringing, etc. After I told her I wasn't interested I asked if she was employed by GTE or by a marketing company. She stammered for a moment, then replied, "Both." So I took a chance and asked her a couple of questions. I asked if GTE planned to implement Caller Id. She amazed me by replying that CID was part of Class service, and that GTE would be implementing CID once the Public Utilities Commission approved it. The current holdup, she told me, was CID's conflict with a Texas privacy law. I then asked if Call Trace would be available as well. Not only did she answer, "Yes," but she described how Call Trace should be used. Then she gave me a *NN code that will execute the trace! Finally, I asked which Texas privacy law prevented CID. This finally stumped her, but she promply suggested I query the business office for the citation. I was quite impressed that this individual, who I initially expected would be reading a prepared script with little understanding, seemed to have a pretty reasonable grasp of not only current GTE services, but future services as well. Bravo GTE! Hardcopy and Electronic Addresses: Office @ Texas Instruments: Bob Peterson Compuserve: 70235,326 NB 2nd Floor CSC Aisle C3 P.O. Box 861686 Internet: peterson@csc.ti.com Landline: 214/995-6080 days Plano, Tx USA 75086 24 hour BBS: 214/596-3720 @ 1200, 2400, 9600 (HST & V.32) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 1991 14:36:12 +0000 From: Claudio Nieder Subject: Remote ISDN Connection Wanted Organization: Physics Institute, University of Zuerich, Switzerland Hi, We would like to connect VAXes running VMS and PCs running MS-DOS to ISDN. The ISDN plugs shall be located at a different place than the VAXes and PCs, and it should be possible to share them between the different computers. So we need a box which connects on an ethernet and on ISDN and the necessary software for PCs and VAXes for accessing the ISDN lines through this box. Does such a box exist? We would for the moment also be interested in a solution which works only with the VAXes. Please mail me if you know of some solution to my problem. I'll summarize to the net. claudio (claudio@forty2.physik.unizh.ch) Also: PSI%022847931125::TRZCL1::C_NIEDER, K538912@CZHRZU1A.BITNET Claudio Nieder AST 3.944 (DW 6) | Tel: +41 1 465-2249 Alcatel STR AG, Friesenbergstrasse 75, CH-8055 Zuerich | Fax: +41 1 465-3525 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 1991 14:39:05 +0000 From: Claudio Nieder Subject: Printing Text Files on Fax From VMS Organization: Physics Institute, University of Zuerich, Switzerland Hi, We are using a program running on VAX(VMS) which produces some lists (plain text, no graphics) on a local printer. There should be a possibility to print them on a remote fax machine. We are looking for a solution which can be implemented without any costly program development etc. The best solution would be if there already exists some product which would make the fax machine appear to the program like a local printer, so that no change to the existing software is necessary. Does anybody know about such a solution? Any help welcome. Please send E-Mail, I'll summarize to the net. claudio (claudio@forty2.physik.unizh.ch) Also: PSI%022847931125::TRZCL1::C_NIEDER, K538912@CZHRZU1A.BITNET Claudio Nieder AST 3.944 (DW 6) | Tel: +41 1 465-2249 Alcatel STR AG, Friesenbergstrasse 75, CH-8055 Zuerich | Fax: +41 1 465-3525 ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone Date: 30 May 91 15:07:54 GMT Well, a government agency (or its contractors) has again forgotten about those silly, old-fashioned rotary phones. This morning's {Tri-Valley Herald} (Livermore, CA) reports that a $25,000 telephone messaging and information system installed in the county courthouse is not accessible by rotary-dialed phones. "Those unfortunate enough to have the old-fashioned types of telephones will be disconnected five seconds after the menu of keypad choices ends." The system for the small claims and civil divisions was supposed to switch to an operator if no menu items were selected, but "somehow, it got lost in the cracks" said John Reymundo, division chief of the small claims court. It's not clear who is responsible. Craig Watts of Pacific Bell is quoted "That is bad." and "I sure hope it wasn't our system." and claimed that 23% of California households have rotary phones. (First time I've heard that number. I wonder where he got it.) The company who installed the system was unavailable for comment. (Gee, I wonder why?) I wonder how many more of these we will see. I wonder when COs will start dropping support for rotory phones into electronic switches? I suspect it's coming now that tone dialing is "free" in California. Maybe there will soon be a charge to allow rotory dialing in the future with all rotory service moved to the old switches? 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: herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com Subject: Another Embarrassed Employee? (was Hayes Wins Damages) Date: 30 May 91 12:05:38 EST In article , hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net (Toby Nixon) writes: > My previous response was to an employee of another modem company that > appeared to be inviting a lawsuit. I considered that to be a separate > matter from the issues related to the validity of the Heatherington > patent and the related cases. I was subsequently contacted by the > management of that company, and it was clearly stated that the > opinions expressed by that employee were not those of the company or > its management (as I suspected). There has been a lot of grieving in this forum over the idea of disciplinary action against Randy Borow. Here is another example of a serious indiscretion by an employee. I wonder about the current state of that employee's career. The relevant differences are that Randy involved his employer in a breaking of the law while the one that Toby mentions was only a serious embarrassment. dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Date: 2 Jun 91 01:40:10 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick Broadhead) writes: > I had a similar experience just a few days ago. I dialed a number in > my own area code (416), exchange 392, and was quite surprised to hear > a double ring. This is the first time I have ever heard a double > ring on the calling end. It is possible that you reached a DID trunk into a PBX. In this case, the ringing, busy, and other 'call progress' tones are not supplied by the C.O., but by the destination PBX. If this PBX generates a double-ring tone toward the calling party (possibly when it generates a double-ring toward the called party) then that's what you'll hear. Were you calling a commercial establishment? A college dorm or campus? Some other place where you were dialing directly to an extension of a large private network? 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 #413 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17004; 2 Jun 91 3:59 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02065; 2 Jun 91 2:26 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa08857; 2 Jun 91 1:19 CDT Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 0:20:56 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #414 BCC: Message-ID: <9106020020.ab18718@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 2 Jun 91 00:20:28 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 414 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telemarketing by The Middlesex News [John R. Covert] Two Beepers, One Number [Ken Levitt] Homebrew Networking [Official Random] Engineering Help Needed [leroy Casterline] Wanted: T1/CEPT1 VME Card [Brian Carlton] MCI Prefered (Correction on Prices) [Bill Huttig] Carrier ID Number - 700-555-4x4x [Bill Huttig] MCI $20 Promotion [Rick Anderson] 908 Area Code Switchover [Tom Neff] Does Fred Know Something We Don't Know? [Charlie Mingo] Billing Cutover Question [Linc Madison] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 31 May 91 10:01:15 PDT From: "John R. Covert 31-May-1991 1255" Subject: Telemarketing by The Middlesex News Telecom readers will remember the letter I wrote last year concerning telemarketing calls from {The Middlesex News}. That letter stated, in part: > I pay New England Telephone for residential telephone service for my > own purposes, and I allow my number to be listed so that people who > know me but do not know my number may find it out and call me. I > also pay New England Telephone for call forwarding service and pay > NYNEX Mobile Communications for mobile telephone service so that > I can receive desired calls when I am not at home. > I do not wish to be called by telemarketers, especially by companies > such as The Middlesex News which continue to call repeatedly after I > have told them to cease and desist. This letter documents, in writing, > my request for The Middlesex News to permanently remove me from any > and all telemarketing lists, and to never call again. > Should my request be ignored, I am serving notice that I will bill > you for the actual cost of any call forwarding or mobile telephone > call that results when you call my home telephone number. In addition, > I will bill you a service charge of between $20 and $100 for processing > your call. Yesterday, they called again. I am sending the following letter: 31 May 1991 Mrs. Paula Bubello Director of Telemarketing The Middlesex News 33 New York Avenue Framingham, Massachusetts 01701 Dear Mrs. Bubello: Yesterday evening at around 7:05 pm, as I was driving on Route 1 North, I received a telemarketing call from The Middlesex News. The caller told me that his name was David, but refused to tell me his full name. As I informed you in my letter written almost exactly one year ago, I do not wish to receive calls from the Middlesex News. In that letter, I also informed you that I would bill you for the cost of the call forwarding and the cellular mobile telephone charges, as well as a service charge of between $20 and $100 for processing your call. I have enclosed a copy of that letter. This letter again asks, rather demands, that The Middlesex News never contact me by telephone again. My service charge will increase each time The Middlesex News calls, and if this invoice is unpaid, I will institute legal action. I N V O I C E 30 May 1991 Call Forwarding Message Unit 0.09 Cellular Air Time Charge 0.32 Massachusetts Telecom Tax 0.02 Federal Telecom Tax 0.01 Telemarketing Service Charge 20.00 TOTAL $20.44 THIS BILL IS PAYABLE AND DUE WHEN RECEIVED, AND IS OVERDUE AFTER 5 JULY 1991. Sincerely, John R. Covert ------- If they don't pay, they will get a second notice, and then I will gamble $14 to see if Small Claims Court will order payment. john ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 21:51:29 EDT From: Ken Levitt Subject: Two Beepers, One Number I own two Motorola digital pagers type BPR2000 Model A03BGB4661C. One of them is currently receiving messages from a local beeper provider and the other one is not. The units are identical in every way (including frequency) except for the serial number. I would like to have both units beep when the signal comes in so that I could carry one unit and my partner could carry the other. Only one of us would be on call at any given time, but it would be nice to not have to pass the unit back and forth constantly. The serial number seems to be contained on a long white plug in chip that is labeled "Motorola Permacode Code Plug". Is there any way to reprogram this chip or to purchase a new chip that matches the number of my other beeper? Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390 UUCP: zorro9!levitt INTERNET: levitt%zorro9.uucp@talcott.harvard.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 22:26:19 EDT From: Official Random Subject: Homebrew Networking For a year and a half, I've dialed in to the local terminal server of [state university which shall remain nameless.] Until last December, access was facilitated via an X.25 statewide network, which has since died due to budget cuts and cost overruns. Having discovered four-digit phone bills (that's four to the left of the decimal), I am taking the following action. I live three NXXes from the dial-in. Diagram: Dial-in ----- NXX ----- NXX ----- Me Oddly, I am only local to the NXX nearest to me, but it is local to the NXX beyond it _and_ the dial-in's NXX. Having an aunt and uncle who live in the NXX which is local to both me and the dial-in, I have gotten their permission to get telephone service at their residence. For a cost of about $18.88 a month - including taxes - I get unlimited local calling and call forwarding. Of course, the call forwarding will be _permanently_ programmed to forward to the dial-in. The plot thickens: The dial-in has a rack of 18 modems in a hunt group. Therefore, if I am on line and someone else calls my forwarding number, it does NOT busy on them, but rather just drops them to the next available line. My aunt and uncle will also (according to the local BOC people I ordered this from) be able to dial out, utterly unaffected by the whole forwarding scheme. I stand to save about $400 _at least_ each month by doing this. My friends from nearby exchanges will also get substantial savings. Things like this make me begin to wonder why people phreak ... if you ask me, the phone company is voluntarily losing money in this case, and, worse yet, losing money it would be getting from the lucrative DCOM gang. Are they being nice? Are they just confused? [No one I talked to could understand it.] Is this illegal? [I know it's unethical, and I quit school before Ethics 101.] Will they eventually get really p-o'ed at me? Should I have done this long ago? Should we all do this? Should I get Identi-Call service and Call Forwarding on the data line here, thus creating a situation where calls to the auxiliary number would ring, but calls to the main data number would forward through my new port and onto Internet - thus providing absolutely free network access for an entire county?? Just curious. shag [Moderator's Note: There are instances -- very few of them, and yours is apparently one -- where two or more local calls chained together wind up costing less than a single toll call when you include the cost of the forwarded call AND the fixed expenses each month such as line charges, the call-forwarding monthly fee, etc. Obviously, all links in the chain have to have (relative to the one they connect with) unlimited, untimed local calling to make it worthwhile. As soon as any one link has to pay tolls, you may as well all pay tolls, since the difference will be negligible or possibly even against your favor! Now it may be that unlimited calling is available from you to your aunt and from her to the site with *residence* service, but as you will recall from a previous discussion here, as soon as you solicit the public to call your telephone number, la-la! you have a BUSINESS line, and BUSINESS rates. Do the BUSINESS telephones on the same exchange as your aunt *also* get unlimited local calling? I'd be surprised if they do. In Chicago, business phones are charged by the minute even on very local calls. No unlimited, untimed service for them! So maybe when you start inviting 'the entire county' along with all your friends to use the line at their pleasure to avoid tolls, particularly since the whole thing terminates in a business subcriber's equipment (the modem lines at the site), telco might feel you were soliciting the public to call your phone, i.e. the recent BBS sysop fiasco and convert the forwarded line at your aunt's place to business service. Then what? Back to paying tolls? If this works for you, fine, but best keep it to yourself and use it -- not invite everyone else to join in. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 21:51:11 -0600 From: leroy Casterline Subject: Engineering Help Needed My company is in need of an engineer (consultant/contractor OK) with state-of-the-art knowledge in the design of voice storage systems, and experience designing telephone equipment (digital answering machine design work would be especially relevent). We are especially concerned with reducing the amount of storage required for these messages. If you are interested in working on such a project, please contact me. Leroy Casterline | Cahill Casterline Ltd | Fort Collins, CO | 303/484-2212 Internet:casterli@lamar.colostate.edu | Compu$erve:70540,3307 | BIX:leroy ------------------------------ Subject: Wanted: T1/CEPT1 VME Card From: Brian Carlton Date: Wed, 29 May 91 22:21:15 PDT Organization: BDCsys, Sunnyvale, CA Does anyone know of a card to go into a VME chassis that has a T1 or CEPT1 interface? This is not just trying to hook a computer up to a T1 line, but to allow VME cards to talk to the interface. Please mail replies to me, if there is interest I will summarize any answers. Brian Carlton ------------------------------ From: Bill Huttig Subject: MCI Prefered (Correction on Prices) Date: 31 May 91 01:44:30 GMT Reply-To: Bill Huttig Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL The posting on MCI Prefered I made had several errors in it. Below is a new summary. Customer Service 800-727-5555 Under $50 in calls -- $7.50/month .235 Day /.1645 Evening/ .1293 Night Homework option (Home phones billed to the account) .25 day/ .12 all other Regional calling - State (might be LATA or area code not clear yet) Rates vary by state - Homework rates differ Personal/Private 800 - no mothly fee Per minute rates same as above Clasic 800 - $10/mo $10 for installation Per minute rates same as above Travel card /account code included ... many other options available. ------------------------------ From: Bill Huttig Subject: Carrier ID Number - 700-555-4x4x Date: 31 May 91 02:05:47 GMT Reply-To: Bill Huttig Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL I was under the impression that the number to ID carriers was 1-700-555-4141. MCI Prefered advertises 700-555-4343. Since they are not my 1+, I did some testing and thought the Digest readers might be interested in the results: PIC 700-555 Message 222 4141 Thank You for selecting MCI for.. now connected 2RR 222 4343 Thank You.............................connected 2RR 222 4242 same as 222 4141 852 4141 Thank You for using TELECOM*USA ...call 800-476-1234 852 4242 We are sorry your call can not be completed as dialed AC 852 4343 Thank You for selecting MCI ... now connected 2BP 852 4444 connect to directory assistence The 852 4343 is in the same voice as the 222 PIC ones but not the 852 4141. Why does the 852 PIC behave this way ... it was a SouthernNet PIC. Teleconnects' PIC is 835 ... does it behave this way? Bill [Moderator's Note: From here just now, 10852-700-anything got me a message saying 'call cannot be completed with the carrier access code you have chosen.' PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rick Anderson Subject: MCI $20 Promotion Organization: gte Date: Thu, 30 May 1991 20:26:50 GMT I believe MCI is currently undergoing a nationwide promotion whereby they will give you $20 if you switch over to them as your primary carrier. I recently received a check in the mail from MCI for $20. The check was a normal check on the front, but on the back, it said if I endorsed and cashed the check, I would be switched over to MCI. My question to the net: is it legally feasible to cross out this endorsement message, sign the check, collect the $20, and then legally expect to not be switched over to MCI?? I realize they will probably switch you over regardless of what you do, but by crossing out the endorsement message, haven't you taken away the "ok" for them to switch you over? Rick Anderson AG Communication Systems ...!ncar!noao!asuvax!gtephx!andersonr ...!att!gtephx!andersonr ...!uunet!zardoz!hrc!gtephx!andersonr [Moderator's Note: As soon as you cross out the special endorsement you no longer have the right to cash the check which was issued as payment for your having given permission to change your phones. When you withheld your permission, you had no right to the money. And please, no one needs to reply saying 'you have the right to keep things of value which arrive in the mail unsolicited'. This was not 'something of value'. It was a contract they were requesting you to sign in exchange for immediate payment for doing so. Big difference. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Neff Subject: 908 Area Code Switchover Date: 31 May 91 07:03:27 GMT Reply-To: Tom Neff Just a reminder that New Jersey's 908 area code becomes mandatory on Saturday, June 8, 1991 at 2 A.M. This affects 1.5 million phones (314 exchanges) in central New Jersey, formerly part of 201. The area code has been available since January 1990. As of Saturday you will get a recording if you still dial 201. ------------------------------ From: Charlie Mingo Subject: Does Fred Know Something We Don't Know? Date: 31 May 91 15:11:36 goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > A couple of possible causes of a double ring in the US: > 2) The No. 1 Crossbar generated double ring on some numbers. Few are > left in service but 703 is PacBell so there may be a few left ... ^^^^^^^ If PacBell provides service in 703 (Arlington and Roanoke, VA), they're certainly keeping a low profile; for example, the bills come from C&P. The only PacBell phone I've ever seen in 703 was in "Die Hard 2," when Bruce Willis found one at Dulles. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jun 91 00:48:39 PDT From: Linc Madison Subject: Billing Cutover Question As of about 45 minutes ago, calls between Berkeley and San Francisco "Central" (roughly the northeastern 1/3 of the city, including downtown, North Beach, Castro, and Mission areas) are local (Zone 1). I was musing on the question of what would have happened were I in the midst of a call at the time of the cutover. Suppose, for example, I called someone in S.F. at 11:50 and talked for 25 minutes. In exact compliance with the tariff, I should be charged 40% x ($0.08 + 9 x $0.02) = $0.10 for the first ten minutes, and nothing for the remaining 15 (unless I have measured service, in which case I would pay 40% x (15 x $0.01) = $0.06). Would my phone bill show the Zone 2 call as having a duration of 10 minutes, or 25? Would I have caused all the billing computers at Pac*Bell to explode, engulfing downtown San Francisco in a massive conflagration? Did they actually cut over at 4:00 this afternoon so as not to have to pay people overtime to figure these things out? Linc Madison = linc@tongue1.berkeley.edu PS. I now get to call Belvedere, Sausalito, and Walnut Creek, as well!! [Moderator's Note: Ah, Linc ... here's one for you to worry about: you are crossing the Pacific Ocean coming from Australia to California. You are using the phone, making a collect call to SFC. When you cross the international date line so it becomes the previous day once again, do they charge you for a call which lasted a number of minutes? After all, the call was finished before you even started it. Suppose on the (Australian) day you started the call, the telco was changing over to a new billing plan at the exact moment you were crossing the IDL ... would they charge the minutes using the old calculation or the new one? :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #414 ******************************   Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05776; 2 Jun 91 13:23 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09006; 2 Jun 91 11:23 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06736; 2 Jun 91 10:15 CDT Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 10:15:04 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #415 BCC: Message-ID: <9106021015.ab07529@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 2 Jun 91 10:15:00 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 415 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Steven S. Brack] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Scott Hinckley] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [John Higdon] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Robert L. Oliver] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Michael Nolan] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Colin Plumb] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Floyd Davidson] Re: Old Phone Museum Being Cranked Up [Floyd Davidson] Re: C&P Telephone "Anti-Slam" Flag and Amazing Service [John Higdon] Re: Thrfity Tel [David Gast] Re: Fax Memory [David Ptasnik] Re: Incoming Lines From Telco [braun@dri.com] Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone [Brian Kantor] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World From: "Steven S. Brack" Date: Thu, 30 May 91 16:21:39 EDT Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[0][2][4]) kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net (Bud Couch) writes: > Most C.O. switches built in the last ten years *deliberately* divorce > the ringback tone heard by the calling party from the acrual ringing > sound at the called party's phone. This has been done to cut down on > revenue "leakage" due to ringing code schemes: "Well, when we get to > Aunt Gertie's house, we'll call and leave it ring three times." > Modern switches, in general, return ringback both slower and > asynchronously from the actual ringing in order to foul up those > schemes. "Why did you answer? It only rang twice." "Twice? It started > on the fourth ring here!" Do the IECs do anything to combat sending messages other ways? I can remember my mother telling me (when I was a young man going on a long trip) that when I landed, I was to make a collect call home, and say it was from "Mr. Holmes." It seems that doing something like this would be very costly to the IECs. Oh, I made that collect call through AT&T. Funny, it wasn't that long ago that we had one phone company. 8| <- The jury's still out on whether I should ) or (. Steven S. Brack | sbrack%bluemoon@nstar.rn.com Jacob E. Taylor Honors Tower | sbrack@bluemoon.uucp The Ohio State University | sbrack@nyx.cs.du.edu 50 Curl Drive | sbrack@isis.cs.du.edu Columbus, Ohio 43210-1112 USA | brack@ewf.eng.ohio-state.edu +1 614 293 7383 or 419 474 1010 | Steven.S.Brack@osu.edu ------------------------------ From: Scott Hinckley Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: 31 May 91 12:41:53 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com Organization: I try not to In kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net (Bud Couch) writes: > Modern switches, in general, return ringback both slower and > asynchronously from the actual ringing in order to foul up those > schemes. "Why did you answer? It only rang twice." "Twice? It started > on the fourth ring here!" I have not found this to be the case in Atlanta or Huntsville. In both towns I have had an answering machine with a 'toll saver' feature. If there has not been a message left it allows four rings then picks up. If there has been a message it picks up after two rings (thus if you are calling long distance to check for calls you can hang up on the third ring to avoid charges for no messages). I have always had it pick up after the correct number of rings as heard by either the caller or the callee (plenty of time was spent verifying this). 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 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 11:28 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Fred R. Goldstein writes: > 2) The No. 1 Crossbar generated double ring on some numbers. Few are > left in service but 703 is PacBell so there may be a few left ... What? Did I read that right? Last time I was in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the RBOC was the descendent of C&P. Is Pac*Bell there as an independent somewhere? I cannot imagine that the forces of the universe would allow what Pac*Bell calls service to escape the borders of California. But the mention of #1 crossbar is sound. Back in the not-so-distant past, all phones served by local #1 crossbar had the normal "single" ring if the numbers ended in 000-499 and a "double" ring if they ended in 500-999. I used to feel so superior because I had the more highly advanced #5 crossbar. Unfortunately, I still do. They now have #5ESS. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: "Robert L. Oliver" Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Organization: Rabbit Software Corp. Date: 31 May 91 23:41:39 GMT goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) writes: > 2) The No. 1 Crossbar generated double ring on some numbers. Few are > left in service but 703 is PacBell so there may be a few left ... ACK! Run for your lives! Has PacBell taken over Virginia too?! Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM Malvern, PA 19355 !uunet!cbmvax!hutch!robert ------------------------------ From: Michael Nolan Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Reply-To: nolan@helios.unl.edu Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln Date: 31 May 91 15:10:35 GMT alexb@cfctech.cfc.com (Alex Beylin) writes: > I've always wondered what they do with laptops that require AC power > to operate. Is there a three-prong AC plug at the security station? I've had to set my system up on the floor 10 or 15 feet away from the security station more than once in order to find a reachable plug. The really 'fun' experience I had was when I was carrying a Toshiba T1200 back from Dallas and had inadvertently drained the battery. Good thing I had the AC power pack in my carry-on bag! (This was last September, when security was REAL tight.) Michael Nolan nolan@helios.unl.edu ------------------------------ From: Colin Plumb Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Date: Fri, 31 May 1991 16:19:31 -0400 Organization: Array Systems Computing, Inc., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA Anything with batteries in it could be a bomb. A portable computer is several pounds of unopenable case which X-rays will show as batteries, wires, and unidentifiable junk. This is a really good cover for an explosive device. Verifying that the thing does something is a good way to screen out the less technologically sophisticated. (Not that I expect anyone here to have any difficulty finding some inessential space in a portable computer if they wented to create a "working" bomb.) Colin ------------------------------ From: Floyd Davidson Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science Date: Fri, 31 May 1991 07:06:28 GMT In article Alex Beylin writes: > They usually do the same when I try to carry a portable computer on > board. One of the security people always takes me to the side table > and asks to see the computer work. Once the lights come on, they let > me go. > I've always wondered what they do with laptops that require AC power > to operate. Is there a three-prong AC plug at the security station? As late as maybe 1985 they just wanted to look at it (a Kaypro-4), and obviously didn't know what it was. About '86-'87 or so there was a distinct change. They knew exactly what they wanted to see: some indication that it functioned (disk noise, lights, anything). Yes they always seem to know exactly where an outlet is and they don't hesitate. Floyd L. Davidson | Alascom, Inc. pays me, |UA Fairbanks Institute of Marine floyd@ims.alaska.edu| but not for opinions. |Science suffers me as a guest. ------------------------------ From: Floyd Davidson Subject: Re: Old Phone Museum Being Cranked Up Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 14:30:28 GMT In article kentrox!bud@uunet.uu.net (Bud Couch) writes: > In article Ron acct069@uunet.uu.net> writes: >> The 5,400-square-foot building for the museum is being donated >> by Pacific Telecom Inc., a company in Vancouver, Wash., that owns both >> North-West Telecommunications and Cencom Inc., which operates some >> local phone companies in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa. > Pacific Telecom also bought out the old RCA Alascom system, and is > "The Phone Company" in Alaska. Pacific Corp. (Portland, Ore.) owns Pacific Telecom (Vancouver, Wn.) which owns Alascom (the regulated long distance carrier), and a large percentage of the privately owned local telco's in Alaska! Telephone Utilities of the Northland, Telephone Utilies of ... I don't remember the names of them all. I believe they also use the TU name in Gig Harbor, WN. and Forks, WN. They own several local telco's in the Northwest. But ... the two largest local phone companies in Alaska are city owned: Anchorage Telephone Utilites, and Fairbanks Municipal Utilities. And there in is an interesting story. When Pacific Telecom bought what is now TU of the Northland, which serves much of the area just east of Fairbanks, the Alaska Public Utilites Commission told them something to the effect of: "Don't buy anymore. (Unless Fairbanks MUS is sold, which we would allow)." Now FMUS, being owned by a city, is not regulated by the PUC. I have no idea why the PUC thought then it would be a good idea if Pacific Telecom should be allowed to buy FMUS but nothing else. (It has not been up for sale; it makes the city too much money!) But that was years ago. In the last two or three years the hot item has been the Anchorage Telephone Utilities sale. The city would like to sell it. A couple years ago they put it up for bid. Pacific Telecom offered the only bid. It required 60% voter approval and got something like 58%; and so failed. In the process Pacific Telecom spent more money on advertising and on political donations in the state of Alaska than any other company for that particular year. (Considering the oil companies we have here, that is some chunk of money.) Now the mayor of Anchorage (Mr. Fink, no less) is trying again. The political fighting has been going hot and heavy. Some would say that PT already owns too much! Some would say they do such a fine job, let's give em more! And everything in between. The proposals in Anchorage for a bidding process have been everything from explicitly banning PT to allowing them to bid only if they sell off their inter-state business (originally the idea was that they would have to sell Alascom, which PT said *NO* thanks to, and lately it has meant they would have to sell off their major ownership of the fiber optic Pacific cable that is just now being put into service. That has not been rejected by PT.) Eventually it is very likely that PT will own the phone system in Anchorage. I don't know if that scares Alascom employees more or ATU employees more. Oh, also ... PT corporate profits last year were a record high. Disclaimer: I work for Alascom under a union contract. Floyd L. Davidson | Alascom, Inc. pays me, |UA Fairbanks Institute of Marine floyd@ims.alaska.edu| but not for opinions. |Science suffers me as a guest. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 May 91 17:42 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: C&P Telephone "Anti-Slam" Flag and Amazing Service wts1 writes: > I called Saturday AM, and sure enough, the office was open! Anyone > know if this is just Southern Bell in NC, all of BellSouth, or other > RBOCs also? First Class! Pacific Bell has had Saturday business office hours for a couple of years, as much as it pains me to say it. But then what good does it do if there is nothing to offer :-) John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 18:43:31 -0700 From: David Gast Subject: Re: Thrfity Tel It seems that if TT is playing the ethical line (no pun intended) and at the same time is engaged in delivering intra-LATA calls against PUC rules, that they need to be set up and given a dose of their own medicine. The PUC should just confiscate all of their computers and forbid them from using a phone. David ------------------------------ From: David Ptasnik Subject: Re: Fax Memory Date: Fri, 31 May 91 8:32:13 PDT Ricoh fax machines with memory had this feature a couple of years ago, I assume that they still do. When a fax is sent to the machine, the sender can put in a security code. The fax is stored in the machine's memory, and will not be printed out until the proper security code is entered at the fax's keyboard. This was explained to me by a sales rep, and is kind of vague. I don't know how the problem of lost codes, etc. was dealt with. Another solution would be a fax board(s). The PC could be programmed any way you want it, callers could self direct to the correct PC if you are on a phone system with DISA, or you could use selective rings. There are lots and lots of relatively inexpensive options. As I remember, fax machines with memory were pretty pricy. I imagine a PC with a fax board and a security scheme would be cheaper. davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: Kral Subject: Re: Incoming Lines From Telco Organization: Digital Research Inc Date: Sat, 1 Jun 91 05:33:21 GMT In article HAMER524@ruby.vcu.edu (Robert M. Hamer) writes: > I can't find a network interface. Coming in from outside into the > basement is a line with what looks like perhaps 10 or 15 twisted > pairs. One of the pairs is connected to one of the old-fashioned > terminals (with four screw-type poles) to which all of our in-house > wiring is connected. I can't tell from your description if this is related or not, so take it for what it is worth... In the East Bay (ie Oakland and points east) area I've seen residential units where they string 12 twisted pair wires (not cables, wires, no sheathing!) throughout the house when it is built. Then you just tap on to the pair you want to consider active at each outlet. This lets you fix broken circuits, or have different circuits active at different outlets. This was in a house that was a rental, primarily to students. So it was not unusual to have four lines or more in the house, with each bedroom being on a different line. This setup made it pretty easy to do. kral * 408/647-6112 * ...!uunet!drivax!braun * braun@dri.com ------------------------------ From: Brian Kantor Subject: Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone Date: 2 Jun 91 03:41:21 GMT Ken Oberman wondered when COs would stop supporting pulse-dial (rotary) phones. Well, PBX's already have; the UCSD Ericsson MD-110 will not allow an extension phone to pulse-dial any number with a "1" (one) in it -- it interprets the single pulse as a switchhook flash and gives you a fresh dialtone. Of course, all the campus analog phones have touch-tone dials. We didn't discover the problem until people tried dialing the local Telenet node with their modems, some of which were older models that couldn't use touch-tone dialing. Last I heard, a couple of years ago, they'd have it fixed real soon. Hmm. It just occured to me: when they convert the student dorms to use the Ericsson phone system in a couple of years, will the students who own cheap plastic pulse-dial phones be able to dial 911? Brian ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #415 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11762; 2 Jun 91 15:55 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14881; 2 Jun 91 14:29 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11102; 2 Jun 91 13:24 CDT Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 12:33:23 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #416 BCC: Message-ID: <9106021233.ab10357@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 2 Jun 91 12:33:20 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 416 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Brian Charles Kohn] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Bill Huttig] Re: A Visitor Observes Phone Service in the UK [John Slater] Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire [Steve Gaarder] Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? [Linc Madison] Re: Free Teletypes [Roy M. Silvernail] Homophobic Posting in Digest! (was NYNEX Pops the MPOP) [Andy Sherman] Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? [William M. Hawkins] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 May 91 13:53:33 EDT From: Brian Charles Kohn Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Reply-To: "bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM" Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Quality Process Center > "When it arrives, you'll notice that your new card looks different. It > even has a DIFFERENT ACCOUNT NUMBER FROM YOUR CURRENT AT&T CARD. > (Emphasis added). In order to comply with government requirements, > AT&T is no longer sharing card numbers with your local telephone > company. Now, AT&T is issuing new card numbers that are exclusive to > AT&T." > So does this mean that we will all need to know at least *two* PIN > numbers now? Actually ... the new calling card number will be different from your phone number. It will be a new 14 digit number to remember. => And how is everyone supposed to know that "If it's a local call use my => BOC card, while if it's an inter-LATA call use my AT&T card"? How many => people actually can tell in advance what is a intra- compared to an => inter-LATA call? The word is that BOC card numbers won't work for LD calls, and LD card numbers won't work for local calls. When that transition is to happen I don't know. > Note that if I use MCI or Sprint, which have similar calling card > setups (via an 800 or 950 number), I can usually make INTRA and INTER > LATA calls on the same card, and even on the same call. (The charges > may be higher for INTRA LATA calls than what the BOC/GTE/local > companies charge, however). This has got to be either illegal or unfair. AT&T is not permitted to carry local phone calls. Not even a little. So MCI and Sprint shouldn't be allowed to either. > In the event than any AT&T Calling Card people area reading this, all > I can say is that this is quite disappointing. I bet you that the AT&T Calling Card people are more disappointed with it than you are. Disappointed that unscrupulous AOS services have made the government take this action. Brian Charles Kohn AT&T Bell Laboratories Quality Process Center Quality Management System E-MAIL: att!hoqax!bicker (bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM) Consultant PHONE: (908) 949-5850 FAX: (908) 949-7724 [Moderator's Note: This is just one more example of the unfairness which has riddled divestiture since the beginning. AT&T has been held to the most rigid of standards, while the 'others' are allowed to pretty much do as they please subject to a large enough stink being made that they have to reform a little -- but just a little. AT&T got to where they were after more than a century of experience, hard work and intelligent management ... and a judge comes along and rips them off without a second thought, based largely on his own prejudices. And let's face it: Greene had it in for AT&T from the beginning. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Huttig Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Date: 31 May 91 16:02:26 GMT Reply-To: Bill Huttig Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL In article DREUBEN@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes: > And how is everyone supposed to know that "If it's a local call use my > BOC card, while if it's an inter-LATA call use my AT&T card"? How many > people actually can tell in advance what is a intra- compared to an > inter-LATA call? From my understanding the new AT&T card can be use for IntraLATA calls with any Local carrier. The main reason is to protect you from getting charged by AOS's. I think by law the BOC/LEC numbers must be made available to all OCC's . Your BOC/LEC card should work using any carrier and will be billed on your local bill. OCC's can carry IntraLATA calls in some states but AT&T can not. AT&T said that they have problems with some of the LEC's accepting the new cards and the problem should be worked out shortly. Bill ------------------------------ From: John Slater Subject: Re: A Visitor Observes Phone Service in the UK Date: 31 May 91 15:35:17 GMT Reply-To: John.Slater@uk.sun.com Organization: Sun Microsystems UK In article , artinb@bottomdog.uk.sun.com (Martin Baines) writes: >> He has to dial an access number to get to the Mercury network. > Depends where you live and when you got your phone as to whether it is > Mercury compatible. If you live in an exchange that is digital (50% of > exchanges, 75% of the population) then all you need to get Mercury is > a tone phone. Not true, Marty. Availability of Mercury access is dependent on whether Mercury has got around to making service available yet. This in turn depends on how close geographically a switch is to Mercury's nationwide figure-of-eight fibre optic network. This may often correspond with digital exchanges, but not necessarily. > If you get a *new* phone from BT it may/may not be tone: > it seems to depend what they have in stock (any comments?). To the best of my knowledge all of BT's phones for sale have been dual-signalling for a couple of years or so. They're slowly getting round to promoting "Star Services" (call-waiting, redirection etc) and are installing as many tone-capable phones as they can. > If you live on a pulse exchange, to get Mercury you need a phone that > can change from pulse to tone in the middle of dialing: the pulses to > get to Mercury, then tones for your PIN and the number. True. Almost all phones sold in the UK that are capable of tone signalling have a fairly automatic way of doing this (in other words buttons for abbreviated dialling can be programmed to perform mixed dialling. E.g. in Hayes-speak : ATDP131T,1234567890 to access Mercury and dial account number and PIN). John Slater Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office Disclaimer : I work for Marty Baines, so I have to be nice to him. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jun 91 02:45:55 EDT From: gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us Subject: Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire The following piece, which showed up in soc.culture.new-zealand, suggests one possible approach to my quest for a cheap way to run wire to a friend's house: > From: anorris@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Andrew Norris) > With respect to the tails about uses of no8, there was an real good > chapter in a Crump Book in which a character named 'Scratcher' had the > job of maintaining a 8 mile length of telephone line through the bush. > The PO provided him with copper wire, which he used to sew his boots and > cloths up with. The line was repaired with any junk he could lay his > hands on, including sardine cans and dog chain. But he knew what he was > doing as he confided in the central character, Bruce (?); > 'It can't be any old thing though, it has to be metal' BTW, I'm also looking for entrance blocks (lightning protectors) or sources for same. [ Pat, concerning your suggestion of going underground: A reasonable thing to suggest, since you live in the Midwest where the soil is soft and sandy. Here it's heavy clay, and, since it's through the woods, full of roots as well.] Steve Gaarder gaarder@theory.tc.cornell.edu gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us [Moderator's Note: When I look at old photographs of Chicago, say from the 1900-1920 era, all I see in the sky are telephone poles and wires running everywhere. The wires criss-cross in all directions running up and down the streets, etc. And now, telephone poles, while not rare, are far less common here. In the downtown area you don't see one for blocks at a time. In the residential areas, we have poles in the alley behind the houses in many areas, but very few on the main streets. They have buried almost everything. Of course, there are offsets to this: For the past two weeks, Bell Avenue (the north/south street at the corner from where I live) has been torn up for several blocks, all the way from Roseland Cemetery north to Warren Park. Everyone is in on the act: I see trucks from People's Gas, IBT, and the Water and Sewer Works all out there every day, digging, laying new conduits, sewers, etc. They wake me at 6 AM when they start tearing up the street. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jun 91 00:40:08 PDT From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? Martin Baines said in 11.409.7 that British Telecom made profits of #95/second or #3000 billion. Much discussion has ensued regarding the fact that the latter figure is more than 50 years U.S. GNP, etc. The answer to the dilemma is rather simple: the two figures do not equate to one another. #95/sec = #3000 MILLION/year = #3 billion/yr = US $5 billion/yr. For comparison, AT&T last year earned about US $2.7 billion. However, in 1981, 1982, and 1983, AT&T earned close to or more than US $7 billion per year. [Source: Value Line Investment Survey] The total profits of the "Baby Bells" for 1990, though, was in excess of US $9 billion. Add another $1.5 billion for GTE, and about a billion for MCI and Sprint combined, and a fraction of a billion for Centel, Cincinnati Bell, etc. So, all in all, US telephone companies reaped profits in the neighborhood of $12 billion for 1990. However, the US is more than 2.4 times the size of Britain, so BT's profits were about double the scale of US telephone companies. That gives you a little bit of a yardstick for comparing "excessive" profits. (BTW, 1990 profits for the Baby Bells ranged from a low of $1.13 billion for Pacific Telesis to a high of $1.695 billion for Bell South. Southern New England Telephone earned about $150 million, and I'm not sure whether or not that is included in NYNEX, but it doesn't materially affect my figures either way.) Linc Madison = linc@tongue1.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Free Teletypes From: "Roy M. Silvernail" Date: Sat, 01 Jun 91 13:16:03 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN floyd@ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) writes: [about teletype machines and radio stations] > It was usually "canned" sound. Nobody would really want to work > around that racket. The tty machines in well designed places were in > rooms with sound proofing, and nobody had to listen to them. When I was with Alaskan Forces radio in the mid 70's, the newsroom had five teletypes, with four running all the time. (AP, UPI, Reuters and the AFRTS newswire compilation) The poor news guy had to put up with it all the time. I don't recall the newscasts using teletype noise in the background there, as the news was actually delivered from an ajoining studio. Curiously enough, the simplest solution (of placing a mike in the teletype room) wouldn't have worked, since three of the four wires made their hourly local breaks at the top of the hour. At an earlier job with a Nome radio station, the teletype was in the tiny news studio, albeit inside a sound-deadening casing. The AP fed that machine, and the teletype in the background was real during newscasts. The same unpredictability about local breaks was evident, though ... sometimes, the teletype would be completely silent until the last seconds of the news. (This has strayed from telecom a bit, so I shan't rant on) Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu [Moderator's Note: In the public telegraph offices of yester-year there would be usually a half-dozen or more machines. On rare instances, all would be silent for maybe ten or fifteen seconds; then there would be a soft whirring noise for a few seconds as one of the machines came on, and the click/clack would start again. PAT] ------------------------------ From: andys@ulysses.att.com Date: Sat, 1 Jun 91 18:11:26 EDT Subject: Homophobic Posting in Digest! (was NYNEX Pops the MPOP) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill In article is written: > AT&T does not come off looking well in this matter for its > limp-wristed way of handling it or notifying AT&T's customers, either. "Limp-wristed" is a rather offensive and homophobic term to use. I DARE you to walk into the gym at the Greenwich Village YMCA and a) call somebody there a limpwristed faggot or b) try to convince one of the gentlemen working out that being homosexual or effeminate means that you have no guts, strength or backbone, as your ignorant comment implies. Somebody with a homosexual orientation and the ability and desire to bench press twice your body weight would be happy to adjust your attitude for you. Please take your stereotypes to another list. > [Moderator's Note: Mr. Robert Allen no longer has any say-so over > what NYNEX wishes to do. And although you may call them limp-wristed > for their handling of this, you must realize that whenver AT&T does > attempt to push the LEC's one way or another, there is always someone > waiting in the wings to run crying to the Judge about AT&T being too > involved with the LECs. So this time, AT&T is handling the whole > thing at arm's length. PAT] Pat, while I appreciate your defense of our Corporate reputation, I am a little disappointed that you granted his heterosexist assumptions in your reply. If you think I'm nit-picking, ask yourself if you would have answered: "you may think that policy niggardly, but ..." or "you may think you were being Jewed down, but ..." Andy Sherman AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ andys@ulysses.att.com [Moderator's Note: Oh dear me, here come the flamers again ... detirmined to infest TELECOM Digest as bad they have the rest of the net. The fact that in your response you used 'limpwristed' as an adjective, or modifier for 'faggot' shows me you are aware the term can be used to describe any number of people and/or their actions *in addition to male homosexuals*. Or were you just being redundant, much like saying 'gay homosexual' or 'Department of Redundancy Department'? Your syntax confuses me. Describing a 'faggot' as limpwristed is your problem, not mine or that of the original author. You don't display very good vocabulary skills where 'niggardly' is concerned either. I think you have that word (adj./adv. meaning stingy or miserly; with its root in 'niggard' (n., probably Scandanavian in origin meaning a miser, or stingy person)) confused with 'nigger', a slang term whose root is in 'Niger', or a person from Niger(ia) which in current parlance or idiom is an ugly way of describing a black person. I agree 'faggot' is an ugly way to describe a gay person, but you in your wisdom appended it to 'limpwristed', not me. Please continue this over in alt.politics.homosexual or someplace where they relish flames and personal attacks, and expect to find homophobia, internalized or otherwise, lurking in every message. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 23:48:47 CDT From: "William M. Hawkins" Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? I just returned from a visit to the Pavek Wireless Museum in a suburb of Minneapolis. It's a three year old museum with a major collection of wireless stuff. It also contains a Vitaphone Lathe, dated 1926, with a model number of WE D85249 (yes, it looks like a serial number, but that was on another plate). A single motor drives the turntable from one end and the lathe screw from the other. The placard says that Selsyns were used to couple the camera and the recording lathe. Selsyns are back to back three phase synchronous motors. Well, the transmitter is a generator and the receiver is a motor. So, that's how they synchronized sound and picture. Still, I didn't think a director could make a film a reel at a time, without cutting and splicing. Something had to be used for sound editing, to go with the film editing. The placard also said the lathe cut a 17.5 inch disk, which was used to press 16 inch copies. The disk on the turntable looked like metal, and the head looked like it could dig a serious groove in the metal. The 'card also said 33 RPM. Maybe they dropped the third of an RPM. Bill Hawkins, alias bill@bert.rosemount.com 612-895-6840 at work. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #416 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14730; 2 Jun 91 17:02 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa18272; 2 Jun 91 15:35 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab14881; 2 Jun 91 14:30 CDT Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 13:49:09 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #417 BCC: Message-ID: <9106021349.ab13239@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 2 Jun 91 13:49:06 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 417 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administriva: New Modem In Use [TELECOM Moderator] Bell Atlantic Guardian Insurance Policy Text [Christopher Lott] GTE Mobilenet and 7D vs 10D vs 1+10D Dialing [Marty Brenneis] Surprise!! [Brian Gordon] Cellular Modem Wanted [Albert Pang] Strange AT&T Advertisement [Mark J. Christophel] PacBell Does Something Right [Donald Ekman] Re: International 800 Access [Jim Rees] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 13:11:08 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administriva: New Modem In Use The Digest is now being produced each day using a new Telebit T-1600 modem. This 9600 baud model has a number of nice features, including callback security, error checking, v.32 compatibility and other things. Since most of the time the modem will be in interactive use; i.e. me at the terminal, typing in messages, editing other messages, etc, some aspects of the unit are not needed, such as Data Compression. But the big thing -- the most important from my point of view -- is the fourfold increase in speed where screen refreshes are concerned. I use Emacs to edit the Digest, and mmdf for the mail. The constant redrawing of the screen by the editor took a lot of time in the past. Now the redrawing is instant, as is the listing of messages in the queue. Previously, a list of several dozen messages to be reviewed took several seconds each time it was presented. This is no longer the case. It is just like being in the terminal room at NWU. The modem interfaces with my terminals (Wyse 50's) at 38,400 baud, so everything is now moving very fast and smooth. Baud rate selection is automatic, so the modem fits right in when calling other places at a slower speed. No baud rate adjustment by me is required. Also, an S-register allows automatic dialing of a preselected number whenever DTR goes high, or by pushing a single button on the front panel which is a nice convenience also. The modem was loaned to me for use with the Digest by two regular readers who suggested I leave their name out of print, and I am honoring their request ... but I want to publicly say thanks; and they will know who they are! PAT ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 14:35:06 -0400 From: Christopher Lott Subject: Bell Atlantic Guardian Insurance Policy Text Hi Pat, Hot off the flatbed scanner, here is the full text of the Bell Atlantic Guardian Insurance policy. The policy strikes me as more than a little vague -- for example, do they cover only their phones which you are renting, or any $8.99 phone which maybe you got free in some promotion? chris ... ---- TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE OPTIONAL WIRE MAINTENANCE PLAN AND BELL ATLANTIC GUARDIAN (sm) ENHANCED MAINTENANCE SERVICE The Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company (hereinafter referred to as "C&P") offers the following wire maintenance plans: (l ) Optional Wire Maintenance Plan ("the Basic Plan"), and (2) Bell Atlantic Guardian (sm) Enhanced Maintenance Service. The following terms and conditions will govern the provision of these Plans. DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANS A. Optional Wire Maintenance Plan (the "Basic Plan"): This is an optional wire maintenance plan (hereafter referred to as the "Basic Plan") which includes the following service: In accordance with C&P's standard procedures, C&P will perform such repairs to the Customer's standard inside telephone wire and jack(s) (subject to the Plan Exclusions listed below) that become necessary and are reported to C&P while you are covered under this Plan. If a repairperson is dispatched to perform repairs to your inside wire or jack(s), and the problem is in your telephone or associated equipment rather than the wire or jacks, you may be required to pay a service charge for that visit at C&P's then-applicable rates. Guardian Plan: This plan provides you the same coverage as the Basic Plan, plus the following: In addition to the Basic Plan, if the trouble occurs in your telephone set, C&P will provide you a standard desk telephone for up to 60 days while you arrange to have your telephone set repaired or replaced. Also, you will not be billed a service charge when the problem is found to be in your telephone equipment and not your inside wire or jacks. If you have a permanently wired telephone without a standard telephone jack needed to use the loaner telephone, C&P will convert one telephone jack to modular free of charge. You will then be responsible for converting your telephone to modular or for acquiring a modular telephone to be used with the modular jack. Within 60 days, you must return the loaned telephone in accordance with C&P's then-applicable procedures. If you fail to return the loaned telephone as and when required, you may be billed at C&P's then-applicable rates for all costs and expenses associated with such failure. To request maintenance service under either of these Plans, the Customer should call the C&P repair service telephone number, or such other number as C&P may designate. CHARGES The current monthly charges for these two Plans are as follows: Basic Plan: $.85 per telephone line per month. Guardian Plan: $2.00 per telephone line per month. A one-time service order charge may also be billed, if applicable, when you order either of these Plans. The charges for these Plans are subject to change by C&P from time to time, as more fully described in the next paragraph. All charges, plus all applicable taxes, shall be due and payable upon Customer's receipt of the applicable bill. CHANGES IN MONTHLY CHARGES, TERMS AND CONDITIONS: THE CHARGES FOR THESE PLANS, AND ANY OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO THESE PLANS. MAY BE CHANGED BY C&P AT ANY TIME UPON AT LEAST THIRTY (30) DAYS' PRIOR WRITTEN NOTICE (WHICH MAY BE IN THE FORM OF A BILL INSERT OR OTHER WRITTEN NOTIFICATION). THE PAYMENT OF APPLICABLE CHARGES BY THE CUSTOMER, OR A REQUEST FOR SERVICE UNDER THE PLANS, AFTER RECEIV- ING SUCH NOTICE OF A CHANGE IN THE CHARGES OR OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS WILL BE DEEMED TO BE ASSENT BY THE CUSTOMER TO THE CHANGE(S) IN THE CHARGES, TERMS OR CONDITIONS. IF THE CUSTOMER DOES NOT WISH TO CONTINUE RECEIVING THIS PLAN UNDER SUCH REVISED CHARGES, TERMS OR CONDITIONS, CUSTOMER MAY SIMPLY TERMINATE ITS PARTICIPATION UNDER THE PLAN AT ANY TIME UPON NOTICE TO C&P. LIMITED 90-DAY WARRANTY C&P warrants for a period of 90 days that these services and products will meet accepted industry practices and be free from defects in materials or workmanship. Should any failure to conform to this warranty appear and be reported to C&P within said 90-day period, C&P shall reperform the nonconforming services, and repair or replace the nonconforming product(s). Such reperformance of work and repair or replacement of nonconforming products shall constitute the entire liability of C&P and sole remedy of the Customer under this warranty, whether claim or remedy is sought in contract, tort (including negligence), strict liability, or otherwise. THE FOREGOING WARRANTIES ARE EXCLUSIVE AND IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, WHETHER WRITTEN OR IMPLIED, IN FACT OR IN LAW. C&P DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY THE LIABILITY, IF ANY, OF C&P AND ITS EMPLOYEES AND AGENTS TO THE CUSTOMER OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SERVICE UNDER THESE PLANS, OR FROM ANY FAULT. FAILURE, DEFECT OR DEFICIENCY IN ANY SERVICE, LABOR. MATERIAL, WORK OR PRODUCT FURNISHED IN CONNECTION WITH THESE PLANS, SHALL BE LIMITED TO AN AMOUNT NOT IN EXCESS OF $500.00. IN NO EVENT, HOWEVER, SHALL C&P OR ITS EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR SPECIAL, INDIRECT. INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SERVICE UNDER THESE PLANS, OR FROM ANY FAULT, FAILURE, DEFECT OR DEFICIENCY IN ANY SERVICE, LABOR, MATERIAL, WORK OR PRODUCT FURNISHED IN CONNECTION WITH THESE PLANS (SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, TELEPHONE SERVICE OUTAGES AND ANY LOSS OF USE OF WIRING, JACKS OR TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT, AND ANY DAMAGES RESULTING THEREFROM). THESE LIMITATIONS OF AND EXCLUSIONS FROM LIABILITY SHALL APPLY REGARDLESS OF WHETHER A CLAIM OR REMEDY IS SOUGHT IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE AND STRICT LIABILITY). OR OTHERWISE. PLAN ELIGIBILITY These Plans are offered only to C&P's residence telephone Customers who use only standard single line telephone set(s). The Plans are not available to Customers with multi-line telephone equipment, systems or services (such as multi-line sets associated with common equipment, key telephone systems, Centrex service. private branch exchange (PBX) equipment). EXCLUSIONS The Plans do not apply to: (1 ) wire larger than 8-pair, unless otherwise expressly agreed by C&P: (2) wire or jack malfunctions or problems which arise prior to the commencement of the Customer's coverage under the Plan, or which are caused by abuse. acts of third parties, fire, or natural disaster; (3) inside telephone wiring and jack(s) which are non standard or do not comply with Part 68 of the Federal Communications Commission Rules: (4) wire or jacks which at the commencement of coverage are not in satisfactory condition or fail to meet C&P's technical standards: (5) wire located outside of the Customer's living unit in multi-tenant buildings: (6) restoration of your premises if you ask C&P to repair concealed wire: and (7) repair of the Customer's telephones or other premises equipment. TERMINATION The Customer may terminate participation in either Plan at any time simply by notifying C&P's local business office (or such other number that C&P may designate for such purpose). C&P may terminate the Customer's participation in these Plans without cause only upon thirty (30) days prior notice to Customer, but may terminate or suspend Plan participation at any time in the event Customer fails to pay all applicable charges when due. EFFECTIVE DATE Commencement and termination of coverage under either Plan shall be effective on a date to be determined by C&P, which shall not be more than 30 days after C&P receives the Customer's request(s) to commence or terminate the Plan. GENERAL PROVISIONS In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be invalid or unenforceable such invalidity or unenforceability shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision of this Agreement, and this Agreement shall be construed as if it did not contain such invalid or unenforceable provision. C&P shall not be liable for any delay or failure to perform its obligations if such delay or nonperformance arises in connection with any acts of God, fires, floods, strikes or other labor disputes, unusually severe weather, acts of any governmental body, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of C&P. C&P Telephone A Bell Atlantic Company SSI# 700 219 421 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 07:33:59 PDT From: Marty the Droid Subject: GTE Mobilenet and 7D vs 10D vs 1+10D Dialing I just tried some test calls on my GTE Mobilenet cellphone in the SF area. My number is in the 415 area. I tried calling 389-xxxx, 415-389-xxxx and 1+415-389-xxxx. All three calls went thru without a glitch. This functionality coupled with least cost routing on LD calls makes GTE look even better than $ellularOne. If only the GTE landwire folks could be run this well. Marty 'The Droid' Brenneis ...!uupsi!kerner!droid Industrial Magician droid@kerner.sf.ca.us (415)258-2105 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Jun 91 21:28:37 PDT From: Brian Gordon Subject: Surprise!! The good news is that, as of today, 01 Jun 91, PacBell has expanded its local calling area, so I can call work, for example, without incurring toll charges. The bad news is that, without notice, the "permissive" 1-plus dialing has stopped working. The normal dialing from 408 has been, for example, just 415-336-xxxx. It was permissible, however, to dial 1-415-336-xxxx, which, I presume, will someday become the norm. As of this morning, using the "1-" form reaches a reorder tone ... Doncha' just love those guys? ------------------------------ From: Albert Pang Subject: Cellular Modem Wanted Organization: INSL, McGill University, Montreal, Canada Date: Fri, 31 May 1991 21:54:18 GMT Does a Cellular Modem (as in cellular telephone with a RS232 connection) exist? Albert Pang albert@brahms.insl.mcgill.ca> Information Networks & Systems Lab McGill University ------------------------------ From: "Mark J. Christophel" Subject: Strange AT&T Advertisement Date: Tue, 28 May 91 11:02:33 EDT This is my first post, although I am a regular reader: The following advertisement appeared in last week's (Thursday, May 23) {Sun-Sentinel}. It was a small ad on one of the last pages of the newspaper. NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMERS ------------------------ AT&T filed with the Federal Communications Commission on May 17, 1991, new tax factors to recover gross receipts taxes imposed by certain states on interstate telecommunications services. The factor scheduled to become effective on July 1, 1991, in Florida is 2.25%. These surcharges will apply to the interstate charges of AT&T Long Distance, AT&T Reach Out(R) America, AT&T AnyHour Saver(Sm) Plan, AT&T SelectSaver(Sm) Plan, AT&T WATS and AT&T 800 Service, AT&T 800 READYLINE(R), AT&T PRO(Sm) WATS, AT&T MEGACOM(R) and MEGACOM 800 Services, AT&T Software Defined Network Service, AT&T International Long Distance and AT&T 900 Service. Mark J. Christophel rm1!mjc OR mjc@rm1 (305) 846-6873 [M. Christophel, Racal-Milgo, MS E112, Box 407044, Ft Lauderdale, FL 33340] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 May 91 21:54:59 PDT From: Donald Ekman Subject: PacBell Does Something Right Today Pacific Bell came to my house to install the second line that I ordered two days ago. They replaced the old cable from the pole to the house with a new, two-line cable. They replaced the old box with the new "Telephone Network Interface," which is a box in which my internal lines connect to a terminal block, which, in turn, connects to the telco line via a modular jack and plug. Just the thing for isolating problems to either my in-house wiring, or the telco line. It took exactly five minutes to connect my modem to the new line, and another two minutes to test the whole thing. Pac Bell, for once, did something right. You see this, John Higdon? :-) Donald E. Ekman | Disclaimer: Loral Space Systems/Loral | doesn't think I have Palo Alto, CA USA | any opinions. They ekman@wdl30.wdl.loral.com | are probably right. ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: International 800 Access Reply-To: rees@citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Fri, 31 May 91 15:30:19 GMT In article , Ken Jongsma writes: > For what it's worth: Two years ago, I was in Australia and was unable > to use USA Direct to reach a domestic US 800 number. However, several > months ago, I was in the UK and had no problems with USA Direct. Does USA Direct take Visa? Last time I tried this, they only took AT&T cards, so if you didn't have an account with AT&T you were out of luck. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #417 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03064; 3 Jun 91 0:11 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa03470; 2 Jun 91 22:42 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa01877; 2 Jun 91 21:35 CDT Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 21:30:27 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #418 BCC: Message-ID: <9106022130.ab00130@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 2 Jun 91 21:30:14 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 418 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson That Toddlin' Town Named the Ohm, Too! [Donald E. Kimberlin] Movie Review: The President's Analyst [Rob Boudrie] Re: Surprise!! [Brent Chapman] Re: Surprise!! [Bill Woodcock] Re: Cellular Harrassment at Airport Security [Fred E.J. Linton] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Rick Broadhead] Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire [Patton M. Turner] Re: Free Teletypes [David Lesher] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 11:09 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: That Toddlin' Town Named the Ohm, Too! We can all hum that song made so popular by several singers up to the inimitable Frank Sinatra. Through it, we can see Chicagoans have always known how to "party hearty." That's often our first thought about Chicago and what goes on thre. Great convention town, as many of us know from direct experience. Somehow, despite evidence that most of the early developers of telecommunications devices in America started in Chicago's environs, we never get a focus on the status of Chicago's contributions to our technology. It must have been a significant focus, for Chicago is also the birthplace of every basic unit of electrical measurement the world uses. Here's a quotation from Percy Dunsheath's "A History of Electrical Engineering," (Faber & Faber, London, 1962, pp. 302-303): "At the International Electrical Exposition held in Paris in 1881 much dissatisfaction with the postion was expressed by practical electrical engineers, who were still using widely `Weber' to denote the unit of current, measuring electrical pressure in terms of the equivalent number of Daniell cells and resistance in terms of miles of telegraph wire" "and the new names ampere, volt and ohm were adopted." "In 1891 the Board of Trade set up a Standards Committee `for the measurement of electricity for use in trade' which adopted the C.G.S. system of electrical units with the values of units determined by the original British Association Committee and adopted the names which that Committee had proposed: ohm, ampere, volt for the units of electrical resistance, electric current and electric pressure." "Two years later an important International Electrical Congress was held in Chicago under the presidency of Helmholtz with Britain represented by Preece, Ayrton, Silvanus Thompson and Alexander Siemens. "This Congress recommended the following as legal units: "RESISTANCE. The Internationa Ohm based upon the ohm equal to 10e9 units of resistance of the C.G.S. system of electromagnetic units represented by the resistance to an unvarying current by a column of mercury at the temperature of melting ice 14.4521 grams in mass of a constant cross section and a length of 106.3 cm. "CURRENT. The International Ampere, one-tenth of the unit of current of the C.G.S. unit represented by the current which when passed through a solution of nitrate of silver deposits silver at the rate of 0.001118 of a gram per second. "ELECTROMOTIVE FORCE. The International Volt, which is the electromotive force that steadily applied will produce a current of one International Ampere represented by 1000/1434 of the electromotive force of a Clark's cell at 15 degrees Centigrade. "The unit of quantity, the International Coulomb, was that quantity transferred by one International Ampere fowing for one second. "The unit of capacity, the International Farad, was the capacity of a condenser which a charge of one International Coulomb would raise by one International Volt. "The unit of work, the International Joule, was 10e7 units of work in the C.G.S. system or the energy expended when one International Ampere flows through a resistance of one International Ohm for one second. "The unit of power, the International Watt, 10e7 units in the C.G.S. system or the power when the expenditure of energy is at the rate of one International Joule per second. "The unit of induction, the International Henry, or the induction in a circuit when a pressure of one International Volt is induced by a change of one International Ampere per second." Shortly later, Dunsheath writes, "By this time" (1908) the same units of resistance, current and e.m.f. had been adopted by all the principal countries if the world." (For those interested, these International units are ten times larger than what we use everyday, which are called the "practical units," based on the M.K.S. system of measurement instead of the C.G.S. system used in the basic physics laboratory. We signify the practical units by NOT capitalizing their names, while the larger International Units are capitalized. But be careful: Some units, like the Baud, are used as internationally standardized and are capitalized anyway. However, not only do telecomm people almost always write the term Baud incorrectly, they typically horrobly misuse it, anyway. Your 2400 bps modem does NOT transmit or receive 2400 "Baud," unless you want to play word games about it doing so because it's operating full duplex! Regardless, your 9600 NEVER transmits 9600 "Baud" in any event.) While the units named in Chicago have undergone slight adjustment in the intervening century, they remain the units we all use daily in any aspect of telecommunications work. And I'll bet those famous heads of science who met in Chicago in 1893 enjoyed the fabled hospitality and great steaks of That Toddlin' Town, as well! ------------------------------ From: Rob Boudrie Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 00:28:21 EDT Subject: Movie Review: The President's Analyst "The President's Analyst" is an old (early 70's I think, but I may be off) movie starring James Coburn. The President has a psychiatrist, James Coburn, who is targeted for kidnapping by TPC. The shrink is in a fone booth and the door locks behind him, at which time a telco truck drives up and loads the locked booth with Coburn in it onto the back of the truck. The truck driuves to telco headquarters (somewhere in NJ, I assume), and the phone booth (with Coburn in it) is placed on a conveyor belt taking him past displays of the wonders of telco technology. The best part is the movie they force him to watch -- done in true "public utility PR style" talking about the tremendous benefits of the fone chip they want implanted in every newborn's brain. This will allow all the implanted people to call any other implanted person merely by thinking of that person's number and thinking the communication (sort of the ultimate "follow me roaming"). Seeing this movie is a must for anyone who has ever had an interest in telecom, especially those us of dating from the days of TAP. I don't remember how it turned out, and it was mediocre as movies go, *BUT* the true to life nature of the telco promo movies in it was hilarious. If anyone remembers other funny or remarkable scenes from the film, please post them. Rob Boudrie rboudrie@encore.com ------------------------------ From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: Surprise!! Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1991 19:18:03 GMT Brian Gordon writes: > The good news is that, as of today, 01 Jun 91, PacBell has expanded its > local calling area, so I can call work, for example, without incurring > toll charges. > The bad news is that, without notice, the "permissive" 1-plus dialing > has stopped working. The normal dialing from 408 has been, for > example, just 415-336-xxxx. It was permissible, however, to dial > 1-415-336-xxxx, which, I presume, will someday become the norm. As of > this morning, using the "1-" form reaches a reorder tone ... > Doncha' just love those guys? Either PacBell already corrected this problem, or else it's something isolated to your local switch or PBX. I live and work just on the 408 side of the 415/408 border, while most of my friends live and work in 415. I habitually dial "1-415-xxx-yyyy". I made several calls from 408-745 to 415 yesterday (June 1) without any problems, and I just now explicitly verified that both "1-415-xxx-yyyy" and "415-xxx-yyyy" work from my home phone (408-745). Are you sure this one is PacBell's fault? Brent Chapman Telebit Corporation Sun Network Specialist 1315 Chesapeake Terrace brent@telebit.com Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Phone: 408/745-3264 [Moderator's Note: Incidentally Brent, I *love* your company's new T-1600 modem. It is working out quite well here at Digest HQ. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Woodcock Subject: Re: Surprise!! Date: 2 Jun 91 19:41:17 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing Brian.Gordon@eng.sun.com writes: > The bad news is that, without notice, the "permissive" 1-plus dialing > has stopped working. The normal dialing from 408 has been, for > example, just 415-336-xxxx. It was permissible, however, to dial > 1-415-336-xxxx, which, I presume, will someday become the norm. As of > this morning, using the "1-" form reaches a reorder tone ... > Doncha' just love those guys? Whew. Well, I just tried from my phone in Santa Cruz (408-425-XXX) to my phone in Berkeley (415-843-XXXX) and got through with the 1-plus dialing, but got the "Sorry, but you must first dial a one..." when I tried without. But then I have to dial a 1+7D to get to San Jose, too, and 1+408+7D _doesn't_ work. :-) Yeah, I just can't get enough of that great Pac*Bel logic either. Does this mean that after the 415/510 split, we'll be getting free unlimited calls to a _different area code_ if we have flat-rate service, and are calling back and forth from SF to the East Bay? Does that happen anywhere else? Bill Woodcock BMUG NetAdmin bill.woodcock.iv..woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu 2355.virginia.st..berkeley.ca.94709.1315 [Moderator's Note: Although we do not get flat-rate service, we do get untimed local calls within an eight-mile radius for about four cents each. Many subscribers have a mix of 312/708 in their local area, and I think Centel gives their Park Ridge/Des Plaines customers flat rate unlimited service into IBT's Chicago-Newcastle and Chicago-Ohare COs. Also, the far south side of Chicago (312) and the extreme northeast corner of the southern suburbs (708) get local untimed calls back and forth to each other as well as to selected places in 219; ie, Hammond/ Whiting. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 2-JUN-1991 15:37:55.87 From: "Fred E.J. Linton" Subject: Re: Cellular Harrassment at Airport Security In article alexb@cfctech.cfc.com (Alex Beylin) writes: > I've always wondered what they do with laptops that require AC > power to operate. Is there a three-prong AC plug at the security > station? There certainly was one at the security station that wanted to check out the little immersion heater I carry for boiling water to brew tea in motels in strange towns -- when I pointed out that the heater would quickly self-destruct if it were not immersed in water while plugged in, the agent concerned with me had a colleague dutifully fetch some water, too. There's no end of conveniences available at those stations :-) . Fred or ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 02 Jun 91 16:30:38 EDT From: Rick Broadhead Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus In Vol. 11, Issue 413, dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > Were you calling a commercial establishment? A college dorm or campus? > Some other place where you were dialing directly to an extension of a large > private network? To answer your question: I heard the double-ring when calling the "Management Services" department at Toronto City Hall. Rick Broadhead ysar1111@VM1.YorkU.CA ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 16:18:19 CDT From: "Patton M. Turner" Subject: Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire Steve Gaarder writes: > [ Pat, concerning your suggestion of going underground: A reasonable > thing to suggest, since you live in the Midwest where the soil is soft > and sandy. Here it's heavy clay, and, since it's through the woods, > full of roots as well.] Try renting a small drop plow or trencher (ditch witch). I think I'd prefer the trencher over a vibratory plow if you think you will run into roots. > BTW, I'm also looking for entrance blocks (lightning protectors) or > sources for same. Absolutely, if I remember you are going to use the lines for data com (not RS-232 I hope, at that distance). Many serial ports use CMOS chips which are extremely sensitive to static electricity. Last month lightning damaged several serial ports on the engineering Sun network here at Auburn, even though the cable runs were fairly short (but unshelded). I think Specialized Products Corp. carries gas discharge protectors built into a DB25 connector. As far as wire, I think C-wire (drop wire) is hard to beat if you are going to use unshelded cable. It can be run overhead or plowed in the ground. ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Free Teletypes Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 18:56:07 EDT Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers [about teletype machines and radio stations] I know two stories about news TTY's, from different era's, but with common threads: 1945 {The Cleveland Press}, like any other paper of its time, had many machines. There was the A wire, the sports, etc. etc. Well, they sat next to each other in the City Room, and made non-stop noise. If one was stopped, another three were sure to be running. You just ignored it. If the circuits died, they ran 'open' (clacking but not printing anything) until the loop was fixed. But late that summer, they ALL stopped at once. Dead. The silence was so profound that everyone in the building knew about it at once. Silence continued. After an interval described by one there as "seemingly hours later" but likely only a minute or so, they ALL restarted with the same message -- the war was over. 1970's. At a classical music station of some fame, located on a river with the same name as the Prince of Wales (hint;-}) the machine sat way in the back of the station, in a semi-soundproof phonebooth sized chamber. Now, news is not the forte of classical music stations. If fact, if it were not for some FCC rule I'm sure John Hignon can quote, they'd do away with it entirely. So for the three daily newscasts, the 'voice' would run back, rip off the previous four + hours of stuff, and choose an article or two. Of course, you got time for this task at about 30 seconds before the hour ;_] But that day, somebody at Cheyenne Mountain had loaded and fed, not the weekly NORAD test tape, but the WAR! one. Confusion reigned across the US as the wrong code was used to cancel the bogus message. Some stations ignored it. Others followed the law and went off the air ASAP. The lead station in "our fair city" [the one that the others have CONALRAD receivers tuned to] choose to ignore it. It took hours to straighten out. Can you imagine the look on the personality who finds a forest of paper on the machine, most of which indicates that the USA has been at war for four + hours, and Wxxx is still on the air? Gulp. wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (305) 255-RTFM ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #418 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03204; 3 Jun 91 23:49 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24463; 3 Jun 91 20:55 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa30616; 3 Jun 91 19:49 CDT Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 19:46:09 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #419 BCC: Message-ID: <9106031946.ab07870@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Jun 91 19:45:45 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 419 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Surprise!! [John Higdon] Re: Surprise!! [Roger Fajman] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Steve Bellovin] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Skip Collins] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [A. Satish Pai] Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? [Scott Dorsey] Re: Homebrew Networking [Brad Hicks] Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire [Bill Nickless] Re: Two Beepers, One Number [Darren Alex Griffiths] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 20:14 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Surprise!! Brian Gordon writes: > The bad news is that, without notice, the "permissive" 1-plus dialing > has stopped working. This is a programming problem in your individual CO. There would be no reason to block the permissive '1' in calling long distance. A '1' is still permitted (but not required) from my 408 telephones. Bill Woodcock writes: > Yeah, I just can't get enough of that great Pac*Bel logic either. > Does this mean that after the 415/510 split, we'll be getting free > unlimited calls to a _different area code_ if we have flat-rate > service, and are calling back and forth from SF to the East Bay? Does > that happen anywhere else? Frequently. As a matter of fact, Mountain View and Los Altos (415) are Zone 1 (local) to San Jose 2 (408). Southern Fremont (415) is local to San Jose 1 (408). In both cases, the full ten (or eleven in the case of calls from 415) digits must be dialed to complete a LOCAL call. And yes, if you have unmeasured residence service the call is free. This also is the case in many places in the Los Angeles area, and in many other places around the country, as Pat suggests. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Roger Fajman Date: Mon, 03 Jun 91 19:24:33 EDT Subject: Re: Surprise!! > Yeah, I just can't get enough of that great Pac*Bel logic either. > Does this mean that after the 415/510 split, we'll be getting free > unlimited calls to a _different area code_ if we have flat-rate > service, and are calling back and forth from SF to the East Bay? Does > that happen anywhere else? Here in the Washington, DC, area we have flat rate local calling among three area codes (202, 301, 703). We also have a quite large local calling area centered around DC and including much of the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. Unfortunately, it is flattened in the northwest and so does not include my home in Ashton, MD. :-( However, when the 301 area code splits, I will be able to dial local calls to three area codes from there too. Here we now have to dial the area code in front of a local call to another area code. When that went into effect, a 1 in front of the area code would not be accepted. However, I just tried a few calls and found that the 1 seems to be optional now. I also found that I could also prefix a local call in my own area code with 1 and the area code, which also did not work before. I was doing this from a Centrex line on the 301-402 exchange. It might work differently elsewhere. Roger Fajman Telephone: +1 301 402 1246 National Institutes of Health BITNET: RAF@NIHCU Bethesda, Maryland, USA Internet: RAF@CU.NIH.GOV ------------------------------ From: Steve Bellovin Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Date: 3 Jun 91 20:10:32 GMT Reply-To: Andy Sherman Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ In article , DREUBEN@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes: > So does this mean that we will all need to know at least *two* PIN > numbers now? > And how is everyone supposed to know that "If it's a local call use my > BOC card, while if it's an inter-LATA call use my AT&T card"? How many > people actually can tell in advance what is a intra- compared to an > inter-LATA call? Caveat: this is not authoritative, but I did ask somebody about this. Right now, the LECs supply card verification services to the IECs. With the new cards, that relationship will be reversed. AT&T will supply card verification service to the LECs for an intra-LATA call billed to an AT&T Card. This is already being done by the Universal Card people. You can bill intra-LATA calls to your Universal Card, but without the 10% discount applied to AT&T calls. Note that AT&T will *NOT* be providing card verification to other interexchange carriers. This should deal with the oft-expressed concerns of our customers that they not be billed by an AOS for calls placed on an AT&T Card. I hope this sets your mind at ease. > Now I don't consider my friends, parents, and relatives to be all that > ignorant on how to use a telephone, but I just can't see how THIS is > going to be explained to them by AT&T and/or the BOCs. AT&T and the > BOCs sure didn't do a good job when it came to warning people about > AOSs until quite late in the game; I am wondering how much more > confusion this nonsense will cause. Tell them to use their AT&T Card. Period. Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928 READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking! ------------------------------ From: Skip Collins Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Date: 3 Jun 91 19:30:03 GMT Organization: JHU/APL, Laurel, MD DREUBEN@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes: > So does this mean that we will all need to know at least *two* PIN > numbers now? Why don't the telephone companies allow customers to *choose* their own PINs, as some banks now do for their ATM cards. More than one sequence of 14 digits would be hard for many people to remember. If it is illegal for local and long-distance carriers to exchange and coordinate such matters, why aren't consumers given the option to make their own lives simpler? Just a thought. Skip Collins, collins@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu ------------------------------ From: "A. Satish Pai" Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Reply-To: "A. Satish Pai" Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven CT 06520, USA Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1991 15:46:34 GMT [Brian = bicker@hoqax.att.com (Brian Charles Kohn). SE = someone else.] SE> "When it arrives, you'll notice that your new card looks different. SE> It even has a DIFFERENT ACCOUNT NUMBER FROM YOUR CURRENT AT&T CARD. SE> (Emphasis added). In order to comply with government requirements, SE> AT&T is no longer sharing card numbers with your local telephone SE> company. Now, AT&T is issuing new card numbers that are exclusive to SE> AT&T." SE> So does this mean that we will all need to know at least *two* PIN SE> numbers now? Brian> Actually ... the new calling card number will be different from ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Brian> your phone number. It will be a new 14 digit number to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Brian> remember. I don't understand the above statement. My Calling Card (issued two years ago) has a number that is not my home or other phone number (in fact I didn't have residential phone service when I applied for the card). I've seen promotional literature from AT&T saying explicitly that you don't need to have a phone number of your own to get the card. And the number has 14 digits, too (except that they're all on the card, there is no PIN, unlike the Universal Card). So what's the difference from the older cards? One thing different that I _have_ seen (in pictures of the new card in ads) is that the "international number" seems to have an extra six digits prefixed to it compared to the one on the older cards, and there is a two-digit "authorization code" also on the card. Since I haven't got any notification from AT&T about my Calling Card, I presume that I can still use my card according to the instructions I received when I got it. Does this mean, then, that there are actually two different ways of calling internationally with AT&T cards? What are the extra digits there for on the newer cards? Satish Internet: Pai-Satish@CS.Yale.Edu | A. Satish Pai UUCP: ...!{uunet,harvard,decvax,ucbvax}!yale!pai | Bitnet: Pai@YaleCS | +1 203 432 1286 [Off.] Mail: Box 2158, Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520 | +1 203 436 2061 [Res.] ------------------------------ From: Scott Dorsey Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? Reply-To: Scott Dorsey Organization: NASA Langley Research Center Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1991 13:01:31 GMT In article bill@rose3.rosemount.com (William M. Hawkins) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 416, Message 8 of 8 > I just returned from a visit to the Pavek Wireless Museum in a suburb > of Minneapolis. It's a three year old museum with a major collection > of wireless stuff. It also contains a Vitaphone Lathe, dated 1926, > with a model number of WE D85249 (yes, it looks like a serial number, > but that was on another plate). A single motor drives the turntable > from one end and the lathe screw from the other. The placard says > that Selsyns were used to couple the camera and the recording lathe. > Selsyns are back to back three phase synchronous motors. Well, the > transmitter is a generator and the receiver is a motor. So, that's > how they synchronized sound and picture. Still, I didn't think a > director could make a film a reel at a time, without cutting and > splicing. Something had to be used for sound editing, to go with the > film editing. Yup. The projector actually had mechanical coupling, but the recording was done with a selsyn arrangement. Some of the earlier Vitaphone lathes just had a 60 Hz synchronous motor which would synchronize with the indentical motor on the camera, by virtue of their being on the same power line. Because the loads were different, though, the motor slip was different and they didn't stay synched too well. Sound editing was done with a bank of synchronized turntables, a mixer, and a synchronized cutting lathe. Scenes would be shot with three cameras all synched together, and the film edited seperately, but maintaining the same length and pattern so that the edited film would stay in synch with the sound. Often scenes really would last for a full reel, and the scenes were shot all in one take with no editing within. > The placard also said the lathe cut a 17.5 inch disk, which was used > to press 16 inch copies. The disk on the turntable looked like metal, > and the head looked like it could dig a serious groove in the metal. > The 'card also said 33 RPM. Maybe they dropped the third of an RPM. The disk was a sheet of aluminum with a nitrate or acetate coating on it. There are also some glass transcription discs out there with similar coatings, though I don't believe they were used for Vitaphone. Makes me glad I live in the 1990's, with my nifty Nagra. Or is this the 1960's? Something like that. scott ------------------------------ Date: 03 Jun 91 10:16:59 EDT From: "76012,300 Brad Hicks" <76012.300@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Homebrew Networking > Is this illegal? ... Will they eventually get really p-o'ed at me? This exact question came up in the news less than a year ago, less than a hundred miles from me. A guy in central Missouri figured out a deal by which he could get lower intraLATA rates by hopscotching once, and set himself up to do it. Then he got REALLY creative: he put some kind of multiplexor on each end so that up to eight conversations could ride the same circuit, and "sold" access to the other seven pseudo-circuites, openly and publicly, to people in his part of the state. The savings for them was something like 30% or 50% off of standard intraLATA charges from SWBT. When they finally caught on to this (the mills of bureaucracy grind slowly), Southwestern Bell gave birth to a porcupine with all attendant sound effects, and hit the guy with about a dozen lawyers. If memory serves, the final settlement gave them the right to charge him enough extra to make it uneconomical, but not the right to recover damages. IMPORTANT NOTE: Almost all of the above is from dim memory. To get an accurate account, call the St. Louis Post-Disposal (excuse me, Post-Dispatch) or the St. Louis Riverfront Slimes (excuse me, Times) and ask them for a copy of their articles on the subject. (Front page stuff in both papers.) It's late, and I don't have a phone book handy; you can get both numbers from (314) 555-1212, of course. Or maybe somebody here knows the full story? [For direct replies, save me a lot of money and use jbhicks@mcimail.com; CI$ is just easier for me to hit via the company QuickMail system.] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 11:09:06 CDT From: Bill Nickless Subject: Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire When you find the right wire and tools and get ready to do the job, don't forget to contact the appropriate utilities so they can tell you where the 25 kilovolt electric main is buried on your property, or the 128-fiber AT&T AT&T Long Lines trunk. Bill Nickless nickless@andrews.edu or nickless@flash.ras.anl.gov (708) 972-7390 or (616) 927-0982 ------------------------------ From: Darren Alex Griffiths Subject: Re: Two Beepers, One Number Date: 3 Jun 91 15:09:40 GMT Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA In article levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) writes: > I own two Motorola digital pagers type BPR2000 Model A03BGB4661C. One > of them is currently receiving messages from a local beeper provider > and the other one is not. > The serial number seems to be contained on a long white plug in chip > that is labeled "Motorola Permacode Code Plug". > Is there any way to reprogram this chip or to purchase a new chip that > matches the number of my other beeper? Ick, I'm don't believe that is the most elegant way of solving the problem. I've had to deal with similar situations many times and normally you can call the provider and they will make a small change to flag both beepers during a call. The company I use makes this type of change free of charge and the cost would be the rental of two beepers plus one phone number. I suppose it would be even cheaper if you own the beepers. I also find it useful to have multiple numbers on one beeper. For example, I currently have a voice mail/pager system on one number, I primarily use this for personal stuff, and two seperate numbers that I've given to my two biggest clients. The advantage of this is that each number also has a different letter illuminated (the A B C D at the bottom of most Motorola pagers) so I have a pretty good idea who is paging me. All of this costs about $22 a month, including pager rental, which seems cheap to me. I suppose the next step would to get an alphanumeric pager and have my computer send the subject line of each mail message I receive to it, although there is a such a thing as being to available. Cheers, darren alex griffiths (415) 708-3294 dag@well.sf.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #419 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05276; 4 Jun 91 0:32 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21480; 3 Jun 91 23:02 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31956; 3 Jun 91 21:56 CDT Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 21:34:39 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #420 BCC: Message-ID: <9106032134.ab16066@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Jun 91 20:34:30 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 420 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: MCI $20 Promotion [John Higdon] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Rob Stampfli] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Andy Sherman] Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone [Robert L. Oliver] Re: Two Beepers, One Number [John A. Weeks III] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Steven King] Re: PacBell Does Something Right [Ole J. Jacobsen] Re: PacBell Does Something Right [John Higdon] Re: Surprise!! [David E. A. Wilson] Re: Cellular Modems [Ron Dippold] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 00:06 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion Rick Anderson writes: > My question to the net: is it legally feasible to cross out this > endorsement message, sign the check, collect the $20, and then legally > expect to not be switched over to MCI?? If you want to be extra sleazy (and let your conscience be your guide), the following scam will work and will not cost you any money. It assumes existing service with PacBell and AT&T (mileage with other providers may vary ...) First, notify PacBell that you suspect that MCI is about to slam your service. A note will go into your records that you made the call and the normal charges to switch the account (in case the "slamming" occurs) will be waived. Then call AT&T and tell them the same thing. AT&T will for some fixed period repeatedly place PIC orders, changing your service back to AT&T. If it already is AT&T, the order is ignored. If not (and is MCI), your PIC will be switched back to AT&T. You will not be charged by PacBell because of the previous call the that business office. How do I know this will work? Recently, I had some dealings with a reseller who I expected to pull just such a trick (change my PIC). I called PacBell, who said that while nothing could be done to stop such an order, a note could be made in my records to allow the switches of the PIC without charge. At the same time, AT&T offered to repeatedly put through PIC change orders to specify AT&T. I was told to check for PIC and if I found that it was changed to call AT&T or PacBell immediately. > I realize they will probably switch you over regardless of what you > do, but by crossing out the endorsement message, haven't you taken > away the "ok" for them to switch you over? Remember, there is nothing to stop you from switching back, unless the "contract" states that acceptance of the money requires you to languish with MCI for some period of time. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Rob Stampfli Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion Organization: Little to None Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1991 03:26:49 GMT > [Moderator's Note: As soon as you cross out the special endorsement > you no longer have the right to cash the check which was issued as > payment for your having given permission to change your phones. When > you withheld your permission, you had no right to the money. And > please, no one needs to reply saying 'you have the right to keep > things of value which arrive in the mail unsolicited'. This was not > 'something of value'. It was a contract they were requesting you to > sign in exchange for immediate payment for doing so. Big difference. PAT] Pat, Put the shoe on the other foot: Suppose I wrote on the back of a check to MCI, in payment of a regular monthly bill: "By depositing this check, MCI agrees, for the value received, to provide the issuer of said check with phone service for the rest of his natural life, with no additional charges to be incurred." Are you really saying that if MCI should happen to not catch this and cashes the check, that they have entered into this contract? And if they do catch it, cross out the verbage and deposit the check anyway, are they guilty of some heinous crime? Then, what makes you or I different from MCI? I am not a lawyer, and neither are you. I have tried very diligently to get an answer to this question (not related to the MCI offer, incidently) and the best that I could ascertain was that it is far from a clearly defined point of contract law. I may morally agree with what you say, but I don't believe it would make a strong case in a court of law. Rob Stampfli, 614-864-9377, res@kd8wk.uucp (osu-cis!kd8wk!res), kd8wk@n8jyv.oh ------------------------------ From: Andy Sherman Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: 3 Jun 91 18:30:21 GMT Reply-To: Andy Sherman Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ In article , YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick Broadhead) writes: > [Moderator's Note: I don't know if you meant it the way it came out, > but the telephone instrument has *nothing* to do with the ring you > hear as the caller. What you heard must have been some kind of fluke; > some temporary switch problem. PAT] He might have hit a PBX or Centrex that uses a double ring to indicate an outside call. Having moved around the Joisey locations of Bell Labs quite a bit, I've encountered this feature in ESSX (a centrex), Dimension, and System 85. Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928 READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking! ------------------------------ From: "Robert L. Oliver" Subject: Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone Organization: Rabbit Software Corp. Date: 3 Jun 91 22:49:55 GMT brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor) writes: > Ken Oberman wondered when COs would stop supporting pulse-dial > (rotary) phones. Well, PBX's already have; the UCSD Ericsson MD-110 > will not allow an extension phone to pulse-dial any number with a "1" > (one) in it -- it interprets the single pulse as a switchhook flash and > gives you a fresh dialtone. Sounds like a misconfiguration or a bug in the Ericsson to me. The switch should be able to tell the difference between a 1 and a flash. Further, you imply that OTHER numbers can be pulse dialled, indicating that pulse dialing IS supported. I suspect that the person who configured your Ericsson figured that no pulse phones would be used, and they set the flash interval so small that it cannot be distinguished from a 1 (our old ITT 3100 PBX could be so configured). It makes flashing easier: you don't have that annoying problem of trying to flash but realizing that you haven't held the hook down long enough. Used to happen to me all the time until I convinced our ITT maintenance people to change the flash interval; it was ridiculously high. Never encountered these problems with our current AT&T System 25. The defaults are apparently just right. Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM Malvern, PA 19355 ...!uunet!cbmvax!hutch!robert ------------------------------ From: "John A. Weeks III" Subject: Re: Two Beepers, One Number Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1991 17:10:46 -0500 Reply-To: "John A. Weeks III" Organization: NeWave Communications Ltd, Eden Prairie, MN In article levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) writes: > The units are identical in every way (including frequency) except for > the serial number. I would like to have both units beep when the > signal comes in so that I could carry one unit and my partner could > carry the other. Only one of us would be on call at any given time, > but it would be nice to not have to pass the unit back and forth > constantly. As long as you expect to pay for service for two pagers and not just one, I am sure that your paging service would be more than happy make this change for you. > The serial number seems to be contained on a long white plug in chip > that is labeled "Motorola Permacode Code Plug". The permacode sets the code that the page will respond to. These are replacable parts, and most pager service centers and many paging services carry spare code plugs, but few carry duplicate code plugs. You would end up having to order a new code plug. Expect to spend $100 or so for the new code plug. If your paging service has two duplicate code plugs of a different code, it might end up cheaper to change both pagers to a new code. John A. Weeks III (612) 942-6969 john@newave.mn.org NeWave Communications, Ltd. ...uunet!tcnet!newave!john ------------------------------ From: Steven King Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Date: 3 Jun 91 19:31:48 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group, Arlington Hgts IL In article colin@array.uucp (Colin Plumb) writes: > (Not that I expect anyone here to have any difficulty finding some > inessential space in a portable computer if they wented to create a > "working" bomb.) My feelings exactly. I've had to travel with a reasonably large (about 50 pounds with case) HP analyzer at times. When I bring it as a carry-on item airport security invariably wants me to unpack it and turn it on. I know that there's LOTS of room in there to fit exposives and a timer and still have the thing perform as advertised. Oddly, on a trip to Israel (you know, terrorism central?) last month I brought the analyzer as checked baggage. On the Chicago -> Zurich leg they took it no questions asked. (And I specifically told them, "This is computer equipment. PLEASE DON'T X-RAY IT!" Dunno if they did or not, but it still worked when I got there so I don't really care. :-) For the Zurich -> Tel Aviv leg all luggage had to be re-checked, and on that one they had me unpack the analyzer so they could run some sort of explosives sniffer over it. No one ever asked me to actually turn it on, though. (Good thing. I later found out I was missing the fuse needed for 220V AC.) Steven King, Motorola Cellular (...uunet!motcid!king) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 15:48:31 PDT From: "Ole J. Jacobsen" Subject: Re: PacBell Does Something Right You're lucky. I had to really work hard to convince the installers that they should rip out several generations of interface boxes and clean it all up with a six-line box for me and a two-line box for the guy downstairs (we share a garage in which the boxes are located). The installers told me that while it is in the company's interest to introduce the new telephone network interface boxes as much as possible, it is *not* in the installers' interest, as the nifty new boxes reduce service calls for which these guys get paid. One bad thing that they did do and I did not discover until after they were done: In order to get all my lines installed they had to pull out the existing five-pair underground cable and replace it with two five-pair cables (or so I thought). Since the conduit was so tight (it took them five hours to pull the 60 feet or so to the nearest pole) they "cheated" and intstalled a three-pair plus a five-pair. I have six lines, the other guy has two. 3 + 5 = 8 and 6 + 2 = 8, so now there is no room for expansion! Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions--The Interoperability Report Interop, Inc., 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040, Phone: (415) 941-3399 FAX: (415) 949-1779 Email: ole@csli.stanford.edu Direct: (415) 962-2515 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 20:23 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: PacBell Does Something Right Donald Ekman writes: > It took exactly five minutes to connect my modem to the new line, and > another two minutes to test the whole thing. Pac Bell, for once, did > something right. You see this, John Higdon? :-) Yes, it certainly makes perfect sense for PacBell to remove your old drop, replace it with two-line overhead drop, and install a modern demark when you added ONE (1) line. On the other hand, it also apparently makes sense to the powers that be at PacBell to have an entire corner of my house covered with six types of protectors and ten haphazard single-line drops feeding them. A recently suggested theory is that this is PacBell's infliction of punishment for my having so many lines. Now for $300/month, it could all be provided on T1. Hmmmm .... could it be a sales pressure tactic? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: David E A Wilson Subject: Re: Surprise!! Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 03:29:55 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Although we do not get flat-rate service, we do get > untimed local calls within an eight-mile radius for about four cents > each. Does this mean that the telco has the exact geographic co-ords for each phone number so that a call to one house [(abc) def 1234] is untimed but a call to another house on the same exchange but > eight miles away [(abc) def 1235] is timed? Or is it based on distances between exchanges so that if you are lucky you could be further apart as long as the two exchanges in question were within eight miles of each other? Our local calls are untimed (22c soon to be 24c) and can reach 30km to the north and south but only 5km to the east and 10km to the west (the Pacific Ocean and Illawarra Coastal Ranges get in the way) from my home. This is based on exchange districts - calls to your own district or an adjacent one are local. David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au [Moderator's Note: They measure from one central office to another, as the crow flies. Any central offices within eight miles of the central office serving you in any direction make up your local calling area. I get a smaller area here since I am two miles west of Lake Michigan. I cannot call eight miles east! But my eight miles north gets me into Glencoe, IL. To the northwest, Skokie and Niles. West to the Chicago central offices of Kildare, Irving, Merrimac and Newcastle. South to the Chicago central offices of Lakeview, Superior, Illinois-Dearborn. Directly southeast of me is Chicago-Edgewater. 'My' CO is Rogers Park. There might be 10-11 miles between subscribers if both are at the outer edges of their own district. The plan here is fair to all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ron Dippold Subject: Re: Cellular Modems Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 22:01:08 GMT On the subject of cellular modems and laptops, I've run into something that others might have encountered a fix for. It seems the high-powered laptops such as the Toshiba 5200 don't have any provision for running off of a 12-V DC input. I can imagine that your typical low-power 12-V input might be insufficient to run something like this, with a hard drive, 16 megs of memory, 25 MHz 386, VGA screen, etc. However, we need something that powerful (and we need the slots). Seeing as how a car battery can provide a substantial amount of power, I was wondering if anyone knew of any product that would allow us to run something like this off of the car's lighter jack, or even to hook directly to the battery if necessary. Or of any portable with that much power and a slot that you can take along with your cellular phone. Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks. | Ron Dippold ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #420 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07936; 4 Jun 91 1:39 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19671; 4 Jun 91 0:10 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac21480; 3 Jun 91 23:03 CDT Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 22:33:30 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #421 BCC: Message-ID: <9106032233.ab27425@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Jun 91 22:33:01 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 421 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Fred R. Goldstein] Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? [John Higdon] Re: 900 Numbers and Privacy [Tom Perrine] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Bill Huttig] Re: Movie Review: The President's Analyst [Donald E. Kimberlin] CORNET (was AT&T Announces New 800 Number) [Andy Sherman] Looking For Ringback Number [Rick Broadhead] Telecom References in Movies (Was The President's Analyst) [Dennis Pratt] Caller ID in the UK [Scott A. McIntyre] Telecom and Nixpub Systems Questions in Great Britain [Kai-Uwe Herbing] Markey Bill on Telemarketing [Robert Jacobson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: 3 Jun 91 21:47:37 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Fred R. Goldstein writes: >> 2) The No. 1 Crossbar generated double ring on some numbers. Few are >> left in service but 703 is PacBell so there may be a few left ... > What? Did I read that right? Last time I was in the Commonwealth of > Virginia, the RBOC was the descendent of C&P. --- Mea Culpa. I read "704" instad of "703" and thought about oranges, talking mice, and various other fruits and nuts who hang out in PacBell land. I doubt that Virginia has any 1XB's left. But I may be wrong. 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? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 22:44 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Produce Sound Recordings? George Horwath writes: > finally marketed it as the graphophone. This was the device that ^^^^^^^^^^^ > [Moderator's Note: Did you mean 'gramaphone'? PAT] No, this is not a typo. Several reference works talk about the 'graphophone'. This is understandably confusing. By the way, things like this have been appearing at the end of some digests: > ^A^A^A^A Are they the result of your new 'modemphone'? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: The four control-A's which appeared at the end of the re-transmission of issues 410-411-412 were inadvertently forgotten. I sent the remailing from the archives copies, and the symbols there mark the end and start of each issue. Sorry. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Perrine Subject: Re: 900 Numbers and Privacy Date: 3 Jun 91 22:44:28 GMT Reply-To: Tom Perrine Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California In article gast@cs.ucla.edu (David Gast) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 413, Message 2 of 13 > Someone wrote yesterday: >> At the end it reports that 900 numbers increasingly capture the >> callers' numbers and translate them to addresses. According to Sprint >> Gateways, the US Sprint 900 department, they are able "to identify the >> names and addresses of the nine closest neighbors of the original 900 >> caller. With this information, additional qualified prospects can be >> identified for database marketing efforts." > Finally, I am curious about the nine closest neighbors. My guess is > that it is nine numbers close by, probably arranged by address. I > doubt that US Sprint actually has detailed maps indicating the > location and configuration of every apartment and house on every plot > of land. It would be interesting to know who my nine closest > neighbors are or even the nine closest neighbors of my parents. Where > do they measure from? Where the phone enters the building? The > center of the property? All in all, I would estimate that Sprint is > exaggerating its claims again. At least, I hope they do not have > these detailed maps. One very simple way to find your "nine-closest neighbors" is by using ZIP + 4. I discovered this while extensively researching privacy issues (killing time while waiting in the Post Office line). I saw the new ZIP + 4 directory, and decided to look up my address and see just how close someone could match me, based on only my ZIP + 4. I discovered that I share a ZIP + 4 with *one* neighbor. When I saw this, I skimmed through the book and noticed that in most instances, it appeared that there where no more than 8-12 addresses to a ZIP + 4. I live on a fairly generic street of single-family homes in a city (Poway) which is adjacent to San Diego. I do not know how ZIP + 4 deals with high-occupancy buildings, but I suspect that a ZIP + 4 could be set up to handle one or more floors of a single building. (Actually, I seem to recall that ZIP + 4s are grouped together to form the routes that the Post Office assigns to letter carriers.) I suspect that your "nine-closest neighbors" share your ZIP + 4, or are otherwise matched from adjacent ZIP + 4s. Tom Perrine (tep) |Internet: tep@tots.Logicon.COM |Voice: +1 619 597 7221 Logicon - T&TSD | UUCP: sun!suntan!tots!tep | or : +1 619 455 1330 P.O. Box 85158 |GENIE: T.PERRINE | FAX: +1 619 552 0729 San Diego CA 92138 ------------------------------ From: Bill Huttig Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Date: 4 Jun 91 02:14:03 GMT Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL In article "A. Satish Pai" writes: > My Calling Card (issued two years ago) has a number that is not my > home or other phone number (in fact I didn't have residential phone > service when I applied for the card). I've seen promotional literature > from AT&T saying explicitly that you don't need to have a phone number > of your own to get the card. [stuff deleted] > So what's the difference from the older cards? > One thing different that I _have_ seen (in pictures of the new card in > ads) is that the "international number" seems to have an extra six > digits prefixed to it compared to the one on the older cards, and > there is a two-digit "authorization code" also on the card. Since I > haven't got any notification from AT&T about my Calling Card, I The difference is that the old non-subscriber cards are issued in area code 507 and 508 with a exchange that is inposible (starting with a 0 or 1) and are handled through various BOC's, I had one that was billed by Cincinatti Bell a few years ago. They provided verification for the AT&T to the LEC's. The new cards start with a 83x where x is a 6 or 8. The international part of the number is 891253 xxx xxxx xxxx x xx the 89 is the internation standard for phone card the 1 is for the North America country code. The 253 id's it as a AT&T card the xxx xxx xxxx is the same as the US version. The x xx are additional verification numbers. I was surprised that the number 253 was used as Carrier ID and not 288 like the PIC. It would have made more sense to use the PIC's. Bill [Moderator's Note: I think all the non-subscriber AT&T cards were handled by Cincinatti Bell for many years ... maybe still. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 09:46 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Movie Review: The President's Analyst In Digest v11iss418, Rob Boudrie describes the closing scenes of a film that ought to be in the curriculum of every student of telecommunications. Rob asks for recall of earlier scenes, all of which probably run on and on to the casual viewer. The earlier scenes do, however all build the thread that the world has some all-pervading, all-knowing super spy organization called TPC. Because the President's analyst knows what's on the mind of the President of the U.S., every spy organization wants to capture him for interrogation. For most of the film, James Coburn (the actor who portrayed "Our Man Flint" in a number of 007 spoof films) is chased, captured and escapes from every major spy organization in the world. Through all this plot-building, no matter where Coburn is, on land, at sea (indeed at one time under it in a Russian sub) or in the air while being chased by one spy service after another, he is under constant color video and audio surveillance by TPC. Truly, TPC has telecommunications ability equalled by no other organization on the planet. But, threaded through every adventure the President's analyst embarks on is a non-stop series of "telephone gags." Many of these are "inside jokes," hilarious to anyone who was ever inside the monopoly U.S. telephone esablishment; perhaps puzzling and boring to a non-initiate. Among the more obvious gags are a scene in the Washington bar where spies of all nations meet for a drink at the end of a hard day. Each has to check in with their respective national HQ, comparing notes about how rotten the phone company is in their home nation. In the scene Rob mentions, the President's analyst has finally escaped bearing nothing but but his undershorts, and finds himself along a road through open Canadian wheat fields - with nothing in view but a telephone booth. His attempts to place a collect call to the White House, but lacking the demanded coin the idiotic operator is only going to return after taking the call order, are the penultimate example of Lily Tomlin's "Ernestine the Operator." Whoever the author of "The President's Analyst" was, that person certainly had to be "on the inside" in the bad old days of the monopoly era of telecommunications. Today, it can be found in the "oldies and classics" section of many video rental stores for a very low rental price. I heartily recommend viewing this film to every serious student of telecommunications as a very entertaining object lesson in what the study all came from. It's a great way to pick up on what the cognoscenti are talking about here in the Digest! ------------------------------ From: Andy Sherman Subject: CORNET (was Re: AT&T Announces New Technical Reference 800 Number) Date: 3 Jun 91 18:51:15 GMT Reply-To: Andy Sherman Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ In article , nstar!bluemoon!sbrack@ iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: > A quick, simple question: what is Cornet? > [Moderator's Note: Cornet is the internal phone network of AT&T. Like > many large nationwide corporations, they have their own internal network. > I wonder what they pay for it and who they get it from? :) PAT] CORNET is on the way out. At most locations it's already been replaced with a Software Defined Network (SDN). You dial 1+NPA+NXX+xxxx and some other magic routes the call. Most locations have switched over some time ago. There are chargebacks for SDN calls, since the business unit that provides the service sure wants the revenue shifted from *your* books to *its* books. Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928 READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 02 Jun 91 17:00:57 EDT From: Rick Broadhead Subject: Looking For Ringback Number Pat: I'm not sure if this is an appropriate question for the list, but I'm looking for the telephone number that will cause my own telephone to ring (there must be an acronym to describe such a number, but I don't know what it is). The number used to be 41091 but then the telephone company changed the switching equipment for my exchange (487), and now, dialing that number generates a "We're sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed...." announcement. Dialing 57 + the last five digits of your phone number seems to work on almost every exchange but my own. I expected that once my exchange had been serviced, I would be able to use this method like everyone else. But, dialing 57 + the last five digits of my own phone number brings "You have dialed a number to which long distance charges apply...." Obviously, I can't ask Bell for the number. Do you have any idea how I'd go ab out looking for it (I'm in 416)? Thanks. Rick Broadhead ysar1111@VM1.YorkU.CA [Moderator's Note: The ringback number varies from one community to the next. There is no set rule. Maybe someone in area 416 reading this who knows the answer will write you direct. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dennis Pratt Subject: Telecom References in Movies (Was: The President's Analyst) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1991 09:06:30 DST Organization: GTE Labs, Inc. Other important telecom aspects of The President's Analyst included: * All phone company employees were actually PR robots. * The phone company had video bugs planted all over the world. * The phone company was more powerful than the KBG, CIA, FBI, etc. I would like to compile a list of telecom references from popular movies (and what those references were). I particularly liked the Cheers episode two years ago in which Robin Colcord (sp?) phones Cheers from a plane (using, perhaps, GTE Airfone). The connection was extremely poor, causing a mis-communication, and leading to the humorous episode. Sam also implied that Robin used AirFone only to impress people. Please email any telecom references from movies that you remember to DGP0@bunny.gte.com. Dennis Pratt New Service Modeling Techniques Service Concept Design Department GTE Laboratories, Inc., Waltham, MA (617) 466-2910 ------------------------------ From: "Scott A. McIntyre" Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1991 14:05:16 BST Subject: Caller ID in the UK I was just browsing through a flatmates copy of Cosmopolitan and in the back, in the advertising section under Personal was a device called something like the Inquisitor. Essentially, it's a Caller ID box that displays the area code and phone number of all incoming calls. It is also programmable to ignore calls from certain area codes or precise numbers. It also boasts a automatic dialer and a few other widgets. As far as I am aware, this is the first of these deviced to be on the UK market. I would think that it will not be trememdously successful since most of the UK is not on Tone yet (the device requires it). If anyone wants any more information, let me know, I'll copy down the advert and submit it. Scott ------------------------------ From: Kai-Uwe Herbing Subject: Telecom and Nixpub Systems Questions in Great Britain Date: 2 Jun 91 12:25:28 GMT Organization: netmbx, Berlin, Germany Hey folks, I am interested to go from Germany to Great Britain and therefore I research the conditions concerning access to the net. I would like to know, if there are any nixpub systems in Great Britain, how high are the prices, the British Telecom charges you pay per minute (average) and so on. If this is'nt the right newsgroup to ask all this, please refrain from flaming me, but direct me to the right one, because I found none fitting better. Please respond by e-mail. Thanks in advance for your help. Kai-Uwe Herbing | phone 49-30-3126145 Strasse 28 D-1000 Berlin 12 | herbing@netmbx Fed.Rep.of Germany | herbing%netmbx@db0tui6.bitnet ------------------------------ From: Robert Jacobson Subject: Markey Bill on Telemarketing Organization: Human Interface Technology Lab, Univ. of Wash., Seattle Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1991 05:46:14 GMT Rep. Markey of the House Subcomm. on Telecomm has introduced a bill that would create a national telemarketing "NO CALLS" list, to which telemarketers could not make calls without assuming legal liability. It has been covered in almost every newspaper of record, and chances of its passage are rated high. Is anyone on the East Coast tracking the progress of this bill? Thanks for your report, if you are. I drafted an almost identical bill for the CA legislature which passed in 1989, only to be vetoed by our then-Governor Deukmejian ... so you know where I stand on this matter.) :-) Bob Jacobson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #421 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10513; 4 Jun 91 2:46 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab09912; 4 Jun 91 1:18 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac19671; 4 Jun 91 0:11 CDT Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 23:12:37 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #422 BCC: Message-ID: <9106032312.ab10661@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 3 Jun 91 23:12:31 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 422 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telephone Advertising Consumer Rights Act (HR1304) [bparrish] The FCC Says it Wants to Hear From You! [Donald E. Kimberlin] Click on Line After First Ring - a New Noise [Andy Rabagliati] Funny Ringing Tones in North America [Dave Leibold] Underground vs Aerial Plant [Jim Redelfs] Inta-LATA Calls by AT&T, and 800 via USA Direct [John R. Covert] Mux's For Sale [Glen Lovell] Videophones? Telewriters? [Artur Matuck] Baud-y Bits (Was That Toddlin' Town Named the Ohm, Too!) [Al Varney] 950 Carrier Access From Canada [Dave Leibold] Re: New Mexico Cell Questions [John R. Covert] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Telephone Advertising Consumer Rights Act (HR1304) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 12:57:45 PDT From: bparrish Re: HR1304 (Markey) Bill If anyone is interested in getting a copy of the bill, just give a call to your congressman ... I did so last week, and have a copy on my desk right now. The bill basically sets up a database that telemarketers must query before calling to sell things ... anyone who wants to can request to be in the database indicating that they do not wish to receive unsolicited sales calls. Much of the text deals with the FCC's responsibility to figure out how to set up and pay for the database. Interesting points ... It includes lots of rules about faxes ... "Telephone Solicitation" is defined as "the initiation of a telephone message for the purpose of encouraging a person to purchase, rent, or invest in property, goods, or services without that person's prior express invitation or permission". Note the exclusion of fund-raising. Maybe the politicians still want to be able to do it themselves? There is a restriction making it unlawful to "...use any automatic dialing system to make unsolicited calls -- (A) To any emergency telephone line or pager of any hospital, medical physician or service office, health care facility, or fire protection or law enforcement agency; or (B) to any telephone number assigned to paging or cellular telephone service" Notably missing from this are non-emergency lines in hospitals (i.e. patient rooms) although I suppose a hospital could list all their patient rooms on the "restricted" database. I personally know of a case of a telemarketeer making a call to a labor room at a local hospital ... my wife was labor coach for a friend and told the telemarketer to go soak his head. Autodialers must state the identity of the company making the call, and "when technically practible (given the limitations of the telephone exchange service facilities) after the called party hangs up, automatically create a disconnect signal or on-hook condition which allows the called party's line to be released." The bill is 12 pages long,(double-spaced) and makes pretty interesting reading. I personally would prefer that "solicitation" included fund-raising. I don't know the status of the bill wrt committees and whatnot, except what is on the cover "referred to the Committee on Enery[sic] and Commerce"... but it's kind of fun to finally see something in writing. Bill Parrish (bparrish@hprnd.rose.hp.com) HP Roseville CA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 01:12 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: The FCC Says it Wants to Hear From You! The June 1 issue of TE&M has an interesting article on page 18; one that indicaes a route that might be useful to suffering sole practitioner consultants who need some recognition. It goes as follows: "FCC COURTING VIEWS FROM NON-D.C. PLAYERS "The FCC's first look at `Networks of the Future' won't be it's last, according to Office of Plans and Policy Chief Robert Pepper, who is considering how commissiners can get more regular contact with telecom industry players whose jobs are not wooing Washington. "The commission had an _en_banc_ hearing last month where technicians and users described how the telecommunications network will develop, which communications products consmuers want, and what innovative projects are underway. Overriding thems were the increasingly blurry lines among voice, data, broadcast, cellular andother communications technologies, and the need for an applications platform similar to that in the computer industry, so vendors and users who plug into network are assured of uniform specifications. "Pepper says commissioners want to hear more from network users in the field and especially on ideas about specific applications. His office is considering ideas for regular contact between the FCC and the world outside the Capital Beltway. "He agrees that tecnology is blurring the distinction among communications media, but doesnot see a massive FCC reorganization as a result. He concludes however, that the commission `must be flexible enough to make changes along with technology, including better work across traditional bureau boundaries." --------------- ...This certainly should be an opportunity for anyone with the gumption to write a letter to Pepper at the FCC's M Street address. ------------------------------ From: Andy Rabagliati Subject: Click on Line After First Ring - a New Noise Organization: SGS-Thomson/Inmos Division Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 05:55:51 GMT Here in Colorado Springs (US West) I have noticed both on our PBX at work, and my home phone, that there is a click on the line after the first ring. Is this 'shutting out' Caller*Id that I havent paid for? Turning on the bug "they" have on me :-) ? Thanks. Cheers, Andy - andyr@inmos.COM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 23:48:00 PST From: Dave Leibold Subject: Funny Ringing Tones in North America Reply-to: dleibold@attmail.com Regarding the double ringing tone of numbers in 416-392, that prefix is used by the City of Toronto for municipal services, and presumably a DID connection to their PBX. 416-393 is for the Metro level of government in Toronto. Thus, it's the PBX ringing tone that comes across (and PBX rings are normally faster than your average phone line). Not too many years ago, when step-by-step switches dotted the Toronto landscape, it was possible to get all kinds of error tones depending on which exchange was dialed. There were sirens for wrong numbers or invalid prefixes, or there were recordings, or there were many types of fast busy signals to be had. With the conversion of just about everything to DMS switches in Bell Canada territory, everything will soon sound the same. mail to: dleibold@attmail.com Dave Leibold - via IMEx node 89:681/1 Dave.Leibold@f135.n82.z89.onebdos.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 02 Jun 91 20:30:02 CST From: Jim Redelfs Subject: Underground vs Aerial Plant Reply-To: ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@uunet.uu.net Organization: Macnet Omaha > When I look at old photographs of Chicago, say from the 1900-1920 > era, all I see in the sky are telephone poles and wires running > everywhere. The wires criss-cross in all directions running up and > down the streets, etc. And now, telephone poles, while not rare, are > far less common here. In the downtown area you don't see one for > blocks at a time. In the residential areas, we have poles in the > alley behind the houses in many areas, but very few on the main > streets. They have buried almost everything. When Northwestern Bell Telephone Company celebrated its centennial (1979) they published an EXCELLENT book, "Good-bye Central, Hello World", specially commissioned for the occasion. In the book was a photograph of downtown Omaha's Harney Street - and the maze of overhead wires. As I recall, the poles had TWELVE cross arms! In the book it was mentioned that the Omaha City Council passed an ordinance mandating that NWB have ALL plant UNDERGROUND (between the Missouri River and 24th Street) by 1935! One of the things that, as a phoneman, strikes me is when I drive into Lincoln, NE. Lincoln Telephone and Telegraph Company STILL has MANY, major feeder cables hanging in the air along MAIN streets! Most of the distribution cables are enshrouded in squirrel-guard. Heaven only knows how old the plant under it is! What galls me is that we spent the last 20-30 years BURYING all (most) of our plant then, in a couple, short years, CATV hung "it" all back up there again! JR Tabby 2.2 MacNet Omaha 402-289-2899 On loan from Mrs MacWidow (1:285/14) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 06:51:57 PDT From: "John R. Covert 03-Jun-1991 0933" Subject: Inta-LATA Calls by AT&T, and 800 via USA Direct It's time to end some misconceptions. Some folks have been complaining about AT&T being prevented from handling Intra-LATA calls when MCI and Sprint are allowed to do so. This is simply not true. Whether carriers other than the local telco can carry Intra-LATA traffic or not is determined on a state-by-state basis by the local DPU/PUC/PSC/CC. If the local regulatory authority decides to permit Intra-LATA competition, each carrier wishing to compete must file a tariff with the local authorities. AT&T has chosen not to file tariffs for most kinds of Intra-LATA service, even where they would be allowed to do so. In the case of Massachusetts, AT&T has chosen not to handle Intra-LATA Message Telephone Service (1+ and 0+ calling), but does handle other kinds of Intra-LATA service, such as Readyline 800, Megacom, and Software Defined Network (SDN). So quit your moaning about AT&T being unfairly picked on. In re calls to 800 numbers via USA Direct: This is a service that AT&T has only been providing for about a year now. So the reports of people trying a couple of years ago without avail are true, but were before the service was offered. To use the service, you must have either an AT&T or local exchange carrier calling card. Third number or collect billing is not possible, nor is billing to any bank or travel and entertainment cards. When I used the service almost exactly a year ago from Bermuda, a call to a fictitious number in Pittsburgh appeared on my bill. Calling that number yielded a recording explaining the USA Direct 800 calling service. Back then, the USA Direct operator (who can be on a console anywhere in the country; many of them are in North Carolina), had to pass the call on to another operator. Now the software in the normal Toll Services Positions has been modified so that the first operator can directly connect the call. AT&T will provide the service only to AT&T 800 numbers -- this is because to do otherwise would not only cause people to receive calls from areas other than those specified in their contracts with MCI/Sprint or whoever, but would also provide a benefit to their competition which AT&T seems to consider not to be worth the small added revenue of handling the call. john ------------------------------ From: Glen Lovell Subject: Mux's For Sale Date: 3 Jun 91 14:51:20 GMT Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF For Sale !!! 15 (ea) Teltone M-825 T-1 asynch Multiplexers. Just taken out of service, excellent condition... *32 line without modem control *31 line with modem control *9600 Baud and below with error-correction *19200 without error-correction *T1 lightning protected *Internal span power for driving repeaters *1 mile at 26 guage 2 pair shielded without repeaters Great gear. $ 750 per pair or best offer. Glen @ (301)338-8096 or GDL@JHUVMS.HCF.JHU.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 12:20:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Artur Matuck Subject: Videophones? Telewriters? Does anyone know where to find info to eventually acquire videophones and telewriters? I am trying to set up an international art telecommunication event and I heard some people are already using those devices. How do I find them? Thanks, Artur Matuck ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 18:22:20 CDT From: Al Varney Subject: Baud-y Bits (Was: That Toddlin' Town Named the Ohm, Too!) Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: [a lot of stuff about partying in Chicago, but leaves out the details!] > But be careful: Some units, like the Baud, are used as internationally > standardized and are capitalized anyway. However, not only do > telecomm people almost always write the term Baud incorrectly, they > typically horrobly misuse it, anyway. Your 2400 bps modem does NOT > transmit or receive 2400 "Baud," unless you want to play word games > about it doing so because it's operating full duplex! Regardless, > your 9600 NEVER transmits 9600 "Baud" in any event.) Well, NEVER say NEVER! Don't forget that there are "modems" that interface to AT&T's digital (DDS) network that really send 9600 "symbols"/second. The DDS network doesn't convert the user's bits to analog signals, it instead multiplexes them to a DS0-compatible 56-Kbps bipolar format, then encodes that into a single 64-Kbps T1 channel. The receiving end just undoes the multiplexing/encoding. In the interest of fairness, I should mention that almost any real carrier will support private-line or direct-connect service of this type, including Mr. Kimberlin's company. Of course, maybe this doesn't fit your idea of a "modem". And I agree the terms "baud" and "Baud" are mis-used by telecom people, even "horrobly". The "operator's manual" for my SupraModem 2400(tm) uses "bps" almost everywhere, and even defines 2400 bps as "600 symbols per second". But in Appendix A, "Result Codes", the meaning of "CONNECT 2400" is "Modem has connected at 2400 baud." Maybe you have to mis-define the code in order to be compatible with the "industry-standard AT command set"?? What does a Hayes manual say? Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 23:40:00 PST From: dleibold@attmail.com Subject: 950 Carrier Access From Canada Reply-to: dleibold@attmail.com Brian Crawford asks: > Is "950" carrier access available FROM Canada (B.C. specifically)? The straight 950 prefix (or 10xxx for that matter) doesn't operate in Canada ... yet. However, that prefix seems to be reserved for eventual carrier access. Some payphones and switches have been found to treat the 10xxx syntax properly (though only a recording comes on at this point). In the meantime, MCI can be reached from Canada via their 1 800 950.1022 number, while Sprint's 1 800 877.8000 number worked from Toronto in recent times. These are available only to those who have active billing with these carriers (such as US residents, or Canadians who move to Florida :->). Information about other carriers (Allnet, Metromedia/ITT, etc) is unknown as I didn't have their 800 access numbers. U.S.-bound calls seem to default to AT&T when dialing 1+ out of Canada. At least directory assistance calls to California are greeted with thanks for using AT&T. Also, payphones that take cards (which are not too common) will accept AT&T's card, along with Canadian telco cards, Visa, MC, and Amex. It's a good bet that dialing the card number (ie. 0 + area code + number card #) will accept the AT&T cards. Now if the CRTC (Canadian regulator) can open up 10xxx at least for the U.S.- bound calls from Canada. It shouldn't matter to the Telecom Canada folks once the call crosses the border. The concern seems to be use of U.S. carriers to make calls from one Canadian point to another, cutting Bell Canada, Unitel, etc out. BTW ... does anyone know if the calling number is passed along when a 950 is dialed, or does the carrier completely rely on the called number and the card number with this? David Leibold dleibold@attmail.com Uucp - via IMEx node 89:681/1 Uucp@f135.n82.z89.onebdos.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 May 91 11:47:54 PDT From: "John R. Covert 31-May-1991 1440" Subject: Re: New Mexico Cell Questions > As to the "B"s: Is there a "B" in Santa Fe? No one was sure about > this, and there was some suggestion made that a new system had been > set up but no info was available yet. Any word on this? U.S. West has the license to operate the B system, but have not built it yet. Their Albuquerque system reaches to just barely the southern edge of Santa Fe, they tell me. For more info, call them on 800-238-7848. john ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #422 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21177; 5 Jun 91 4:19 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06402; 5 Jun 91 2:40 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31951; 5 Jun 91 1:32 CDT Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 1:10:08 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #423 BCC: Message-ID: <9106050110.ab04426@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 5 Jun 91 01:09:59 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 423 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [J. Philip Miller] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Rob Woiccak] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Dave Niebuhr] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Joshua E. Muskovitz] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Mike Riddle] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Jim Redelfs] Re: Movie Review: The President's Analyst [Scott Dorsey] Re: Movie Review: The President's Analyst [Roy M. Silvernail] Re: Cheap 9600 bps Modem [Robert Dinse] Re: One City With Two Area Codes [Carl Moore] Re: International 800 Access [David Heale] Re: Surprise!! [Fred R. Goldstein] Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Key Pads) [Steve Forrette] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Philip Miller" Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 23:14:06 CDT Skip Collins writes: > Why don't the telephone companies allow customers to *choose* their > own PINs, as some banks now do for their ATM cards. Well at least with the AT&T Universal card, you can change your PIN to whatever you want. Just call them and change the one they have assigned to you. J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 uunet!wuarchive!wubios!phil - UUCP (314)362-2693(FAX) C90562JM@WUVMD - bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Jun 91 08:16:12 EDT From: rob woiccak Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Skip Collins sez: > Why don't the telephone companies allow customers to *choose* their > own PINs, as some banks now do for their ATM cards. In fact, some do. I called up Bell Atlantic to acquire a calling card yesterday morning and after going through the rigormorole of supplying name and number, the operator asked if I wanted to choose a PIN of my own (the last four digits that is). I was a bit stunned and just stammered, "um, no, I'll let you do it". rob woiccak zengineer -- rewoicc@erenj.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 7:33:38 EDT From: "Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093" Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? I recently changed my NYTel PIN (reason unimportant) and found that I had to select a new four-digit number and give it to a second person. Not bad. However, a few days later a card arrived from ATT (my long distance carrier) with my new PIN on it. I was curious but didn't pursue the matter at that point. A few days after that the new NYTel card arrived. The difference between the two is that the ATT card has my full phone number, PIN and International number whereas the NYTel card has just the PIN. I called ATT and asked why I received a new card since I hadn't made the request to them. The answer was that the local BOC forwarded the number to a processor and the third party went ahead and cut two cards (one ATT and one NYTel). It seems that these two outfits share the same database for PINs. However, the ATT operator couldn't answer what would have happened if I had Sprint, MCI or any other long distance company. Dave Niebuhr Brookhaven National Laboratory BITnet and Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov [Moderator's Note: What would have happened is you would have received a different card and a different PIN. Only AT&T and the local telco share a calling card data base, and AT&T will not be doing with the local telco much longer. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 09:38:51 EDT From: "Joshua E. Muskovitz" Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? I've been an MCI customer for years and I've ALWAYS (well, with one exception noted below) had my MCI calling card be the same first 10 digits of my phone, and then a different PIN from the RBOC. Makes sense to me. All I have to remember is which PIN to use. The only time this didn't work was after my last move. The MCI rep set up my account incorrectly (but issued cards). After realizing the mistake, they cancelled service and set it up again (this time correctly). This was in a matter of minutes. But when they went to issue me a calling card (for the new account), the computer recognised that a card had been issued for that phone number and instead issued a scrambled card number. When I finally got the card, I called MCI and asked about it. After about five minutes, they figured out what had happened, cancelled those cards, and issued me new cards based on my phone number. Since I was going on a trip and wouldn't have the new cards in time (and they couldn't tell me the PIN) they told me to use my RBOC / (ATT) card and they would reimburse me for the difference in rates, when the bill came. All in all, very nice service. (Although I've had some really bad service from them, too.) ------------------------------ From: Mike Riddle Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion Organization: Nebraska Inns of Court Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 13:25:48 GMT In colnet!res@cis.ohio-state.edu (Rob Stampfli) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: As soon as you cross out the special endorsement >> you no longer have the right to cash the check which was issued as >> payment for your having given permission to change your phones. >> [deleted] >> It was a contract they were requesting you to >> sign in exchange for immediate payment for doing so. Big difference. PAT] > I am not a lawyer, and neither are you. I have tried very diligently > to get an answer to this question (not related to the MCI offer, > incidently) and the best that I could ascertain was that it is far > from a clearly defined point of contract law. I may morally agree > with what you say, but I don't believe it would make a strong case in > a court of law. Well, I'm a law school graduate but not yet admitted to any state bar, so I guess this is just going to be over-educated ramblings, but here's my two cents worth. The issue of endorsements on the back of checks is subject to the Uniform Commercial Code and is, as the last poster suggested, not entirely clear. "It Depends" is the best answer one can give, separate from the specific facts in a case. When I received the MCI offer recently, the qualification was also on the front of the check and an enclosed letter clearly explained the offer. I don't know, of course, if this format was followed anywhere else, but in my semi-professional opinion, if /I/ had endorsed the check, I would have been accepting their offer to switch. Which I didn't, for reasons which will remain my own. <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>> riddle@hoss.unl.edu | Nebraska Inns of Court ivgate!inns!postmaster@uunet.uu.net | +1 402 593 1192 Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet | 3/12/24/9600/8N1/V.32/V.42bis ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 02 Jun 91 18:51:35 CST From: Jim Redelfs Subject: Re: MCI's $20 Promotion Reply-To: ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@uunet.uu.net Organization: Macnet Omaha Rick Anderson wrote: [Regarding MCI's $20 check - the endorsement of which grants them permission to change your PIC (long distance carrier) to MCI] > is it legally feasible to cross out this endorsement message, sign > the check, collect the $20, and then legally expect to not be > switched over to MCI? To which Pat replied: > As soon as you cross out the special endorsement you no longer have > the right to cash the check which was issued as payment for your > having given permission to change your phones. When you withheld your > permission, you had no right to the money. I agree with that, Pat. After I (recently) received my check from MCI, I did some thinking - AND some calling to the US WEST Communications Business Office. I did not see among the promotional literature that accompanied the check anything that indicated a TIME constraint - how long one MUST remain with MCI following the cashing of the check/cutover to MCI. "We" charge $5 (total) to change a customer's long distance carrier. I wonder if MCI will allow THE CUSTOMER to pay that charge (out of the $20 check)? I assume so. So the net value of the check is reduced to $15. After a period of time, the customer could initiate a PIC-change to another carrier, incurring yet another $5 charge by the RBOC. At that point, the net value of MCI's promotion to the end user is a CLEAR, $10! Not a bad deal, really. It just depends on how much value one places on his/ her time - to place the PIC-change order. JR --- Tabby 2.2 MacNet Omaha 402-289-2899 On loan from Mrs MacWidow (1:285/14) ------------------------------ From: Scott Dorsey Subject: Re: Movie Review: The President's Analyst Reply-To: Scott Dorsey Organization: NASA Langley Research Center Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 13:40:41 GMT In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > But, threaded through every adventure the President's analyst > embarks on is a non-stop series of "telephone gags." Many of these > are "inside jokes," hilarious to anyone who was ever inside the > monopoly U.S. telephone esablishment; perhaps puzzling and boring to > a non-initiate. The President's Analyst really is a spectacular film. I have a 16mm print of it underneath my bed and invite any comp.dcom.telecom readers to view it if they ever find themselves in the southern Virginia area. scott ------------------------------ Subject: Movie Review: The President's Analyst From: "Roy M. Silvernail" Date: Mon, 03 Jun 91 22:42:41 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN rboudrie@encore.com (Rob Boudrie) writes: > "The President's Analyst" is an old (early 70's I think, but I may be > off) movie starring James Coburn. [...] > I don't remember how it turned out, and it was mediocre as movies go, > *BUT* the true to life nature of the telco promo movies in it was > hilarious. If anyone remembers other funny or remarkable scenes from > the film, please post them. You had mentioned the movie Coburn was forced to watch ... Pat Harrington played the quintessential Phone Company announcer/PR flack, narrating the movie and explaining why they needed Coburn to convince the President of the necessity of their plan. As he's going on, the camera pans down to a close-up of his right foot, shot from behind. Into the heel of his shoe is plugged a standard-looking cord-board cord and plug, with the cord trailing off-screen. At the end of the movie, there is a brief scene with a roomful of TPC types standing and watching the video clandestinely taken in Coburn's house, as he's reunited with his friends and allies. A close-up of Harrington, with a sentimental tear in his eye pulls back and pans the roomful of PhoneDroids, and as the camera pans, you see that _all_ of them have the same cord exiting their right heels. That's my favorite James Coburn movie. I've yet to see it in a video store ... is it available? The TPC movie is truly a classic; all those Bell Labs films we saw in grade school, thrown in a blender. Thanks for reminding me! Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ From: nanook@eskimo.celestial.com (Robert Dinse) Subject: Re: Cheap 9600 bps Modem Date: 2 Jun 91 17:32:44 GMT Organization: ESKIMO NORTH (206) 367-3837 SEATTLE WA. In article , hoepfner@heawk1.gsfc.nasa. gov (Patrick Hoepfner) writes: > There is also a V.32bis, V.42bis, MNP5 and send/receive Fax modem from > Prometheus selling for around $700! > Get 'em while their hot! Haven't had any experience with the Prometheus 9600 bauds, but for their 2400 baud external modems, "Get 'em while their hot!" is appropriate, I could could just about fry an egg on the ones I used to have. I had to take the option card out of one of them or it would hang up on people as soon as it answered. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 10:12:15 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: One City With Two Area Codes That is 917 (not 918) to be used for cellular/beeper in NYC. 918 is in use in Oklahoma, including Tulsa. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: International 800 access Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 10:02:48 BST From: D.Heale@ee.surrey.ac.uk Attempts to dial American 800 numbers from the UK sometimes give one of two recorded messages (otherwise they just give number unobtainable tone). The messages are: "The number you have dialled is unobtainable, please check the number and try again," and "Your international call could not be completed as dialled, please check the number and try again 2EN". Both of these imply that the user has missdialled rather than international calls to the number being blocked. Presumably there is a table of valid area codes at one of the international exchanges and any code not listed returns these messages, whether it is non-existant or blocked. David Heale ------------------------------ From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Subject: Re: Surprise!! Date: 4 Jun 91 18:54:35 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) writes... (Actually, Pat sez:) > [Moderator's Note: They measure from one central office to another, as > the crow flies. Any central offices within eight miles of the central > office serving you in any direction make up your local calling area. In some cases they use the location of the CO, but in others, they bill to a "rate center" at a fictitious location. This is useful to the telco when "contiguous exchanges" get a lower rate than nearby non-contiguous exchanges. By splitting one CO into multiple exchanges, they reduce the local/cheap radius! New England Telephone does this a lot. Medford, Everett and Melrose MA are all exchanges, with their own billing locations, but they don't have CO's; all are served by the Malden CO (which has a lot of prefixes). Likewise, Charlestown, MA is an exchange served by the Boston-Bowdoin CO, whose other codes are in the Boston Central exchange. Dover (in 508) by the Needham CO (in 617), etc. In some other cases, a CO has different prefix codes for different localities but they're billed as one. Mattapan served by Milton and West Medford by Arlington are examples. Hence the distinction between the CO serving area (which may be part of an exchange, or more than one exchange) and exchange area itself (which is a line on a map). Confusing, eh? 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? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 23:02:00 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) In article Jamie Mason writes: > Of course, now we have computer keyboards on fast computers > which will accept chracters faster than Superman could type. And my > local switch can handle my modem dialing with DTMF tones of less than > a 35ms duration. This reminds me of a "pet peeve" (sic?) that I have with the newer modems. Both the Hayes 9600 V-series and the $74 2400 card-modem I have won't accept an ATS11 value (DTMF duration) of less than 50ms. The default seems to be 100ms. The Hayes will take a smaller value, but use 50 during tone generation. The clone returns ERROR for a value less than 50. The old 1200 geniune Hayes that I have will take values down to 1ms, and actually do it as well. Since my switch will reliably take 36ms, I see no reason to not allow me to dial at that speed. Anybody (Toby?) know why the newer modems are handicapped/differently-abled in this manner? Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu [Moderator's Note: And while Toby is answering that, here is another question: how come US Robotics has a condition you can set which allows for 'quick dialing', or dialing without waiting the obligitory two seconds before starting? Hayes used to claim (maybe still do) that telco tariffs require a two second pause before dialing. You could not set that particular S-register less than 2. Telebit seems to feel the same way ... but USR lets you go off hook and bang those digits right out if you set the register for it. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #423 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23468; 5 Jun 91 5:22 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac06371; 5 Jun 91 3:48 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab06402; 5 Jun 91 2:40 CDT Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 1:52:45 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #424 BCC: Message-ID: <9106050152.ab06609@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 5 Jun 91 01:52:32 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 424 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Free Teletypes [Roy M. Silvernail] Re: Motorola PC-500 Problems (was DiamondTel 99X) [Scott Stratmoen] Re: ONA Offers New Horizons for Telesleaze [Brandon S. Allbery] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Tom Perrine] Re: Cellular Modems [Dave Platt] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Patton M. Turner] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Max Rochlin] Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire [Jim Redelfs] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Free Teletypes From: "Roy M. Silvernail" Date: Mon, 03 Jun 91 22:55:36 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) writes: > [about teletype machines and radio stations] > But that day, somebody at Cheyenne Mountain had loaded and fed, not > the weekly NORAD test tape, but the WAR! one. Confusion reigned across > the US as the wrong code was used to cancel the bogus message. Some > stations ignored it. Others followed the law and went off the air > ASAP. Hey, I remember that! It was 1973, I think ... my first year in radio. As I recall, the message I saw was the weekly Associated Press EBS test, but the AP threaded the wrong tape, and we saw the real McCoy message. The authentication codes checked out and everything. (big thrills as the news director finally got to rip open one of those red envelopes). We might have paid more attention, though, if it had come in some other time. The message arrived on Saturday, in the early afternoon (Bering Time), exactly the same time the AP _always_ ran the EBS test. I think AP began moving their tests around after that. It seems that very few stations took it seriously. > Can you imagine the look on the personality who finds a forest of > paper on the machine, most of which indicates that the USA has been at > war for four + hours, and Wxxx is still on the air? Gulp. Oh, yes, I can imagine. I also remember the look on an announcer's face when he was blasting through a bunch of news, and came across a wire piece that had actually been composed on the KSR tape-punch machine we had. It looked exactly like an authentic wire story, but was heavily peppered with un-airable expletives. He got about two syllables into it, and began to stammer and splutter, as we in the other room were collapsing in laughter. (radio folks are fun folks... some day, I'll tell you about getting pied in the face in the midst of a newscast :-) Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ From: Scott Stratmoen Subject: Re: Motorola PC-500 Problems (was DiamondTel 99X Weakness) Date: 2 Jun 91 15:23:57 GMT Organization: Scott Stratmoen, Arlington Heights, IL In article heiby@mcdchg.chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 412, Message 6 of 14 > Saw your message about your PC-500. You refer to a *dealer* > dissatisfaction issue. Motorola loves its customers and your > satisfaction is our number one goal. Publishing dissatisfaction with > us rather than the dealer is counter-productive. You provide enough > information to infer that the phone was NOT NEW. If used, warranty is > NOT transferrable. Regardless, I would like to speak with you and > resolve to your satisfaction. If your Oki was NEW and your PC-500 was > NOT NEW, I say "No Fair." We stand behind our products and customers > -- period! > Our quality program is second to none. Our customers are our number > one priority. Not to draw out this discussion ... but let me clear up a few things. - In no way do I have dissatisfaction with my dealer. The only person who was dissatisfied was the owner who couldn't get rid of me. - All three of the PC-500 phones were new out of the box. (Not sure how this could have been a point of confusion.) - There is no question in my mind that customer satisfaction is a priority with Motorola. The service center in Arlington Hts., IL stated that they would repair said phones. I didn't want a repaired phone at a new price, but a new phone that worked. - Warranty repair of a new phone out the box only one to ten hours (depending on which of the three phones we are discussing) is not justified. The unit should just work. <- note period After three phones in four days, I just couldn't spend anymore time dealing with the situation. Thus the decision to switch to another vendor. Post sale support of a product is a must in a competitive market. But reputation is made, or lost, on the basis of delivering product of the highest quality possible off the factory floor. Scott Stratmoen ..!ast!freedm!scott scott@freedm.dsd.northrop.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 21:16:10 -0400 From: "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" Subject: Re: ONA Offers New Horizons for Telesleaze Reply-To: allbery@ncoast.org Organization: North Coast Public Access Un*x (ncoast) As quoted from by johnl@iecc.cambridge. ma.us (John R. Levine): (about advertizing between rings) > I don't know why it's suddenly coming back now, except perhaps that > the last of the old Bell System managers who thought of the phone > company as a service are retiring, and the new ones have less shame. I dunno, but it's been a progressive disease around here. First they combined the time and weather services, then they added advertising, then they moved it to a 900 number and put a current-time-and-temperature announcement on the old number with an advertisement for the 900 number (and, of course, they try to bore you off the phone before telling you how much it co$t$). I expect ads in the ring sequence wil be next. :-( At least they haven't figured out how to charge me for punching in 162.550 on my HT. :-) Me: Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH: DC to LIGHT! [44.70.4.88] Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG Delphi: ALLBERY uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery [Moderator's Note: Hadn't you heard that NOAA was going to begin selling advertising space on that mobious loop tape they play over and over for an hour at a time? Its true! :) Of course it is. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tom Perrine Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Date: 4 Jun 91 18:08:26 GMT Reply-To: Tom Perrine Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California In article Andy Sherman writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 420, Message 3 of 10 > In article , YSAR1111@vm1.yorku.ca (Rick > Broadhead) writes: > He might have hit a PBX or Centrex that uses a double ring to indicate > an outside call. Having moved around the Joisey locations of Bell > Labs quite a bit, I've encountered this feature in ESSX (a centrex), > Dimension, and System 85. Hmmm. Our brand-new ROLM 97xx signals with a double ring for an outside call, but the caller hears a single ring. Speaking of our brand-new system, several people have asked me (why me?) questions about DIDs. Is the following explanation correct: For an incoming (outside) call: The CO translates the dialed number and either: If it is POTS ("single-line home phone") routes it to the proper dedicated line. If it is a DID, discovers some kind of indication that this number should be routed to any of a set of trunks (our incoming trunks). The CO then picks any of the available incoming trunks (is this like a rotary?) and routes the call over that trunk to the PBX, passing the dialed number (destination) as well. The PBX then signals the instrument assigned that DID, and if it answers connects the trunk to the instrument. Notes: If all of the trunks are busy, the CO will signal busy to the caller, even if the instrument is on-hook, the PBX will never even see the call. When we get Caller-ID, if you have one of the ROLM 240XX phones, you will also see the phone number of the (outside) caller on the display. Am I even close? PS: I am also looking for any "stupid phonemail(tm) tricks" that anyone can suggest. I have a sense of humor that has been described as "strange, demented but never intentionally hostile". Something we can all laugh at here, as a way to make the new phone system a little less scary for some of our more telephobic employees. We have ROLM PhoneMail, Release 5.0. Tom Perrine (tep) |Internet: tep@tots.Logicon.COM |Voice: +1 619 597 7221 Logicon - T&TSD | UUCP: sun!suntan!tots!tep | or : +1 619 455 1330 P.O. Box 85158 |GENIE: T.PERRINE | FAX: +1 619 552 0729 San Diego CA 92138 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 10:42:44 PDT From: Dave Platt Subject: Re: Cellular Modems Organization: New Technologies Group, Inc. Palo Alto CA In article is written: > On the subject of cellular modems and laptops, I've run into something > that others might have encountered a fix for. It seems the > high-powered laptops such as the Toshiba 5200 don't have any provision > for running off of a 12-V DC input. I can imagine that your typical > low-power 12-V input might be insufficient to run something like this, > with a hard drive, 16 megs of memory, 25 MHz 386, VGA screen, etc. > However, we need something that powerful (and we need the slots). > Seeing as how a car battery can provide a substantial amount of power, > I was wondering if anyone knew of any product that would allow us to > run something like this off of the car's lighter jack, or even to hook > directly to the battery if necessary. Or of any portable with that > much power and a slot that you can take along with your cellular > phone. There may be a very real, defensive reason (or two) for the lack of a +12 VDC power input. [1] Most of the "guts" of a laptop or cellular modem probably run on +5 volts. To be able to accept +12, one would need either a linear voltage regulator (which would dissipate, as heat, more than half of the power fed into it), or a switching regulator (which would add size, weight, and cost). [2] 12-volt power drawn from a car's electrical system is hazardous. If the engine is running, the accessory voltage is likely to be quite "dirty", with sags and spikes and high-frequency noise from the ignition, other loads cutting in and out, etc. The auto environment is considered to be "electrically hostile"... audio amplifiers, CD players, etc. which are designed to operate in this environment must include a good deal of overvoltage/spike suppression, etc. The CMOS components in a laptop are quite vulnerable to spikes and surges. If you want to run a laptop, cellular, etc. from an auto's electrical system, you'll probably have to buy an external high-amperage 12-volt- to-5-volt stepdown regulator (probably a switcher, with extensive surge protection and some big filter capacitors), and a "cheater" which will let you plug the regulator's output into the laptop's charger input or directly to the battery-compartment contacts. I'd suggest that you check your insurance and warranty, as well ... it'd be a shame if a spike from the ignition fried your laptop. If you were thinking of running your laptop from the car's battery, with the ignition off: be advised that most auto batteries are not intended for deep discharge. They're designed to provide large amounts of current in short bursts, and to be recharged immediately and kept "topped up" by the alternator. A "low maintenance" or "no maintenance" auto battery can be ruined by only a few deep-discharge/recharge cycles ... it will lose its ability to hold a charge. If you really want to run your high-amperage laptop from an external battery, you'll probably want to get something along the lines of a deep-discharge lead/acid battery, such as are often sold for marine or RV applications. These batteries are designed to be able to be discharged most of the way to zero, and then recharged fully, a large number of times (the tradeoff being that they don't have the same peak-current output as a lead/acid battery designed for automotive use). You could charge this battery from an auto's alternator, or with a standalone battery charger. - Dave Platt VOICE: (415) 813-8917 Domain: dplatt@ntg.com UUCP: ...apple!ntg!dplatt USNAIL: New Technologies Group Inc. 2468 Embarcardero Way, Palo Alto CA 94303 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 19:48:03 CDT From: "Patton M. Turner" Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security > on that one they had me unpack the analyzer so they could run some > sort of explosives sniffer over it. No one ever asked me to actually > turn it on, though. The sniffer usually checks for nitrates, which are used in virtually all explosives as oxidizers. As Steven King pointed out this is a much better way to check suspicious bagagge than asking you to "Turn it on." No suprise Israel is using the latest equipment. There was a move to install them at US airports, but it died (no irony/pun intended). At one time Israel placed all baggage in a decompression chamber before loading it on planes. I guess they still do. No wonder they don't have any sucessful bombing/skyjacking since the days of Entebe. Patton Turner KB4GRZ pturner@eng.auburn.edu ------------------------------ From: Max Rochlin Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Organization: Gupta Technologies Inc Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 21:18:10 GMT In article alexb@cfctech.cfc.com (Alex Beylin) writes: > I've always wondered what they do with laptops that require AC power > to operate. Is there a three-prong AC plug at the security station? Yes there is. I've got a Toshiba 5200 that I've been asked to turn on more than once. Three-prong plugs are always nearby. For fun, I changed my os-prompt to: "Yes, this really is a computer and thanks for checking" Which amuses most airport security guards. | max@gupta.com | Max J. Rochlin | decwrl!madmax!max | ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Jun 91 21:28:36 CST From: Jim Redelfs Subject: RE: Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire Reply-To: ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@uunet.uu.net Organization: Macnet Omaha Patton M. Turner wrote: > C-wire (drop wire) is hard to beat if you are going to use unshelded > cable. It can be run overhead or plowed in the ground. C Rural Wire is TOUGH stuff, but buried? I've never seen it buried in my experience or heard of doing so before. I recommend against direct burial of C Rural Wire. It is designed as an AERIAL wire (1-pr/1-line wire) and not really even as a "drop" wire. C Rural Wire is used for exceptionally LONG aerial spans whose length would cause ordinary F Service Wire (aerial drop wire) to fail at the P-clamps or break in the span. A typical C Rural Wire installation includes terminating the C Rural Wire at the pole closest to the station where it is connected with a 105 block to conventional F Service Wire for the final span to the station. Considering the scenerio: phone service wire placed through "woods" in an area of clay/compacted soil. Ordinarily, a vibratory lawn plow would do a satisfactory installation but, considering the likely encounters with numerous, substantial tree roots, a trencher would work MUCH better. If the service MUST be hung, I would probably forgo the luxury and expense of poles and simply hang the spans, with PLENTY of slack, from the existing trees. AT&T's Phoenix Works manufactures an EXCELLENT, 5-pair, jelly-filled buried service "wire". JR --- Tabby 2.2 MacNet Omaha 402-289-2899 On loan from Mrs MacWidow (1:285/14) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #424 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25805; 5 Jun 91 6:27 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa08913; 5 Jun 91 4:54 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab06371; 5 Jun 91 3:40 CDT Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 2:38:35 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #425 BCC: Message-ID: <9106050238.ab07930@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 5 Jun 91 02:38:14 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 425 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? [andrewf@syacus.acus.oz] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Tom Gray] Re: 900 Numbers and Privacy [John R. Levine] Re: 908 Area Code Switchover [Carl Moore] Re: Videophones? Telewriters? [Sandy Kyrish] Re: Alexander Graham Bell Movie on AMC [Dave Levenson] Re: Surprise!! [Larry Jones] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Bryan Reid] Re: PacBell Does Something Right [Martin McCormick] Re: The FCC Says it Wants to Hear From You! [Ronald Greenberg] Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone [Martin McCormick] Re: Cellular One Dialing Procedures [Tony Harminc] Caller ID Spreads From Atlanta to Athens [Glenn F. Leavell] How Do You Deal With Central Office Problems? [Steve Forrette] Busying Out a Phone With a Resister [Marc Unangst] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andrewf@syacus.acus.oz Subject: Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 15:23:29 EST Subject: Re: Are Telco Profits Too Large? 0004322955@mcimail.com (Guy J. Sherr) writes: > You may wish to remind some of us that English notation given as a > billion is actually a number with 12 zeroes, and not 9. 3000 billion > pounds sterling would therefore be 3,000,000,000,000,000 pounds > sterling written out, and I believe worth approximately 4.5 > quadrillion US dollars (apologies to those following the exchange > rate). This number seems to be inaccurate. It is more than 50 years > of the United States's GNP. I suspect the situation regarding millions is the same in the U.K. as it is here. Financial institutions and others reporting financial results usually (incorrectly) use the US convention rather than the English one. I presume this is to make their results sound more impressive. Nevertheless, the original posting poses an interesting question: How can companies that make large profits, be fullfilling their community service obligations, which should include pricing their calls as cheaply as possible. The usual answer is that large profits are needed to finance new equipment. Of course, most residential subscribers don't give a hang about new technology so long as reliability compares favourably with price. ------------------------------ From: Tom Gray Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Date: 4 Jun 91 12:44:43 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. >> Were you calling a commercial establishment? A college dorm or campus? >> Some other place where you were dialing directly to an extension of a large >> private network? > To answer your question: I heard the double-ring when calling the > "Management Services" department at Toronto City Hall. The double ring will indicate that the destination has answered your call on its own equipment. The real implication of this is that you are now being billed for the time that you are listening to ringing. Tom Gray ------------------------------ Subject: Re: 900 Numbers and Privacy Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 4 Jun 91 14:04:53 EDT (Tue) From: "John R. Levine" In article is written: > One very simple way to find your "nine-closest neighbors" is by using > ZIP + 4. ... I discovered that I share a ZIP + 4 with *one* neighbor. > I do not know how ZIP + 4 deals with high-occupancy buildings, but I > suspect that a ZIP + 4 could be set up to handle one or more floors of > a single building. ZIP + 4 is probably how they do closest neighbors. For large buildings, a single building or even a single office in a building can have its own zip. For PO boxes, a group of boxes or a single box gets a zip (anything sent to zip 02238-0349 comes to me, for example.) Finding the nine people with the closest zips would be a pretty good approximation to the closest neighbors. Using that to make mailing lists is still a pretty unpleasant idea. Perhaps we could try to add language to the Markey bill forbidding the use of CLID and ANI info for anything other than call billing and verification. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 10:15:22 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: 908 Area Code Switchover I believe the 908 area code became available in January 1991 (not 1990). ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 13:49 GMT From: Sandy Kyrish <0003209613@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Videophones? Telewriters? Responding to Artur Matuck's request: Common telewriter vendors: Optel Communications in New York City; DataBeam in Lexington, KY; Shure Brothers in (yes, indeed) Chicago, IL. Common videophone vendors: VideoTeleCom in Austin, TX; Compression Labs in San Jose, CA; PictureTel in the Boston area. Also, the International Teleconferencing Association is having its annual trade show in Washington DC on June 25-27. For info call ITCA at 202-833-2549. Be forewarned that "videophones" do not run on POTS lines, but telewriters do. Videophones mentioned above need digital circuits. Sandy Kyrish 320-9613@mcimail.com ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Alexander Graham Bell Movie on AMC Date: 3 Jun 91 01:41:37 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , irvin@northstar105.dartmouth. edu writes: > The above is from OnSat Magazine. Since, I don't subscribe to AMC (or > any subscription channels), I guess I'll have to find someone with > cable who will let me watch it ;). You might want to check it out. Here in NJ, AMC is not offered as a premium channel, but as a standard channel, included in the basic monthly cable rate. The movie on A. G. Bell, incidentally, appears several times a year on AMC, and is worth watching! 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: Larry Jones Subject: Re: Surprise!! Date: 3 Jun 91 15:43:13 GMT Organization: SDRC, Cincinnati In article , woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu (Bill Woodcock) writes: > Does this mean that after the 415/510 split, we'll be getting free > unlimited calls to a _different area code_ if we have flat-rate > service, and are calling back and forth from SF to the East Bay? Does > that happen anywhere else? Here in Cincinnati we not only get free unlimited calls to a different area code, we get free unlimited calls to TWO different area codes in two different states! Cincinnati Bell is one of the smaller phone companies and only server the Cincinnati vacinity. Due to the location of Cincinnati, this includes pieces of southwest Ohio, northern Kentucky, and southeastern Indiana. Larry Jones, SDRC, 2000 Eastman Dr., Milford, OH 45150-2789 513-576-2070 Domain: scjones@sdrc.com Path: uunet!sdrc!scjones ------------------------------ From: Doctor Math Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion Date: Sun, 02 Jun 91 10:43:15 EST Organization: Department of Redundancy Department asuvax!gtephx!andersonr@ncar.ucar.edu (Rick Anderson) writes: > I believe MCI is currently undergoing a nationwide promotion whereby > they will give you $20 if you switch over to them as your primary > carrier. I recently received a check in the mail from MCI for $20. > The check was a normal check on the front, but on the back, it said if > I endorsed and cashed the check, I would be switched over to MCI. > My question to the net: is it legally feasible to cross out this > endorsement message, sign the check, collect the $20, and then legally > expect to not be switched over to MCI?? > [Moderator's Note: As soon as you cross out the special endorsement > you no longer have the right to cash the check which was issued as > payment for your having given permission to change your phones. . . .] What if your BOC requires carrier changes in writing from YOU, the customer? [Moderator's Note: If your teleco requires written notices of changes, then MCI would comply by sending them the endorsement you signed on the chedk. That would serve as the written notice. PAT] ------------------------------ From: reid@pa.dec.com (Brian Reid) Subject: Re: PacBell Does Some Subject: Re: The FCC Says it Wants to Hear From You! > "The FCC's first look at `Networks of the Future' won't be > it's last, according to Office of Plans and Policy Chief Robert > Pepper, who is considering how commissiners can get more regular > contact with telecom industry players whose jobs are not wooing > Washington. How about telling him to post to the net solicitations for comments on specific issues as they arise? Ronald I. Greenberg rig@eng.umd.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 11:50:27 CDT From: u1906ad@unx.ucc.okstate.edu Subject: Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor) writes: > Ken Oberman wondered when COs would stop supporting pulse-dial > (rotary) phones. Well, PBX's already have; the UCSD Ericsson MD-110 > will not allow an extension phone to pulse-dial any number with a "1" > (one) in it -- it interprets the single pulse as a switchhook flash and > gives you a fresh dialtone. Oklahoma State University has had an Ericsson MD110 switch in use since Fall of 1988. It is a truly digital PBX with the vast majority of campus phones having A/D D/A converters in their bases. While I've been told that the signal on each wire pair is proprietary, it is pretty close to ISDN. Such indications as on-hook, off-hook, ring and caller id information are all just digital codes sent on the control channel. The situation that Bryan described regarding getting a fresh dial tone each time the hook was flashed sounds precisely like what happens when you flash the hook on an Ericsson digital phone. Ericssen also makes an analog line card which plugs into the MD110 switch so as to support such things as fax machines and the radio paging system operated by our physical plant. The analog line unit provides all of the standard telephone signals and will accept either pulse or tone dialing. The best way to tell what kind of Ericsson line one is on is to listen to the sound of the line as you dial a number. On a digital line, there is absolutely nothing heard between the dial tone and the first ring. Martin McCormick Amateur Radio WB5AGZ Oklahoma State University Computer Center Data Communication sGroup Stillwater, OK ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Jun 91 10:51:28 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: CRe: Cellular One Dialing Procedures John Higdon wrote: >> "All of our switches are programmed from Toronto, thus you can't >> talk to the guy in charge of switch programming." > That's a good one. I guess if the programmers are actually in Toronto, > there are no telephone circuits there so it would be impossible to > talk to them. On the other hand, GTE's switches are programmed from > Houston and I have talked to programmers for that company. Yes - here in Toronto we all use tin cans and string (digital string of course). Now the curious question is why Cellular One's switches would be programmed here. The only switch maker I know in Toronto is Northern Telecom. Or is it perhaps that Cellular One is owned by a Toronto based company ? Cantel (the nation-wide "A" carrier) is into all sorts of other technical ventures. Perhaps they're the culprit. Tony H. ------------------------------ From: "Glenn F. Leavell" Subject: Caller ID spreads from Atlanta to Athens Organization: University of Georgia Economics Department Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 04:31:43 GMT For anyone who is keeping track out there: As of June 3, Caller-ID is available in Athens, Georgia. Southern Bell reports that they hope to provide the service to all of their service areas in the state by mid-1991 (which, in my book, is just about to arrive!). Glenn F. Leavell Systems Administrator glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu 404-542-3488 University of Georgia Economics Department. 147 Brooks Hall. Athens, GA 30602 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 22:37:57 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? Tim Irvin writes: > What is really strange (off the subject -- sorry Pat), is that any of > these numbers gets a recording (in fact any unused number in the area) > that says, "The number you have reached X-X-X X-X-X-X is being checked > for trouble, please try your call again later." This was a problem > when I was giving a friend my new number, but I gave him the wrong > number, and he tried to reach me for over a week, continually getting > " ...checked for trouble...". He finally called DA and discovered he > had the wrong number. Does anyone have ideas as to how to get these types of problems resolved? I've tried in vain on a couple of occasions to get Pacific Bell to fix wrong recordings or other minor CO trouble, and Repair Service seems very uninterested. At first, they can't understand the problem, and resort to "we just tested your line, and didn't find anything wrong." Once I convince them that it's not "in my line", they take the report, the ticket soon gets cleared, and the problem is still there. I've all but given up. During my recent move, there was a half-day delay between my old service disconnect and the referral starting to work. In the meantime, the "... is being checked for trouble, please try your call again later" recording was active. Since I receive business calls on that line, I was somewhat disappointed at this situation. A call to the business office revealed that this was quite normal. A very poor standard practice, I would say. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? From: Marc Unangst Date: Tue, 04 Jun 91 23:31:27 EDT Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, +1 313 665 2832 I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should have almost the exact same effect as an off-hook telephone does -- thus busying out the line. Now, my question is, is there anything wrong with doing something like this? Will a 1/2W resistor be enough? Is this an "accepted" way of busying out a phone line? Marc Unangst mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us !hela!mudos!mju ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #425 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27335; 6 Jun 91 3:45 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16760; 6 Jun 91 2:15 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa22694; 6 Jun 91 1:07 CDT Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 0:53:19 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #426 BCC: Message-ID: <9106060053.ab16014@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 6 Jun 91 00:52:57 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 426 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Jamie Mason] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Marc T. Kaufman] Re: Surprise!! [Dennis Blyth] Re: Surprise!! [Nick Sayer] Re: Cellular Modems [Patton M. Turner] Re: One City With Two Area Codes [Linc Madison] Re: Telephone Advertising Consumer Rights Act [Linc Madison] Re: PacBell Does Something Right [Dave Levenson] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Tim Irvin] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Brian Charles Kohn] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jamie Mason Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: University of Toronto Computer Services Advisor Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1991 03:41:54 -0400 In article forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > This reminds me of a "pet peeve" (sic?) that I have with the newer > modems. Both the Hayes 9600 V-series and the $74 2400 card-modem I > have won't accept an ATS11 value (DTMF duration) of less than 50ms. > The default seems to be 100ms. The Hayes will take a smaller value, > but use 50 during tone generation. The clone returns ERROR for a > value less than 50. The old 1200 geniune Hayes that I have will take > values down to 1ms, and actually do it as well. The default on my modem (an old USRobotics "VARmodem" 2400 internal) for the tone generation is 70ms. 70ms is obnoxiously slow, as it is. *How* can they set their *fastest* speed to 50? I guess it is like those databases which try to get smart about names, and inevitably end up mangling esoteric names; you know a little more about your CO switch than the modem, but the modem won't give you the benefit of the doubt. My modem, like your old 1200, will go right down to 1ms, but the 1ms is a pretty feeble attempt at DTMF. > [Moderator's Note: And while Toby is answering that, here is another > question: how come US Robotics has a condition you can set which > allows for 'quick dialing', or dialing without waiting the obligitory > two seconds before starting? Hayes used to claim (maybe still do) > that telco tariffs require a two second pause before dialing. You > could not set that particular S-register less than 2. Telebit seems > to feel the same way ... but USR lets you go off hook and bang those > digits right out if you set the register for it. PAT] What S-Register is that? I know how to set my tone-generation rate really fast, but I don't see an S-register which controls how long my modem waits between taking the phone off the hook and dialing. My modem seems to wait for a dialtone before dialing. (Smart, eh?) As for the two second delay, while two seconds is a little long (restrictive) in the usual style of Phone Company tarrifs, *some* delay *is* required. Dialing on my phone, I have to wait about one second before I get the dial tone. I can't dial sooner, or it will miss some digits. Anyone know *why* 35ms (or 36ms) seems to be a universal limit on modern exchanges? Is this designed in? Also, I have heard of, but never heard officially, of a telco tariff which requires that autodialers not retry the same number more than ten0 times in a row automatically. This lead to: a) some crippled terminal programs which won't do more than ten retries before having to be restarted, and b) crippled hardware -- my DUoFone 195 (an old Radio Shack gadget) has an auto redialer which keeps trying till there's no more busy. But it will only try a maximum of ten times. Of course, this is all obsolete now, in the days of Call Return, where the Network does it for you. Jamie [Moderator's Note: Register S-6 in many modems sets the length of time to wait off hook before dialing. In the USR, the command ATX6 overrides the two second delay and dials immediatly. The ten attempt limit is to prevent repeated harassment of people who get wronh number calls intended for modems. Telco's repeat dialing feature won't change this; the modem does not care if it dials 7-D or *66. After ten tries, it will stop dialing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Marc T. Kaufman" Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1991 15:42:18 GMT > to feel the same way ... but USR lets you go off hook and bang those > digits right out if you set the register for it. PAT] The regulation in question is 68.314(a)(2), but it applies to answer, not originate: 68.314 Billing Protection (a) Call duration requirements on data equipment connected to the Public Switched Network, or to Tie Trunks, or to Private Lines that access the Public Switched Network. (2) Registered terminal Equipment Registered terminal equipment for data applications shall assure that, when an incoming telephone call is answered, the answering terminal equipment prevents both transmission and reception of data for at least two seconds after the answering terminal equipment transfers to the off-hook condition. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu) ------------------------------ From: Dennis Blyth Subject: Re: Surprise!! Date: 5 Jun 91 20:24:08 GMT Reply-To: Dennis Blyth Organization: NCR International - Europe Group, Dayton In Cincinnati Bell territory, one can call from a residence phone in Hamilton, Ohio (about 30 miles north of the Ohio river) to the Cincinnati International airport (CVG -- code named short for 'Covington' -- because the Cincinnati airport actually is in Northern Kentucky, about 15 miles south of the Ohio river) for the price of a local call. For residences, this is non-measured service. Admittedly only certain exchanges in Hamilton have this service, and one pays extra (less than $ 2, in my recollection), but, oh, boy, what a deal!! BTW, is this the furthest distance one can go, 'toll free' in the states. (Pls, no flames for 800 service, I'm new to the net and somewhat sensitive!) ------------------------------ From: Nick Sayer Subject: Re: Surprise!! Date: 5 Jun 91 22:11:34 GMT Organization: The Duck Pond, Stockton, CA sdrc!scjones%thor@uunet.uu.net (Larry Jones) writes: > In article , woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu (Bill > Woodcock) writes: >> Does this mean that after the 415/510 split, we'll be getting free >> unlimited calls to a _different area code_ if we have flat-rate >> service, and are calling back and forth from SF to the East Bay? Does >> that happen anywhere else? > Here in Cincinnati we not only get free unlimited calls to a different > area code, we get free unlimited calls to TWO different area codes in > two different states! Cincinnati Bell is one of the smaller phone > companies and only server the Cincinnati vacinity. Due to the > location of Cincinnati, this includes pieces of southwest Ohio, > northern Kentucky, and southeastern Indiana. Given the post-Greene reality, would it not make a BIT of sense to reform area codes a bit? How about one simple rule: No area code could be in two LATAs? A LATA can have more than one area code, on any boundary convenient to the local BOC, but the area codes within a LATA would be unique to that LATA. Yes, this will make a mess in the short term. In the long term, however, it would become a hell of a lot easier to figure out how your call would be billed. It would also simplify new area code assignment, I would think. Nick Sayer mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us N6QQQ 209-952-5347 (Telebit) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 04:58:46 CDT From: "Patton M. Turner" Subject: Re: Cellular Modems > high-powered laptops such as the Toshiba 5200 don't have any provision > for running off of a 12-V DC input. I can imagine that your typical > low-power 12-V input might be insufficient to run something like this, > with a hard drive, 16 megs of memory, 25 MHz 386, VGA screen, etc. > However, we need something that powerful (and we need the slots). > Seeing as how a car battery can provide a substantial amount of power, > I was wondering if anyone knew of any product that would allow us to > run something like this off of the car's lighter jack, or even to hook > directly to the battery if necessary. In addition to an inverter, which will generate a square wave with the same RMS voltage as AC line current at up to several thousand watts, there is another solution: the Adapata80 and 30. These do not produce AC current, and only work with switching type power supplies. The adaptors produce 80 and 30 watts respectivly, and weigh about 1 pound. They include a cigrette lighter plug for the DC and a 110 volt receptacle for the output to the computer These adaptors being upstream of the power supply should avoid "noise problems" from the car's electrical system. One of these adaptors is being used by the Agricultural Engineering department here at Auburn, I'll check with them regarding their experience with it. The company's address is: Product R&D Corporation 1194 Pacific St. Suite 201 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 I hope this helps, I'll E-mail any aditional information. Patton Turner KB4GRZ pturner@eng.auburn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 02:55:08 PDT From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: One City With Two Area Codes Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Scott Barman (scott@nbc1.ge. com) writes: > It was announced not too long ago that the Bronx will be changed to > 718 so that Manhattan will be the only borough with the 212 area code. > Also, NY Tel also announced that a new area code (917) will > be used for cellular phones and beepers in New York City ... Does anyone have a list of prefixes in 212/718? Is it really true that none of the 212 prefixes in the Bronx are duplicated in 718? If so, then either NY Tel anticipated this situation (in which case, why didn't they just throw the Bronx into 718 in the original split?) or they got astoundingly lucky. Also, a quick look at the NPA/NXX list shows 718 with about 400 prefixes in use, and 212 with about 660. If even 1/3 of the prefixes in 212 are Bronx exchanges, it won't be long before 718 gets split again. Linc Madison = linc@tongue1.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 03:57:11 PDT From: Linc Madison Subject: Re: Telephone Advertising Consumer Rights Act (HR1 Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Bill Parrish (bparrish@hprnd. rose.hp.com) writes: > Re: HR1304 (Markey) Bill > "Telephone Solicitation" is defined as "the initiation of a telephone > message for the purpose of encouraging a person to purchase, rent, or > invest in property, goods, or services without that person's prior > express invitation or permission". Note the exclusion of > fund-raising. Maybe the politicians still want to be able to do it > themselves? [No, I'm not a lawyer, but...] There's an interesting point of Constitutional law involved. It turns out that if you have a "NO SOLICITING" sign on the front of your house, it is entirely legal for someone to come to your door anyway and solicit you for POLITICAL purposes, because the First Amendment right of the solicitor to engage in political speech outweighs the right of the would-not-be solicitee to discourage it. ...or so I was told when I had a summer job soliciting for a political organization (CalPIRG). Of course, there is the practical consideration that the "yield" from houses with "NO SOLICITING" signs was rather lower than the incidence of rather nasty-looking Dobermans growling through the screen door. Regarding the Florida state tax on interstate telephone charges, the Supreme Court ruled about three years ago that it is legal for them to tax interstate telephone charges, notwithstanding obviously contradictory clauses of the U.S. Constitution. I pay the City of Berkeley 6.5% for my out-of-state calls, although, oddly, it appears that the State of California hasn't hitched onto this gravy train. Linc Madison = linc@tongue1.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: PacBell Does Something Right Date: 5 Jun 91 11:35:52 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: [regarding Pac*Bell's installation of ten individual single-pair drops on his residence] > A recently suggested theory is that this is PacBell's infliction of > punishment for my having so many lines. Now for $300/month, it could > all be provided on T1. Hmmmm .... could it be a sales pressure tactic? ^^^^^ ^ ^ Hey, John, is looks like one of your ten single-drop loops may be unbalanced! Is that $300/month in addition to the monthly rate for service on the ten loops? 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 ------------------------------ Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Date: Wed, 05 Jun 91 11:53:53 -0400 From: irvin@lombard.dartmouth.edu In TELECOM Digest V11 #423, Joshua E. Muskovitz writes: > I've been an MCI customer for years and I've ALWAYS (well, with one > exception noted below) had my MCI calling card be the same first 10 > digits of my phone, and then a different PIN from the RBOC. Makes > sense to me. All I have to remember is which PIN to use. > The only time this didn't work was after my last move. The MCI rep > set up my account incorrectly (but issued cards). After realizing the > mistake, they cancelled service and set it up again (this time > correctly). This was in a matter of minutes. But when they went to > issue me a calling card (for the new account), the computer recognised > that a card had been issued for that phone number and instead issued a > scrambled card number. US Sprint (or is it just Sprint now) hasn't issued FON Cards with you phone number on it for sometime now. A couple of moves ago the rep told me my new card would be some random 14 digit number. Not wanting to have to memorize 14 random digits, I asked her if there was anyway to request that my card have my phone number as the first 10-digits. She said no way (security precautions -- something about people having roommates and the security problems that brought about -- seemed like hoky to me). She did say that I could keep my present card number if I wanted. So I did. Now two moves later (and two phone numbers later), I still have my old FON card with my old telephone number on it. Seems strange when I get the bill and my 2 phone numbers are listed followed by this old phone number from 1/2 way across the country. Tim Irvin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 12:24:54 EDT From: Brian Charles Kohn Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Reply-To: "bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM" Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Quality Process Center [Brian = bicker@hoqax.att.com (Brian Charles Kohn): > Actually ... the new calling card number will be different from ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > your phone number. It will be a new 14 digit number to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > remember. > I don't understand the above statement. > My Calling Card (issued two years ago) has a number that is not my > home or other phone number Then you already have one of these new type calling card numbers (for domestic use) ... people like SE have not ... the first ten digits of their calling card number have been their telephone number. Brian Charles Kohn AT&T Bell Laboratories Quality Process Center Quality Management System E-MAIL: att!hoqax!bicker (bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM) Consultant PHONE: (908) 949-5850 FAX: (908) 949-7724 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #426 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00504; 6 Jun 91 4:54 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab19954; 6 Jun 91 3:24 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab16760; 6 Jun 91 2:16 CDT Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 1:28:41 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #427 BCC: Message-ID: <9106060128.ab28840@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 6 Jun 91 01:27:56 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 427 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Free Teletypes [Steven S. Brack] Re: MCI's $20 Promotion [Ron Dippold] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [John R. Covert] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [John Higdon] Re: Cellular One Dialing Procedures [John R. Covert] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [William F Thompson] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Robert L. Oliver] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [Carl Moore] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Toby Nixon] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Free Teletypes From: "Steven S. Brack" Date: Mon, 03 Jun 91 17:10:25 EDT Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[0][2][4]) wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) writes: > [about teletype machines and radio stations] > 1945 > {The Cleveland Press}, like any other paper of its time, had many > machines. There was the A wire, the sports, etc. etc. > Well, they sat next to each other in the City Room, and made non-stop > noise. If one was stopped, another three were sure to be running. You > just ignored it. If the circuits died, they ran 'open' (clacking but > not printing anything) until the loop was fixed. > But late that summer, they ALL stopped at once. Dead. The silence was > so profound that everyone in the building knew about it at once. > Silence continued. After an interval described by one there as > "seemingly hours later" but likely only a minute or so, they ALL > restarted with the same message -- the war was over. From what I understand of news teletypes, there is a break key which interrupts send/recieve along the TTY connection. This key must be held for one minute to silence the feeds on the line. (They apparently detect loss of transmiossion.) This method is used to clear the line for important transmissions, i.e. the end of WWII, the deaths of FDR & JFK, Nixon's resignation. > 1970's. > At a classical music station of some fame, located on a river with the > same name as the Prince of Wales (hint;-}) the machine sat way in the > back of the station, in a semi-soundproof phonebooth sized chamber. .... > But that day, somebody at Cheyenne Mountain had loaded and fed, not > the weekly NORAD test tape, but the WAR! one. Confusion reigned across > the US as the wrong code was used to cancel the bogus message. Some > stations ignored it. Others followed the law and went off the air > ASAP. The lead station in "our fair city" [the one that the others > have CONALRAD receivers tuned to] choose to ignore it. It took hours > to straighten out. How does the EBS/CONALRAD/SCATANA system work? I assume there is a great deal of telecom equipment used in its implementation. > Can you imagine the look on the personality who finds a forest of > paper on the machine, most of which indicates that the USA has been at > war for four + hours, and Wxxx is still on the air? Gulp. I read a report of a college AM station receiving a phone call to the effect that radicals had threatened to douse the city (somewhere in CA?) with a poisonous agent. The phone call was bogus, but convinced the student on duty to broadcast warnings to citizens that they should stay inside and close their windows (this occured, I recall, in the late summer - high temperatures). The hoax went largely unnoticed, because hardly anyone paid attention to the station that broadcast the warning! Steven S. Brack | sbrack%bluemoon@nstar.rn.com Jacob E. Taylor Honors Tower | sbrack@bluemoon.uucp The Ohio State University | sbrack@nyx.cs.du.edu 50 Curl Drive | sbrack@isis.cs.du.edu Columbus, Ohio 43210-1112 USA | brack@ewf.eng.ohio-state.edu +1 614 293 7383 or 419 474 1010 | Steven.S.Brack@osu.edu ------------------------------ From: Ron Dippold Subject: Re: MCI's $20 Promotion Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 18:09:49 GMT In article ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@ uunet.uu.net writes: [Regarding MCI's $20 check - the endorsement of which grants them permission to change your PIC (long distance carrier) to MCI] ... > "We" charge $5 (total) to change a customer's long distance > carrier. I wonder if MCI will allow THE CUSTOMER to pay that charge > (out of the $20 check)? I assume so. So the net value of the check > is reduced to >$15. After a period of time, the customer could > initiate a PIC-change to another carrier, incurring yet another $5 > charge by the RBOC. At that point, the net value of MCI's promotion > to the end user is a CLEAR, $10! Not a bad deal, really. It just > depends on how much value one places on his/ her time - to place the > PIC-change order. I imagine that MCI is willing to take the risk that once you've switched over to their service that you will be so impressed that you'll want to stay forever. Not unlike those record clubs. And if they _did_ stipulate that you couldn't switch back to AT&T or Sprint, that would appear as if they were unconfident of their service, and people wouldn't go for the offer because they wouldn't have a choice. So they weigh the risk that you'll do two quick switches, losing them $20, against the odds that you'll stay on as a customer, gaining them quite a bit in the long run, they hope. Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks. | Ron Dippold ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 11:44:05 PDT From: "John R. Covert 05-Jun-1991 1440" Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus >> To answer your question: I heard the double-ring when calling the >> "Management Services" department at Toronto City Hall. > The double ring will indicate that the destination has answered your > call on its own equipment. The real implication of this is that you > are now being billed for the time that you are listening to ringing. Tom, for the Management Services department at Toronto City Hall, this is not the case. As has already been explained, when a PBX has DID trunks, audible ringing tone is returned to the caller directly from the PBX, which can ring any way it pleases. This earlier response was correct, and yours was incorrect. Specifically, 416 392-7715 rings with double ring, but you are not billed until someone answers. I have verified this from a trunk which provides positive indication of answer supervision. john ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 08:56 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Tom Gray writes: > The double ring will indicate that the destination has answered your > call on its own equipment. The real implication of this is that you > are now being billed for the time that you are listening to ringing. Not generally true. If the reason you are hearing an unusual ringing signal involves a PBX, it is probably a DID connection. Answer supervision occurs when, and only when, the call is picked up by the ringing extension. Busy, no answer, and even local customer intercept recordings do not return supervision on a properly set up PBX. In essence, the PBX becomes the terminating CO. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 12:08:57 PDT From: "John R. Covert 05-Jun-1991 1446" Subject: Re: Cellular One Dialing Procedures > Now the curious question is why Cellular One's switches would be > programmed here. The only switch maker I know in Toronto is Northern > Telecom. Or is it perhaps that Cellular One is owned by a Toronto > based company ? Cantel (the nation-wide "A" carrier) is into all > sorts of other technical ventures. Perhaps they're the culprit. Your guess that Cantel is somehow involved may be right on the mark. As was reported elsewhere, Bay Area Cellular has recently converted to an Ericsson (correctly spelled with the double "s") switch. Cantel is the largest single user of Ericsson switches, and may be providing the programming -- or Ericsson may have an office in Toronto where the programming is done. It seems to be the case throughout Cantel that local calls must be dialled without a "1", and I wonder why Cantel subscribers don't complain about the same problem of not being able to use repertory dialling when travelling. Someone asked about new features that Ericsson switches may provide: Cantel customers are able to be reached regardless of where they are, coast to coast in Canada, as well as in locations in the U.S. that are Ericsson switches directly linked to Cantel, without doing anything at all to indicate that they are in a new system. In addition, all their custom calling features, including three-way calling, call-forwarding, and call-waiting, continue to work wherever they go. The locations currently linked to Cantel are: Pittsburgh, Johnstown and Erie, Pa., Wheeling, W. Va., Albany, Rochester, and Buffalo, N.Y., Detroit, Ann Arbor, Flint, Grand Rapids, Muskegon, and Saginaw, Mich., Toledo and Lima, Ohio, Jacksonville, Daytona, Orlando, Tampa, St. Petersburg, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, and Miami, Fla. All the "A" systems in Washington and Oregon are in the process of being linked; they work at the moment if your Cantel number is a British Columbia number, and will work for all Cantel numbers within a few months. Presumably other Ericsson systems will be linked to Cantel (and to each other) as time goes on. Next time I travel in these areas, I'll have the option (and the need to decide) to use either my NYNEX number and Follow-Me-Roaming or my Cantel number and Call-Following. Of course, IS-41 is supposed to make all this possible so that all systems everywhere get interconnected, but the Judge Greene problem still exists for any cellular companies owned by Baby Bells -- and this includes those Cellular Ones owned by Southwestern Bell, or by PacTel, or by U.S. West. Cellular One in San Francisco (Bay Area Cellular) is a partnership of PacTel, McCaw, and one other minority owner. john ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 16:46:11 EDT From: William F Thompson Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Organization: Tex and Edna Boil's Prairie Warehouse and Curio Emporium From article , by netnews@ulysses. att.com (Steve Bellovin): > Note that AT&T will *NOT* be providing card verification to other > interexchange carriers. This should deal with the oft-expressed > concerns of our customers that they not be billed by an AOS for calls > placed on an AT&T Card. > I hope this sets your mind at ease. >> Now I don't consider my friends, parents, and relatives to be all that >> ignorant on how to use a telephone, but I just can't see how THIS is >> going to be explained to them by AT&T and/or the BOCs. AT&T and the >> BOCs sure didn't do a good job when it came to warning people about >> AOSs until quite late in the game; I am wondering how much more >> confusion this nonsense will cause. > Tell them to use their AT&T Card. Period. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ Andy couldn't be more correct. All you have to use in the future for calling card calls will be your NEW (and I stress NEW) AT&T calling card. Let me clear up some common misconceptions. First, there are three formats for the new AT&T calling card: a CCITT Full Format 21 digit card, an abbreviated 17 digit card, and what's known as a hyperdialed 14 digit calling card. All you will have to dial is 14 digits, period. Forever. The AT&T formats, as discussed by someone else, are as follows: CCITT Full Format 21 digit: 891288 XXXXXX XXXX L PINN where L is a Luhn check digit 891253 XXXXXX XXXX L PINN " " " " " " " Abbreviated 17 digit dialing: 288 XXXXXX XXXX PINN 253 XXXXXX XXXX PINN Hyperdialed 14 digit dialing: XXXXXX XXXX PINN You will only have to dial the 14 digits. So you only have to remember one new calling card number. And yes, you can bill your intralata calls to your AT&T card, but they are not carried by AT&T (of course). As far as I've heard, you will be able to choose your own PIN also. Most of these cards will be issued by the end of this year. Some of the cards already issued (Universal Cards, for example) start out with 507 and 508 as the Issuer ID. The fourth digit of a 14 digit AT&T issued calling card (the new ones, remember) will always be a 0 or a 1 (just like the old "shared" RAO cards). I hope I've answered some questions that you may have. You can drop me a line if you have any more questions. Bill Thompson att!ihlpf!foz ------------------------------ From: "Robert L. Oliver" Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Organization: Rabbit Software Corp. Date: 5 Jun 91 22:20:17 GMT wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > ... the old non-subscriber cards are issued in area > code 507 and 508 with a exchange that is inposible (starting with a 0 > or 1) and are handled through various BOC's, I had one that was billed > by Cincinatti Bell a few years ago.... My Universal Card uses a number like this also. Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM Malvern, PA 19355 ...!uunet!cbmvax!hutch!robert ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 10:31:25 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World The ABCDEF codes apparently are those in the British Telecom booklet dated September 1990 which I received recently. It shows Denmark as BD, not ED; apparently this is intended for people calling from the U.K. ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? Date: 5 Jun 91 17:48:25 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , Marc Unangst writes: > I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. > Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some > investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging > a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should > have almost the exact same effect as an off-hook telephone does -- > thus busying out the line. Now, my question is, is there anything > wrong with doing something like this? Will a 1/2W resistor be enough? > Is this an "accepted" way of busying out a phone line? The FCC has said that it will no longer allow Part 68 registration of modems that busy out the line in this manner (i.e., by just going "off-hook"). Centrex is supposed to have a way to tell the CO that a particular line in a hunt group is unavailable. Bellcore is working on a DTMF signal that can be sent on the line to tell the switch that the circuit is busied-out (like the "Do Not Disturb" function on many PBXes). And FCC already specifies an RJ4MB data jack, in which, if you close the MB/MBC pair, notifies the switch that the circuit is busied-out. Nobody likes the RJ4MB solution, though, because it takes up an extra pair of wires for every circuit. The DTMF solution is what everybody is looking for. In the meantime, about the only way you can do it is by going "off-hook". Not being a hardware engineer, I can't comment on whether the resistor value you've chosen is appropriate for this function. I assume some of the telco experts here will comment for you. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 USA | Internet hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #427 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02795; 6 Jun 91 6:03 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa10181; 6 Jun 91 4:32 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19954; 6 Jun 91 3:16 CDT Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 2:09:44 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #428 BCC: Message-ID: <9106060209.ab19557@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 6 Jun 91 02:09:12 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 428 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Hot Chips Symposium III [Martin Freeman] Fibre to the Home Conference [borys] What Will Turn the Telcos On [Peter Marshall] World War III [Ed Hopper] Programmable Modem Wanted [Chuck Hsiano] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Martin Freeman Subject: Hot Chips Symposium III Organization: Center for Integrated Systems, Stanford University, California Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 19:48:47 GMT Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Go On Vacation: HOT CHIPS SYMPOSIUM III A Symposium on High-Performance Chips (Advance Program) Sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Microprocessors Stanford University, Palo, Alto, California August 26-27, 1991 Attend HOT Chips III, a symposium on high-performance chips, which will bring together researchers and developers of chips used to construct high-performance workstations and systems. Enjoy the informal format offering interaction with speakers. This first two HOT Chips Symposiums were huge successes and prompted articles in three special issues of IEEE Micro magazine. This year's HOT Chips III will again bring you the latest developments in chip technology. ORGANIZING COMMITTEE General Chairman: Martin Freeman, Philips Research Program Co-Chairmen: Forest Baskett, Silicon Graphics John Hennessy, Stanford University Finance Chairman: Hasan AlKhatib, Santa Clara University Registration Chairman: Robert Stewart, Stewart Research Publication Chairman: Nam Ling, Santa Clara University Publicity Chairman: Andrew Goforth, NASA Ames Research Center Local Arrangements Chairman: Robert Stewart, Stewart Research PROGRAM COMMITTEE Forest Baskett, Silicon Graphics (Program Co-Chair) John Crawford, Intel David Ditzel, Sun Microsystems John Hennessy, Stanford University (Program Co-Chair) John Mashey, MIPS Computer Systems Teresa Meng, Stanford University Alan Smith, U.C. Berkeley PROGRAM August 26, 1991 - Dinkelspiel Auditorium 7:30 - 8:30 Onsite Registration 8:30 - 8:45 Welcome and Opening Remarks Martin Freeman, General Chair Forest Baskett and John Hennessy, Program Co-Chairs 8:45 - 10:15 High-Performance Processors - I . Viking: A Superscalar SPARC Processor Greg Blanck, Sun Microsystems & Steve Krueger, Texas Instruments . R4000 Technical Overview Tom Riordan, MIPS Computer Systems . High-Performance PA-RISC Processor for "Snakes" Workstation Mark Forsyth, Charles Kohlhardt, & Ruby Lee, Hewlett Packard 10:15 - 10:45 BREAK 10:45 - 12:15 Highly Parallel Chips . The LIFE Family of High-Performance Single Chip VLIWs Gerrit Slavenburg, Philips Research Palo Alto . The Message-Driven Processor William Dally, J. Stewart Fiske, Waldemar Horwat, John Keen, Richard Lethin, Michael Noakes, & Peter Nuth MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory D. Scott Wills University of Central Florida Andrew Chien University of Illinois Salim Ahmed, Paul Carrick, Roy Davison, Greg Fyler, Steve Lear, Mark Vestrich, & Ted Nguyen Intel . The TRW CPUAX Superchip: A 4.1 Million Transistor CMOS CPU A. Miscione, R. Almeida, H. Hennecke, & R. Mann TRW Micro Electronics 12:15 - 1:45 LUNCH 1:45 - 3:15 High-Performance Processors - II . An 80 MHz 64-Bit Floating Point RISC Processor with Direct DRAM Support James Hesson, Micron Technology . The 80860XP: 2nd Generation of the i860(tm) RISC Processor Family David Perlmutter & Michael Kagan, Intel Israel . Beyond Claims of Free Transistors and Abundant Instruction-Level Parallelism Michael Smith, Stanford University 3:15 - 3:45 BREAK 3:45 - 5:15 Low Power and Low Cost . SPARC System Chipset Greg Favor, Tera Microsystems . The SparKIT Chipset: How to Clone a Sparcstation Mohammed Wasfi, LSI Logic Corporation . SMM, The "Virtual 386(tm)" Dave Vannier, Intel 5:15 - 7:15 RECEPTION 7:30 EVENING PANEL SESSION: "Five Instructions Per Clock: Truth or Consequences" Alan Smith, U.C. Berkeley John Mashey, MIPS Computer Systems August 27, 1991 - Dinkelspiel Auditorium 8:00 - 9:00 Onsite Registration 9:00 - 10:30 Communications . A GaAs 200 Mbps 64x64 Crosspoint Chip Ron Cates, Vitesse Semiconductor . RN1: Low-Latency, Dilated, Crossbar Router Henry Minsky, Tom Knight, Andre' DeHon . The NEURON Chip Family Architecture Robert Dolin, Echelon . The Protocol Engine Chipset Greg Chesson, Silicon Graphics 10:30 - 11:00 BREAK 11:00 - 12:30 Caches and Floating Point . R4000 Cache Design Tradeoffs and Performance Earl Killian, MIPS Computer Systems . The Megacell Differentiated Floating Point Product Family Merrick Darley, Don Steiss, Peter Groves, David Bural, Maria Gill, & Tod Wolf Texas Instruments . High-Integration 2nd Level Cache for the i486 CPU Adi Gobert, Intel Corporation 12:30 - 2:00 LUNCH 2:00 - 3:30 Special Processors . C-Cube CL950 MPEG Video Decoder/Processor Stephen Purcell, C-Cube Microsystems . A Smart Frame Buffer Joel McCormack, DEC Western Research Laboratory . A High-Performance, Low-Cost Neural Chip Gary Tahara, Inova Microelectronics 3:30 - 4:00 BREAK 4:00 - 5:30 High-Performance Processors - III . National's Swordfish - A Superscalar with DSP Reuven Marko & Motti Beck, National Semiconductor . H1: A Superscalar Pipelined CPU Bob Krysiak, Richard Forsythe & Roger Sheperd INMOS Ltd. . The Pinnacle SPARC Module Raju Vegeshna, Ross Technology 5:30 Closing Remarks HOUSING INFORMATION Housing is available on the Stanford University campus in Stern Hall, a short walk from Dinkelspiel Auditorium where the symposium will be held. Housing is in student residences with central lavatory facilities and costs $40 per night. A key deposit is required that will be refunded at checkout. Housing arrangements on the Stanford campus must be mase by July 26. Housing is also available at numerous hotels and motels on the peninsula in Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Mountain View, and Los Altos close to Stanford University. If you would like additional housing information, please check the housing information request box on the registration form. QUESTIONS? For more information on registration and local arrangements contact Dr. Robert Stewart at (415) 941-6699 or r.stewart@compmail.com (use email after June 1). REGISTRATION FEES Postmarked by Subsequent July 26 Registration IEEE Computer Society $170 $240 or ACM Member Non-Member $240 $290 Full-Time Student $75 $100 Instead of payment by check, registration may be charged to VISA or MasterCard. Registration charged to a credit card may be FAXed to Dr. Robert Stewart at (415) 941-6699. REGISTRATION INCLUDES * Attendance * Sunday evening wine & cheese reception * One copy of the notes * Monday evening reception * Two luncheons * Coffee breaks * Parking at Florence Moore Hall On-site registration is available Sunday evening at the wine and cheese reception, and each morning at the symposium. WINE & CHEESE RECEPTION * Sunday, August 25 --- 5:00-7:00 PM * Rodin Gardens, Stanford University * A guided tour of the statuary will be provided. HOT CHIPS III REGISTRATION FORM Name________________________________________________________________________ Affiliation_________________________________________________________________ Address_____________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip______________________________________________________________ Country_____________________________________________________________________ Area Code/Phone #___________________________________________________________ Email Address_______________________________________________________________ Membership: IEEE______ ACM_______ Membership Number___________________________________________________________ Check One: ______Check drawn on a U.S. Bank ______MasterCard Make Check Payable To: Hot Chips Symposium ______VISA Name on Credit Card_________________________________________________________ Credit Card #_______________________________________________________________ Expiration Date_____________________________________________________________ Signature___________________________________________________________________ Amount Enclosed_____________________________________________________________ Mail To: Dr. Robert G. Stewart Stewart Research Enterprises 1658 Belvoir Drive Los Altos, CA 94024 ______Housing Information Requested ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1991 04:00:21 -0600 From: borys Subject: Fibre to the Home Conference TRLabs (formerly Alberta Telecommunications Research Centre) presents: FIBRE TO THE HOME Trends in Residential Fibre Access August 28 and 29, 1991 Edmonton, Alberta, Canada This is the first conference dedicated to this topic in Canada, and will be of interest to engineering, management, regulatory, and marketing staff of both cable TV companies and telcos. Sessions cover such topics as: - Fibre to the Curb systems and trials - Broadband Fibre to the Home systems and trials - Potential Services and the economics of Fibre in the Loop - Implementation Issues - Fibre in the Feeder systems for cable TV - A panel discussion featuring the CRTC (regulators), the cable industry, and the telephone industry on the topic of a shared broadband network. Registration is limited to 150 people to permit maximum interaction with the speakers and other attendees. For more information, please call: Myron Borys, FTTH Conference Director TRLabs (403) 440-7213 FAX: (403) 463-3010 atrc!borys@cs.UAlberta.CA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 10:01:19 -0700 From: Peter Marshall Subject: What Will Turn the Telcos On From an article by Victor Toth in a recent issue of "STC Lines," entitled "Don't Give Up, You Can Never Tell What Will Turn the Telcos on": Believe it or not, "little guys" can still have an impact on shaping the network, or at least the services which it makes possible. The principal of a company known as Phone Spots, Inc., recently appeared before the IILC(an industry organization dominated by BOCs and formed to promote the deployment and use of...ONA features and services)to present his idea and solicit telco changes to the network that would make it work. Believe it or not, he got the BOCs real "hot" over his gimmick, and now they are falling all over themselves trying to come up with a network solution. Phone Spots holds a patent on the concept of directly accessing an originating client's transmission path during the audible ringing portion of a call during call set-up and delivering an audible message or signal to the caller between the ringing signals without delaying the call progress. Expressed in its more likely and intended context, this firm intends to launch a business of delivering ten second recorded advertising messages between ringing signals simultaneously on a potentially very large number of telephone lines. When offered in the residential market, it is contemplated that subscribers will receive a discount on their monthly bill for tolerating the ads. The technical obstacle that the BOCs have undertaken to resolve for Phone Spots is one of facilitating an interface at the end office which will permit bridging the mass announcement equipment across a very large number of lines... to permit detection ... yet guarantee electrical disconnection when conversation begins. It is ... curious, indeed, tonote how unusually responsive teh BOCs have been in nursing this idea all along. It will be just as interesting to see whether, after a year or two, the concept survives as a competitive vendor service, ot whether it finds its way into the central office as monopoly product. ------------------------------ From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: Wed Jun 5 07:44:06 CDT 1991 Subject: World War III In a previous posting there was a discussion of the false alert that was distributed on the news wires. I was on duty at the late KSET in El Paso, Texas that morning and remember the event vividly. Since the facts were a little vague in the previous post, let me fill them out. The alert occured on February 20, 1971 at 9:33AM EST. It was originated by the personnel on duty at NORAD, Cheyenne Mountain. At that time, they had the ability to override the AP and UPI wires. The alert that was issued was actually a declaration of national emergency and not an attack warning. Quite frankly, it shook me up, a lot. Fortunately, I did have the presence of mind to hold off on putting the alert on the air, however, in doing so I was undoubtedly in technical violation of FCC rules. The authenticator words were a list of activate and cancel codes sent out on a quarterly basis by the FCC. They were in bright, flourescent red envelopes. The authenticator word for that day was "hatefulness" and the cancel code was "impish". Unfortunately, NORADs first attempt to undo the mess they caused was to send out a cancel message with the "hatefulness" code. This was *INCORRECT* and, by the book, we should have stayed in emergency operation mode. In my case, I had a Mutual Broadcasting System newscast on the air at that time. Since Mutual operates from Washington and was operating normally, I decided to sit on it until I got a bulletin from MBS. A lot of things grew out of that disaster. At that time, EBS signaling was based upon five seconds on, five seconds off of carrier for 30 seconds and then 30 seconds of 1Khz tone. A lot of stations did a really lousy job of implementing that scheme. They wouldn't do the carrier on/off switch and would just play a tape of a 1Khz tone. Tape being what it was in those days it sure wasn't 1Khz. As a result, FCC type accepted EBS tone generators and monitors were required in all stations. I often wonder if this requirement was ever extended to cable. With about a third of the TV audience watching HBO, ESPN, etc, it should be. (HBO did carry a news bulletin at the onset of the Gulf War, I understand). The two tone "beat" tone that is used now was also instituted as part of those reforms. There was some mention of this being the AP's mistake. Not so. I, in fact, received the message on UPI. NORAD, at that time, had the ability to physically override the AP and UPI. That capability was removed after thius fiasco. Now, as I understand it, the White House would originate a conference call with the networks and the wire services. As I mentioned, it was traumatic. I did have a few nightmares after that. I wonder if I can apply for benefits as a veteran of WW III? Ed Hopper ------------------------------ From: Chuck Hsiao Subject: Programmable Modem Wanted Date: 3 Jun 91 23:41:41 GMT I am looking for a modem which is implemented using a DSP chip such that I can modify its code for a data communication experiment. Any information or pointers will be greately appreciated. Chuck ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #428 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02637; 7 Jun 91 3:34 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa10896; 7 Jun 91 1:59 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa17365; 7 Jun 91 0:53 CDT Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 0:46:03 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #429 BCC: Message-ID: <9106070046.ab31131@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 7 Jun 91 00:45:54 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 429 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Language Line Costs [Will Martin] Visit to California [Carl Moore] Caller ID Comes to Florida [David E. Bernholdt] Ctrl-A's at Beginning and End of Digest [Bill Berbenich] LAN Power Protection [Jeff Sicherman] Emergency Highway Phones [Darren Alex Griffiths] ZUM "Expansion" [Eliot Moore] Pulse Dial Charge? [Jim Redelfs] Question About PC Pursuit and MNP [Steve Forrette] Questions on LAPD [Stanfield L. Smith] Wrong Recordings [Charles Hoequist] The Princess Returns [Roger Clark Swann] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 8:50:28 CDT From: Will Martin Subject: AT&T Language Line Costs There's been some mention on the list in the past of the AT&T Language Line, and I recall at least one correspondent posted an account of his/her experiences along with a citation of the costs involved. I had always thought of it as a "pay-as-you-go" service, available to anyone. But I just received a brochure from AT&T on it which includes a couple comments that imply otherwise. The first is "For more information or to sign up, call 1 800 544-5721." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [Emphasis added] "Sign up"? The other is "Sign up for AT&T Language Line Services before August 30, 1991 and save $500 off the service initiation fee of $1,000." [My comment: "!!!!!"] Are there two different services here, one a non-scheduled, call up and be charged by the minute type and the other a subscription service with a retainer charge and a lower per-minute or per-service charge? Regards, Will wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil OR wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 10:26:49 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Visit to California I'm just back from Los Angeles. Various remarks: Vista United (already noted for Disney World in Florida?) is the default long distance carrier from Disneyland in Anaheim. 0+NPA+7D and 0+7D apparently both work for 0+ within 213. I think I heard "GTE" as local carrier for an intra-LATA 0+ call I made. Would the default carrier be GTE or PacBell as the case may be (depending on where you are calling from) for intra-LATA? The latest phone books (PacBell) in L.A. area discuss both new area codes in California: 415/510 -- points out that the boundary is easy to remember (the S.F. Bay). 213/310 -- prefix list provided for 213 with asterisk to show if a prefix or range of prefixes is moving to 310. There is a 310 PREFIX (huh?) listed for Santa Monica, which is moving to 310. The only prefixes staying in 213 will be Los Angeles (including FX lines serving places which are otherwise in 818 and in the future 310) and Montebello. Everything else in the present 213 will move to 310. (The L.A. airport, which is in the Inglewood exchange along the ocean, will move to 310.) I should also mention there is a West Los Angeles exchange which is not to be confused with Los Angeles, as West Los Angeles is being put in 310. ------------------------------ From: "David E. Bernholdt" Subject: Caller ID Comes to Florida Date: 4 Jun 91 16:19:43 GMT Organization: Quantum Theory Project, Univ. of Florida In my monthly Southern Bell bill was a page-long message about Caller ID coming to "areas where the technology is available" effective July 1, 1991. Per-call blocking will be available dialing *67 (tone) or 1167 (pulse) before the call. "There will be no charge for blocking the transmission of the number. Blocking may not operate from coin telephones and trunk-type services, e.g. motels, hotels and private branch exchanges (PBXs)." "Per-line blocking is availabble to law enforcement agencies' office lines aas well as domestic violence intervention agencies' access lines at established shelters." It then gives an address where "law enforcement agencies and/or domestic violence intervention agencies" can write to apply for per-line blocking or for more information. Looks like they have some pretty specific ideas about who they're going to give per-line blocking to. David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365 ------------------------------ From: bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech.edu Subject: Re: Ctrl-A's at Beginning and End of Digest Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 13:59:33 EDT Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu These Ctrl-A's are a result of Pat's NWU host using the MMDF mailer. MMDF is a MTA (mail transport agent), sometimes used in place of the bundled Unix 'sendmail' MTA. I could tell when they switched MTAs on the NWU host because my "Return-receipt-to:", which is standard in all my off-site mail headers, no longer sent a return receipt. MMDF does not support return-receipt-to. At least not yet and not as far as I know. Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu [Moderator's Note: You are correct about the use of mmdf as the mail agent at this site. When various messages are kept in a mailbox here, the control A's are separators between them. You should not usually see these because they are stripped away. When I remailed those three issues the other day (mainly because MCI upchucked and dumped the whole thing several issues in a row) I took copies from my archives files to retransmit, and forgot to remove the control A's between them. Although your return-receipt-to does not work here, *most* mail to telecom@eecs.nwu.edu gets an autoreply from me. There are some technical reasons why a few of you never get the autoreply. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 91 11:23:19 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: LAN Power Protection Organization: Cal State Long Beach I tried comp.dcom.lans first but no response so ... How much risk is there that a power problem at a workstation on a LAN will propogate through the LAN and damage other workstations ? (Note that I am not particularly concerned with transmission disruption but with physical/electrical discombuberation (sp?) of the equipment. DO NIC's have any built-in protection for this or is there something that can be done when installing the LAN (extra parts, wiring methods) to eliminate or minimize this risk. I assume that putting power protection devices on every workstation will help and is necessary to try and keep the problem from getting into any of the machines in the first place but would like a little extra power protection for the LAn as a whole. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: Darren Alex Griffiths Subject: Emergency Highway Phones Date: 4 Jun 91 17:26:59 GMT Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA A local newscast reported on some interesting highway emergency phones this morning. It seems that CalTrans is installing phones throughout the San Francisco bay area on major highways. The phones connect you directly to to highway patrol and in will be spaced as close as a half-mile apart. The phones will be installed in pairs, on each side of the highway, to discourage people from crossing busy roads. All that is fairly standard, the interesting part is that the phones are all cellular and run on solar power so no wires are needed to hook 'em up. The reported said that the phones could be installed in about twenty minutes. They are all being paid for by a one dollar surcharge on vehicle registration. They did not mention which cellular carrier the phones operate on and whether that company is getting any money. All bay area counties are getting the phones except SF, Marin and Napa because voters in those counties turned down the surcharge. The idea is pretty neat, but it does raise a few interesting questions. I wonder what kind of security measures are taken. I'm not to worried about some bad guy over hearing a distress call from an helpless motorist at four in the morning and getting there before the cops. I would be interested in whether or not someone could steal the serial number to one of the phones and reprogram their own phone in order to make calls at someone else's expense. It would also be interesting to see if most of the phones have the same serial number or if they are all different, and whether or not the phones are smart enough to send their location to the dispatcher when a call is placed. Cheers, darren alex griffiths (415) 708-3294 dag@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ From: elmo@pain.UUCP (Eliot Moore) Subject: ZUM "Expansion" Date: 5 Jun 91 03:13:08 GMT Organization: Public Access Info Network (818/776-1447) How soon we forget ... PacBell / GTE's generous "expansion" plan of June 1, 1991 follows the new geography of December 10th, 1990, in which many local calls became tolls. For those with longer memories, you will recall the decimation of October 1981, where some calling areas shrunk over 50%! GTE, naturally, has been awarded a 6% basic rate increase in return for their "gift". Regards, Elmo techsys!pain!elmo Public Access Information Network (818/776-1447) ++ Waffle BBS v1.64 ++ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 02 Jun 91 18:37:21 CST From: Jim Redelfs Subject: Pulse Dial Charge? Reply-To: ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@uunet.uu.net Organization: Macnet Omaha R. Kevin Oberman wrote: > Craig Watts of Pacific Bell is quoted > that 23% of California households have rotary phones. (First time > I've heard that number. I wonder where he got it.) That figure doesn't surprise me AT ALL. As a residence repair technician for US WEST Communications in Omaha, I still see rotary sets regularly - frequently, in fact. The fact that they are the most durable telephones ever made is certainly the primary factor to their longevity. > I wonder when COs will start dropping support for rotory phones into > electronic switches? I suspect it's coming now that tone dialing is > "free" in California. Don't hold your breath. The Telephone Company has been committed for YEARS to providing "reverse compatibility" and the above "23%" is an excellent reason. Also, I suspect that accomodating pulse dialing is one of the least sophisticated functions required of an ESS Central Office. Providing pulse capability probably doesn't increase the cost of an ESS on iota. The Nebraska Public Service Commission ordered telcos to stop charging for TouchTone(tm) several years ago. It has been long enough that I am going on foggy recollection, but I remember that they ordered our company to PROVE how much of the Local Monthly Service amount went to cover the ACTUAL cost of providing TTS - for which we were charging $1.20/line. As I recall, the best we could come up with was SEVEN CENTS!!!!! Boom! With the rap of a gavel and the stroke of a pen, everyone got it for "free"! HA! [Disclaimer: These are MY words and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and/or policies of my employer.] JR Tabby 2.2 MacNet Omaha 402-289-2899 On loan from Mrs MacWidow (1:285/14) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 22:44:08 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Question About PC Pursuit and MNP I hope that someone familiar with PC Pursuit or MNP-compatible modems in general can help me with this one: I need to know how to tell an MNP-compatible modem to pretend that it doesn't have MNP, so that when it calls out and reaches another MNP modem, it will "play dumb" and not enable MNP mode. In other words, the connection will be a standard 2400 baud connection. Presumably, this is done with an ATS command on the dialing end, prior to the dialing command. My situation is that I'm dialing into Telenet using a standard 2400 baud modem. The outdial modem in the remote city is dialing to an MNP (I think 5) modem, and returning a "CONNECT 2400 EC", indicating an MNP connection. The problem is that if the remote host sends data continuously for more than a screen or so, there is tremendous data corruption and loss. When the remote modems connect in standard, non-MNP mode, everything works dandy. The Customer Service people at Telenet were of no help - they couldn't quite understand the problem, and said that the only valid commands to give an outdial modem were ATZ and ATDT. I suspect that some other commands, such as ATS might work as well, but they would not tell me about them. Anyone have an answer? Thanks! Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed 05 Jun 91 08:07:15 From: "Stanfield L. Smith " Subject: Questions on LAPD I need HELP in trying to understand how LAPD is going to work on the ISDN B channel of the telephone network. What I have been able to find out is there are many DIFFERENT standards for LAPD, the CCITT, ATT, French and others. I have the CCITT book, but no documentation about the other variations. 1) Does anyone have documentation on the non-CCITT "standards" that is Emailable or suitable to FTP? 2) Can anyone explain how these different incarnations for LAPD are going to inter-operate as a world wide telephone system? Thanks in advance, Stanfield L. Smith stan@seadog.cns.com 516-277-0203 ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 91 11:51:00 EDT From: Charles Hoequist Subject: Wrong Recordings Steve Forrette, in reference to his and Tim Irvin's difficulty with inappropriate automatic-intercept recordings from Pac Bell, asks what, if anything, can be done to correct this. Well, as always, 'it depends ...', in this case on where the problem lies and how Pac Bell stores its recordings. If this is in fact a software problem (the switch is programmed to play the "line is being checked" message at the wrong time), the correction will wait until subscriber irritation forces Pac Bell to have a patch made. Since the problem doesn't actually cripple the switch, the patch would go out at whatever interval Pac Bell's supplier releases patches and upgrades. (where do they get their switch software?) Assuming it's a case of the wrong recording being in place (and that Pac Bell no longer uses tape loops :), then fixing it could be simple or next to impossible. The latter is the case if the telco has its intercept announcements burned into a PROM in the switch somewhere. Burning a new PROM is both tedious and supports an old technology, so they won't want to do it. On the other hand, if the guilty announcement is just a file sitting on a disk that the switch reads in as needed, then replacement can be just about as quick and dirty as the telco wants. Charles Hoequist hoequist@bnr.ca BNR Inc. PO Box 13478 Research Triangle Park NC 27709-3478, USA ------------------------------ From: Roger Clark Swann Subject: The Princess Returns Date: 6 Jun 91 04:37:37 GMT Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics I was into my local ATT Phone Center this week and spotted something that I haven't seen for some time: Princess (R) phones ! ( I think that the Princess name is/was a registered trademark ... ) I asked the sales person and he told me that ATT had just recently brought them back due to popular demand. They are even in a new set of colors that weren't available in the past. And of course, available in either push button or rotary dial versions. However, he said that they were for lease only, no purchases. I wonder if the insides are the same as the old ones I remember? Roger Swann | uucp: uw-beaver!ssc-vax!clark @ | fax: 206-773-1249 The Boeing Company | voice: 206-773-5491 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #429 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05792; 7 Jun 91 4:47 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09560; 7 Jun 91 3:07 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab10896; 7 Jun 91 2:00 CDT Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 1:49:07 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #430 BCC: Message-ID: <9106070149.ab03742@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 7 Jun 91 01:48:48 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 430 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Caller ID Approved in NC; So Bell Unhappy [News & Record via W. T. Sykes] Caller ID Plan OK'd in NC [Raleigh News & Observer via Henry E. Schaffer] Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted [Harri Valkama] Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? [Bill Woodcock] Address of MaxTrek, Inc. [Francesco Caserta] SWBT Computer Outage [J. Philip Miller] N.Y. Metro North Commuter Railroad [Carl Moore] Western Electric Guitar Amplifier [Billy Bradford] Radio Advertisement For Area 908 [Carl Moore] Modem Trouble on Subscriber Loop Carrier [Jim Hickstein] MCI, PictureTel Marketing [Roger Clark Swann] Last Laugh! Voice Mail Tricks; or One Hell of a Time [Tim Smith] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: wts1 Subject: Caller ID Approved in NC; Southern Bell Unhappy With Restrictions Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1991 15:18:05 GMT Reprinted _with_ permission from the Greensboro (NC) {News & Record}, Sunday, June 2, 1991. "Caller ID Service OK'd" RALEIGH - Southern Bell received permission Friday to offer Caller ID, a service that flashes the telephone number from which an incoming call has originated, to customers in Raleigh, Charlotte and Burlington. But while permitting Caller ID, the state Utilities Commission issued a number of restrictions meant to protect privacy. Caller ID allows a subscriber to purchase a special device by which he or she can see the number of the telephone from which the call is being made before picking up the receiver. The commission, in its 12-page order, ruled that Southern Bell must provide a free blocking service for anyone who does not want his number flashed into the home or business he is calling. A subscriber must also have the blocking ability when he uses other telephones, if he chooses, the commission said. And every six months, customers must be notified of their right to obtain free blocking. Those restrictions are designed to protect a person's right to privacy, said Jo Anne Sanford, a special deputy attorney general who handles utility matters. She said she thought the ruling is the toughest issued in any Caller ID case in the nation. Southern Bell representatives, however, said restrictions might keep the company from following through with plans to offer the service to its North Carolina customers. The phone company estimated the monthly price of the service at $7.50 a month for residences, $10 for businesses." END OF REPRINTED ARTICLE Pat, Yesterday I called Southern Bell to see if any plans had been made as to an availability date, and got a decidedly cool response from the business office. It appears SB is not very happy with the blocking restrictions (evidently per line and per call, with twice yearly notification) and may punt. I want my Caller ID. William T. Sykes AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies Burlington, NC UUCP: att!burl!wts att!cbnewsb!wts1 ------------------------------ From: "Henry E. Schaffer" Subject: Caller ID Plan OK'd in NC Reply-To: "Henry E. Schaffer" Organization: NCSU Computing Center Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1991 19:08:20 GMT The NC Utilities Commission gave Southern Bell permission to offer Caller ID to customers in Raleigh, Charlotte and Burlington. This was approved last Friday, with some restrictions that Southern Bell (a BellSouth Company) said might keep it from offering the service. From a Saturday Raleigh {News and Observer} story: "The commission, in a 12 page order, ruled that Southern Bell must provide free blocking service ... a subscriber also must have the blocking ability when using other telephones, if he chooses, the commission said." This sounds like free per-line and per-call blocking. The article continued: "And customers must be notified every six months of their right to obtain free blocking." "Those restrictions were designed to protect a person's right to privacy, said Jo Anne Sanford, a special deputy state attorney general who handles utility matters." [Moderator's Note: Same story as previous item, mostly deleted here. PAT] "A southern Bell representative, however, said the restrictions might keep the company from following through with plans to offer the service to its North Carolina customers." --------- Southern Bell had originally proposed Caller ID in Oct., 1989, said it would decrease annoying/harassing calles and estimated the service price as $7.50 for residences, $10 for businesses, and included no provisions to block displays for callers who did not want their numbers transmitted. A modification of their proposal offered blocking to selected law enforcement and human resources agencies. henry schaffer n c state univ ------------------------------ From: Harri Valkama Subject: Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted Organization: University of Vaasa, Finland Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 19:21:27 GMT Who can recommend for me an automatic fax/phone switch that has a reasonable price. Let's say under $100. It should sniff the incoming call and whether it is a phone call or a fax call direct it to my telephone or fax modem. Here in Finland they are overlypriced; the local telephone company tried to sell me one that cost 1500FIM (about $350) !!! Also a fax number for the company that sells these is very welcome. I guess this device should work the same whether it is used in US or Europe or what. Power supply is perhaps different but not a real problem. I mean that it should work with phone and fax signals or are there any differences concerning this kind of scheme. Harri Valkama, University of Vaasa, Finland P.O. Box 700, 65101 VAASA, Finland (tel:+358 61 248426 fax:+358 61 248465) Anon ftp garbo.uwasa.fi (128.214.12.37) & nic.funet.fi (128.214.6.100) hv@uwasa.fi hv@finfiles.bitnet /s=hv/o=uwasa/prdm=inet/amdm=fumail/c=fi ------------------------------ From: Bill Woodcock Subject: Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? Date: 5 Jun 91 23:38:42 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Steve Forrette writes: > Does anyone have ideas as to how to get these > types of problems resolved? I've tried in vain on couple of occasions > to get Pacific Bell to fix wrong recordings or other minor CO trouble, > and Repair Service seems very uninterested. At first, they can't > understand the problem, and resort to "we just tested your line, and > didn't find anything wrong." Once I convince them that it's not "in > my line", they take the report, the ticket soon gets cleared, and the > problem is still there. I've all but given up. Your line is almost certainly served out of one of the two switches at 2116 Bancroft. There's an NT DMS100 and an AT&T 1AESS there, and between the two of them, they serve almost all of Berkeley and north Oakland. The phone numbers there are as follows: (reasonably) Techie folks: +1 415 540 1129 Management folks: +1 415 644 7953 Or at least those were the numbers last fall, when I last enjoyed the inestimable pleasure of business dealings with Pac*Bell. bill.woodcock.iv..woody@ucscb.ucsc.edu 2355.virginia.st..berkeley.ca.94709.1315 ------------------------------ From: Francesco Caserta Subject: Address of MaxTrek, Inc. Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 23:55:55 GMT Could somebody please provide me with the address of MaxTrek, Inc. One of their products I'm interested in is a modem/fax/phone switch called SmartMax II which seems pretty nice. Thanks a lot. Francesco Caserta ------------------------------ From: "J. Philip Miller" Subject: SWBT Computer Outage Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 22:29:47 CDT I had expected to see a posting from someone else here in St. Louis because it has been front page news for the last several days that a SWBT computer went out last friday with serious outages. No technical details were given, but apparently some 2500 data lines were affected, producing the following outages: * several hundred ATM terminals were not functional. * teller terminals within some branch banks were not functional. * money transfers for the Federal Reserve bank were disrupted. * off track betting at a local race track was not operational. What I find most puzzling is that according to the press it took over THREE DAYS to "reprogram" all of the connections. No backups? Anyone know the real story? J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 uunet!wuarchive!wubios!phil - UUCP (314)362-2693(FAX) C90562JM@WUVMD - bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 12:01:15 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: N.Y. Metro North Commuter Railroad The New York MetroNorth commuter railroad has lines which run from Manhattan (New York City) into the northern suburbs. The New York MetroNorth commuter railroad has a toll-free number which accepts input consisting of the first four letters of your destination! I ended up using that system on Sunday, May 5 of this year. I had originally planned to go from Tarrytown to Grand Central Station, so I called 800-METRO-INFO (800-638-7646) and when asked for the station I was going from, I punched in TARR (8277). But then I planned to check into a hotel in Chappaqua, and on my way up the Saw Mill River Parkway enroute there, I saw a station I'd seen before, at Chappaqua, so I was able to call 800-METRO-INFO again and this time punch in CHAP (2427) and then go on the train from there. Note: PORT (7678) requires further prompted input to distinguish between Port Jervis and Port Chester. Also, the toll-free number worked from Maryland when I was making the original plan to go from Tarrytown. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 12:48:58 EDT From: Billy Bradford Subject: Western Electric Guitar Amplifier [Moderator's Note: This message was forwarded to the Digest from the PC Pursuit Net Exchange BBS. PAT] No. 123 06/05/91 01:16:35 From: Billy Bradford To: Patrick Townson Subject: Western Electric Guitar Amplifier I've been reading the Western Electric sound-recording thread for quite a while now, and came across something interesting. I bought an old guitar amplifier about three weeks ago. On the back, it says "LICENSED UNDER PATENTS OF WESTERN ELECTRIC AND AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CO. LAUREL ELECTRONICS CO., SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS. 110-120 VOLTS AC 40 WATTS". It uses three vacuum tubes, a 12AU6, a 50C5, and a 35W4. Do any of you great telecom gurus out there know what patents are being used? It's just got two instrument inputs and a volume knob, and a built-in speaker. I really enjoy reading this newsgroup. Glad to see that John Higdon is, as Aerosmith puts it, "Back in the Saddle Again." 8-) Billy Bradford | I'm just a 16-year old hacker (of the old POB 1374 | definition) with nothing to do but learn. Anadarko, OK 73005 | You people are making it INTERESTING! 8-) telecom@eecs.nwu.edu [Moderator's Note: Billy neglected to mention in his .signature that he is also an honors student, and *the* computer expert in his school. He desparately is trying to find a unix account somewhere with a local area dialup if anyone can help. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 13:56:11 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Radio Advertisement For Area 908 KYW news-radio (1060 AM in Philadelphia) is running an ad for area code 908. It depicts a woman moving out (on her husband?) and taking the dog, etc. to central New Jersey, which is going to have the new area code. Here in telecom, we know that 908 is already useable; this ad obviously warns of the FULL CUTOVER, without using those words. Earlier warning noted for phone company offices: brace yourselves when a full cutover approaches! ------------------------------ From: Jim Hickstein Subject: Modem Trouble on Subscriber Loop Carrier Date: 6 Jun 91 01:16:49 GMT Organization: Teradyne, Inc. San Jose CA One of my users tried to dial in from home recently, only to discover that the modem spit out garbage continually. He thought it looked like a bad case of a noisy line, but voice calls sounds "crystal clear." I noted that his use of "crystal" indicated that something had gotten better than it was; he said that seemed to be the case. Two such 1200-baud modems showed the same behavior (although one had a history of such problems, and had had its 600-Ohm transformer replaced a while back). Even on calls from one of his residential lines to the other, the same symptoms arise. So this lets out the modem on my end, and the network between his serving office and anywhere else; the two directory numbers have the same exchange, so I suppose they are in the same switch. Thinking fast, I explained that certain adaptive compression and other fancy techniques can cause trouble for modem users. He mentioned that a representative of Pac*Bell had said that they "guarantee service only for voice data [sic]". And the modem worked last week; it just suddenly stopped working. But I thought these techniques were only economical in the long-haul network. Is it possible that the little box on the corner suddenly has a newfangled subscriber loop carrier terminal in it that does some really sophisticated compression, or otherwise makes assumptions about the sort of traffic that will be handled? There has been enormous growth in his neighborhood (he said they had run low on directory numbers, but this doesn't necessarily imply a shortage in the loop plant, I suppose). Are they starting to use something other than straight digitizing on SLCs? Or did both of his modems go south in the same week? Jim Hickstein, Teradyne/Attain, San Jose CA, (408) 434-0822 FAX -0252 jxh@attain.teradyne.com ...!{decwrl!teda,apple}!attain!jxh ------------------------------ From: Roger Clark Swann Subject: MCI, PictureTel Marketing Date: 5 Jun 91 21:44:43 GMT Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics From June 3, 1991 issue of {PC Week}; MCI, PictureTel Plan Marketing Marriage - Michael R. Zimmerman [ just a summary ] MCI Communications Corp. and PictureTel Corp. announce a joint marketing agreement to boost videoconferencing. They will market each other's products - MCI's Switched 56 and PictureTel's system 4000. PictureTel nabbed 74 percent of the low-bandwidth market in 1989. Roger Swann | uucp: uw-beaver!ssc-vax!clark @ | The Boeing Company | ------------------------------ From: ts@cup.portal.com Subject: Voice Mail Tricks; or, One Hell of a Time Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 04:51:11 PDT Tom Perrine asked: > PS: I am also looking for any "stupid phonemail(tm) tricks" that > anyone can suggest. I have a sense of humor that has been described as > "strange, demented but never intentionally hostile". Something we can > all laugh at here, as a way to make the new phone system a little less > scary for some of our more telephobic employees. We have ROLM > PhoneMail, Release 5.0. The voice mail system where I work lets us send messages with delayed delivery. It appears that one can set a message for delivery several months ahead. I've thought of leaving a message for my boss set to go off in about six months. Every month I could then cancel this and resend it for six months ahead. Thus, this message would only get delivered to my boss if I failed to cancel and resend it, which should only happen if I die. The message would be something like this: "Hello, this is Tim! It's real hot here, and I miss you quite a bit. The good news is I've seen the list and you are scheduled to join me here! Having a hell of a time, hope to see you soon. -- Tim" Tim Smith [Moderator's Note: I'll probably join you, since I want to be with all my friends, and they all enjoy spending their summer vacation at that nice resort in Hell, Michigan. (Area 313, just southwest of Ann Arbor for the curious among you.) It has been one hell of a long day here, so I think I will quit for tonight and go to bed. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #430 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08279; 7 Jun 91 5:47 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21309; 7 Jun 91 4:16 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab09560; 7 Jun 91 3:07 CDT Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 2:15:05 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: Telecom in Eastern Europe BCC: Message-ID: <9106070215.ab07576@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> Here is a lengthy message I received about recent developments in telecommunications in Eastern Europe which I thought you would enjoy. Send comments directly to the poster. PAT Date: Thu, 06 Jun 91 23:03:27 EDT From: Richard Budd Subject: Electronic Mail in Eastern Europe Received: by MARIST (Mailer R2.07) id 8189; Fri, 08 Mar 91 18:47:06 EST Date: Wed, 6 Mar 91 14:47:59 EST Reply-To: Discussion of Polish EARN topics Sender: Discussion of Polish EARN topics From: Zbigniew Jan Pasek Subject: Networking in Eastern Europe X-To: PLEARN-L@UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu To: "Richard Budd KLUB@MARISTB" Zbigniew Pasek, a professor at the University of Michigan, posted this article about three months ago on POLAND-L. It provides information about the status of electronic mail and computer networks in the former East bloc. Considering there was virtually no local area or wide area networks in these countries two years ago (most of the residents did not even have telephones), the development of extensive e-mail networks, particularly in Poland, has been impressive. Richard Budd | E-Mail: Internet-rcbudd@rhqvm19.vnet.ibm.com VM Systems Programmer | Bitnet -klub@maristb.bitnet IBM - Sterling Forest, NY | Phone: (914) 578-3746 Subject of Interest: Telecommunications and networking in Central and Eastern Europe. zbigniew@caen.engin.umich.edu quotes in PLEARN-L of 6 March 1991 the following article: Networking and Electronic Mail in Eastern European Countries Claudio Allocchio, INFN This small note summarizes the results of a survey perfored among parteci- pants to the First International School on Network Management and Analysis, held in Trieste from Dec 4th to Dec 16th 1990. The situation can differ a lot from country to country: some have alreay networking structures available, some other still lack the basics, but in all countries there is a strong push to establish connections and to open conctacts with other nations. The major common problems are the bad financial situation and licensing. Also know-how is a lacking point in many situations. A final table tries to compare the different situations. This note is only a first and non-exausting survey, but I hope it can help. Let's now look more in detalis the various situations. Hungary: There is currently available a national experimental X.25 network called IIF "Information Infrastructure Network" of the Hunagarian Academy of Sciences. This network is a semi-private infrasctructure for a closed community (the R&D community) but it is operated by Hungarian PTT. On this network volume charghing is applied. There are currently one EARN node and one EUnet node, both interfaced with IIF network. There are plans to increase a lot networking capabilities within the country in the near future; during 1991 the public X.25 service, interconnected with other PSDNs will be established. The intention is to run OSI services on the X.25 network, but also a number of tcp/ip point to point connections are foreseen. A tcp/ip connection to HEPnet via CERN is also in preparation. E-mail in Hungary is available via the ELLA system, with an x.400-like user agent developed locally, running on top of IIF X.25. There is a gateway connecting ELLA with EUnet and EARN. The plans are to implement an X.400 MHS as soon as the public x.25 service will be available. Poland: Since a few years there is an experimental x.25 network connecting 8 sites via leased lines. This is supposed to be the kernel of the Counry Academic Computer Network (KASK) wich is supposed to be completed at mid 1991, covering 16 sites, and having gateways to EARN and DFN. There is alrady an EARN con- nection in Warsaw and Wroclaw, and two DECnet connections to CERN from Cracow and Warsaw. E-mail: EARN and HEPnet nodes are reachable with their native protocols, but there is no current gateway to the national x.25 infrastructure. Romania: There are currently only a few and poor quality connection in the country at 4800 bps joining single instituations, and no international links are available. However the PTT started a program to make available networking capabilities (x.25) in the country. It will take some years. For international connectivity satellite links are probably the correct solution. USSR: The USSR situation is very fragmented and there is not what can be called a 'nation wide' networking strategy. Public X.25 service (IASNET) is available and is connected to the major PSDNs in the world, using both ground and satellite links. The research community had free access to this facility, but starting from 1991 each Institute will have to pay the service and this is a major problem. The largest research institutes have some small local private X.25 networks, and DECnet technology is also used locally. Leased lines are obtainable, but due to the country geographical situation satellite links are more reliable. Any institute is trying to provide its user with connectivity with the foreign countries, but often local connectivity is much less implemented, showing real cooperation problems exist. The PAD access to remote sites providing services is the most diffused situation. Apart from public X.25 the cooperative "DEMOS", settled in Moscow, is the recognized Internet entry point for domain '.su' and has a link to Helsinki (Finland). It provides access using UUCP to about 30 sites. Many other institutes join the services via dial-up connections (remote login) to DEMOS and using Kermit to transfer data to their remote account. The DEMOS services are expanding to reach more sites and to improve quality. There is also a planned EARN link from Moscow to Poland and plans to establish DECnet connections on top of public x.25 links to the HEPnet community. The most used connectivity method however is still remote login to some foreign institute to access its services. Electronic mail is avaiable from DEMOS sites, via EUnet, but most of other institutes access to it indirectly via remote login to collaborating remote partners. Czecholslovakia: The networking in the country is currently based on 9.6 Kbps lines used for the national EARN backbone and on 2.4 Kbps dial up lines used within the EUnet community. International connectivity is assured by an EARN link joining Pague to Linz (Austria) and an EUnet link joining Bratislava to Vienna. In 1992 the public X.25 service will be available with international connectivity. The intention is to build a national backbone enabling multi- protocol transport (at least SNA, TCP/IP and X.25) and to have a 64 Kbps link to Internet. Electronic mail is available directly, using both EARN ans EUnet facilities. Summary of Networking is Eastern European Countries | Hungary | Poland | Romania ------- ------ ------- Public X.25 | Expected 1991 | NO (experimental | NO available | IIF (semi-private | network 8 nodes) | | network for academic | | | community, 200 DTEs) | | | | | Pad Access | YES | NO | NO available | | | | | | Leased lines | YES (but takes | YES | YES (very available | long time) | | poor quality) | | | Available | up to 9600 bps | up to 9600 bps | up to 4800 bps Speed | | | | | | Satellite/ | ground | ground | ground Ground lines | | | | | | DECnet net | some Local | some local | NO exists | implementations | one link to CERN | | | | TCP/IP net | some local | 1 local | NO exists | implementations | implementation | | | | EARN net | one link to | one int'l link, | NO exists | TU-Wien | 5 nodes | | | | EUnet net | one link | NO | NO exists | | | | | | Other net | IIF nation | exper. X.25 | NO exists | wide X.25 | nation wide | | | | Planned | YES | YES | -- DECnet | nation wide | some sites | | | | Planned | YES | YES | -- TCP/IP | nation wide | nation wide | | | | Planned | YES | YES (SNA) | YES EARN | nation wide | nation wide | | | | Planned | YES | -- | -- EUnet | nation wide | | | | | LAN | NOVELL, | NOVELL | NOVELL technology | DECnet | | | | | E-mail | YES | YES | NO available | directly | directly | | | | E-mail | ELLA, UUCP | VMSmail, | N/A protocols | RSCS | RSCS | | USSR | Czechoslovakia ---- --------------- Public X.25 | YES, IASNET connected | NO (expected in available | to most of PSDN in | 1992) | Europe and USA | | | Pad Access | YES (x.21) but not | NO available | from all sites | | | Leased lines | YES, but sometines | YES available | with poor quality | | | Available | up to 9600 bps | up to 9600 bps Speed | | | | Satellite/ | ground & satellite | ground Ground lines | | | | DECnet net | some Local | NO exists | implementations | | | TCP/IP net | NO | NO exists | | | | EARN net | NO | one int'l link, exists | | 5 nodes | | EUnet net | YES, link to Finland | YES exists | | | | Other net | -- | -- exists | | | | Planned | YES | NO DECnet | nation wide | | | Planned | YES | YES TCP/IP | nation wide | nation wide | | Planned | YES | YES EARN | nation wide | nation wide | | Planned | YES | -- EUnet | nation wide | | | LAN | Ethernet, | Ethernet technology | DECnet | | | E-mail | YES, directly from | YES available | some sites | directly | | E-mail | UUCP | UUCP, protocols | | RSCS Yugoslavia: 3123 YUBGEF51 YUBGSS21 Electrical Engineering Faculty, Universit JNET 90/07/03 0063 YUBGSS21 AEARN Republicki Zavod za Statistiku SR Srbije JES2 90/08/17 Hungary: 3224 HUEARN AEARN Computer and Automation Institute Budapes RSCS 90/07/03 Czechoslovakia: 3223 CSEARN AEARN Czech Technical University, Prague, Czech RSCS 90/11/30 1128 CSPGAS11 CSEARN Institute of Information Theory and Autom RSCS 90/11/30 1024 CSPGCE11 CSEARN Faculty of Civil Engineering of CVUT,Prag RSCS 90/11/30 1037 CSPGEU11 CSEARN Prague School of Economics RSCS 90/11/30 1055 CSPUNI12 CSEARN Czech Technical University, Prague, Czech RSCS 90/11/30 -   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24252; 7 Jun 91 22:00 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19191; 7 Jun 91 20:30 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa00659; 7 Jun 91 19:24 CDT Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 19:24:04 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #431 BCC: Message-ID: <9106071924.ab11968@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 7 Jun 91 19:23:57 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 431 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Hollings and Pac*Bell [John Higdon] Alternative LD from Vancouver, B.C. (Answers) [David Rabson] Nokia P-30 Handheld Cellphone Accessories [Bill Nickless] Calling Card Calls from Canada [Maurice R. Baker] Interesting Article in IEEE Proceedings [Maurice R. Baker] Mass DPU Agrees Second Unlisted Line is No Charge [John R. Levine] RBOCs Own Cellular [Ken Jongsma] Easy Fax to ASCII? [Adam M. Gaffin] Phone/PC Interface Hardware [Jonathan Mark] Service Overlap [Jim Rees] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 10:39 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Hollings and Pac*Bell Pac*Bell has given those of us who care to look a glimpse of the future under the Hollings bill that permits the RBOCs to enter the world of equipment manufacturing. It is call "The Message Center", and while it is not exactly "hardware", it is a good example of how Pac*Bell intends to compete in the marketplace. The "Message Center" is a voicemail service that directly competes with voicemail service bureaus. It will answer your phone after a preset number of rings, allow you to retrieve your messages from anywhere, and will put "stutter" dial tone on your phone if there are messages waiting. What is wrong with this? First, it is priced well below most service bureaus. Using the vast capital resources available courtesy of its ratepayers, Pac*Bell can offer this service at a preditory price that is designed to murder the competition. When the field has been thinned out sufficiently, then the price can be whatever it wants. With a service bureau, it is necessary to forward calls to the special number it provides for your mail box. This results in at least local charges for the forwarded calls. Pac*Bell, being "the phone company" does not worry about this and will tout this as an advantage for its own system (no local charges). And no service bureau can provide "stutter" dial tone on your telephone if you have messages holding. Another EXCLUSIVE Pac*Bell advantage -- exploiting the fact that it controls the network. This is how Pac*Bell would play in the equipment market. "Buy our system. It has special features that no other system can provide." And it would have those features because if you bought the Pac*Bell system, special signals or what-have-you could be sent from the CO to enable the exclusive selling points--signals that would be denied ordinary vendors. In other words, Pac*Bell would use its capital from the regulated services to subsidize preditory pricing, while using its position as controller of the network to provide "exclusive" services. If you doubt this, just look at "The Message Center" and ask yourself these questions: 1. Why does "The Message Center" offer features I can't get anywhere else? 2. Why does it cost less than any other comparable service? 3. What will it cost when the competition is driven out of the market? What would you think of ConEd or PG&E selling appliances, claiming that this would advance the state of the art, benefit the handicapped, improve the quality of life, etc., etc.? Let us hope the Hollings bill dies a well-deserved death in the House. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: But actually, in Chicago the Commonwealth Edison Company does offer 'light bulb service'. For every paid electric bill you turn in, you can have four bulbs (various wattages) for every ten dollars or so on the bill. No one complains about it, and I am not about to complain about Ameritech/Illinois Bell's voicemail service here. I think it beats out any of the others at half the price. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 12:11:15 EDT From: David Rabson Subject: Alternative LD From Vancouver, B.C. (Answers) Organization: Cornell Theory Center Some months ago, before moving to Canada, I called all the US long-distance companies to enquire about calling-card rates from Canada to the U.S. MCI quoted very favourable figures, which I verified on two subsequent calls to customer service. When I received my bill, I found that they had charged between double and quadruple the rates they had quoted me (taking into account the calling-card surcharge, naturally). To their credit, MCI eventually adjusted my bill to reflect the originally-quoted rates, rebating my account about $40. I would not recommend using either MCI or Sprint from Canada; both charge more than B.C. Telephone. After abandoning MCI, I found that while Canadian regulations have apparently prevented the establishment of large, national alternative long-distance carriers as in the U.S., there are numerous local outfits in Vacncouver. Most I called had moderately large volume requirements. One, however, is well suited to the average home user. CamNet charges 35% less than B.C. Tel during all rate periods to the U.S., 25% less to Ontario and Quebec, and roughly 10% less on most international calls. Set-up is $10 (CDN), and there is a $2/month service charge. This puts them about where I remember MCI being ten or twelve years ago. Users can also call U.S. 800 numbers for a flat charge of 30c/minute. They apparently do not have call supervision, for some calls of less than 15 seconds seem not to be billed. Access is through a local number and touch-tone code. They do not advertise, and most people here have never heard of them. I hope this will be of some use to readers living in or moving to B.C. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 12:14:56 CDT From: Bill Nickless Subject: Nokia P-30 Handheld Cellphone Accessories Pat, I seem to recall you bought a Radio Shack CT-301, and you've done business with Cellular Products Distributors. I ordered from them a battery eliminatator; it fits on the phone where the battery goes but plugs into the cigarette lighter in my car. Works great -- and should save wear on the batteries. Haven't you had to replace the battery on the phone more than once? Bill Nickless nickless@andrews.edu or nickless@flash.ras.anl.gov (708) 972-7390 or (616) 927-0982 [Moderator's Note: I've had to replace the battery twice on the Radio Shack phone. Both times, the old one got pretty well hosed from getting charged too often, or not enough, etc. I also have the battery eliminator from the same company, and it works great in the car. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 13:34:31 EDT From: Maurice R Baker Subject: Calling Card Calls From Canada Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories After the recent spate of articles about "ringing tones around the world" and "a view of telephone service in the U.K.", I thought that I would share my recent telephonic experience while visiting Toronto, Ontario, Canada earlier this week. I had occasion to make a few business and personal calls back home to the U.S., and opted for the "Bell" payphone in the lobby of the Westin Harbour Castle Hotel to avoid the $1.00 'service' charge on each call from my room. I used both my AT&T Universal Card and AT&T Calling Card, with identical results: Dial the number as 0+XXX+YYY+ZZZZ. Wait for the "bong", and enter my card number/pin. After a few seconds, get a synthesized (or recorded) message: "Please hold for operator assistance" Then a ringback or two, followed by a real live human operator: "Please hold for card verification" I could hear her keying in something from the buttons clicking. Frequently I would then hear a spurt of (what sounded to me) 2600 Hz. perhaps as a trunk was seized. Then another "bong" tone, with some more audible keyboard pressing. Finally, the operator would say: "I'll put your call through now" Optionally followed by "have a nice day" or whatever, but never "Thank you for using Bell Canada" I interpret this to mean that Network Interconnect between U.S. and Canada has not been completely implemented, and CCS7 messages can't be automatically exchanged across the border yet to the AT&T NCPs, etc. Of more immediate interest is the question: Will I (should I) be charged for an operator-assisted call even though I dialed the called-party and my credit card/pin number myself? M. R. Baker AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel homxc!jj1028 -or- jj1028 at homxc.att.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 13:41:36 EDT From: Maurice R Baker Subject: Interesting Article in IEEE Proceedings Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Just a brief mention of an interesting and well-written journal article which will ikely be of interest to many readers of this newsgroup: "The Intelligent Network-Changing the Face of Telecommunications" by Richard B. Robrock II of Bellcore in "Proceedings of the IEEE", Vol. 79, Number 1, January 1991. The title does not do it justice ... it contains a nice historical perspective on common channel signalling (CCS6 & CCS7), 800 services, CLASS, etc. while providing an abundant amount of technical detail and an excellent list of references. "Proceedings of the IEEE" should be available in any well-stocked college/ university library (associated with a school offering classes/coursework related to EE or the like) not to mention many technically-oriented company libraries. I'm sure you could also order a reprint from the IEEE, if necessary. M. R. Baker AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel homxc!jj1028 -or- jj1028 at homxc.att.com ------------------------------ Subject: Mass DPU Agrees Second Unlisted Line is No Charge Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 17:03:08 EDT From: "John R. Levine" A few months ago I called up New England Tel to get Ringmate, their distinctive ringing service, on my second phone line. Although NET for some reason cannot combine multiple residential lines on a single bill, it has always been the case that unlisting the second and subsequent phone numbers was free. My second number has always been unlisted, so I had the two new Ringmate numbers unlisted as well, since they were for data and fax modems. A week or so later I got a handwritten postcard from NET saying they'd been unable to contact me and I should call them. When I did, they said that if I wanted any of the numbers unlisted, even the number I already had, they would charge $1.81 per number, the usual unlisted rate. When I pressed them and pointed out that the unlisted number had always been free, they insisted that the tariff had changed. I told them to list them all under the name of T. H. Sophia who lives here but gets few phone calls because she's a dog. The next call was to the state Department of Public Utilities to complain, because this whole business sounded pretty bogus. They took my complaint and said they'd look into it. Nothing happened for several months. The DPU called back last week and said they agreed that I was right and NET was wrong, there is no charge for unlisting second and subsequent phone numbers and thank you for bringing it to their attention. Knowing NET, they won't tell anyone else. If you are a Massachusetts phone customer and have been charged for an unlisted second line or Ringmate number, you are presumably entitled to get your money back. For further info you can call Jack Warshall at the DPU, 617-727-3531. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: I'm surprised you had this much trouble with NET. Illinois Bell has always maintained that non-pub listing was as good as a dozen in their records. They either give your number to the seeker, or advise it is non-pub. One transaction, one fee. Of course if you want more than one free listing per line, you do pay for the extra listings; i.e. two lines, two free listings. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Ken Jongsma Subject: RBOCs Own Cellular Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 8:58:01 EDT It would appear the more things change, the more they stay the same. From the June 10 issue of _Business Week_: In the latest acquisition of an independent cellular telephone outfit by a deep pocketed traditional phone company, Ameritech on May 28 agreed to purchase Cybertel RSA Cellular and Cybertel financial for $512 million. The Cybertel acquisitions will extend the Chicago based Baby Bell's cellular reach from the Great Lakes region south to nearby St. Louis. Of the top 10 cellular carriers, only No. 1 McCaw Cellular Communications is not now owned by a conventional "wireline" phone company. Indeed, phone companies are mainly battling one another: Ameritech and Southwestern Bell will go head to head in St. Louis and Chicago. --------- I find the second paragrah very disturbing. Some may claim that there is no way that the local service ratepayer subsidizes this business, but at the very least, it distracts the RBOCs from doing what they ought to be. That is, delivering improved local wireline service. ------------------------------ From: Adam M Gaffin Subject: Easy Fax to ASCII? Organization: The World Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1991 00:37:55 GMT If this one has already been beaten to death, please forgive me, but... Probably nobody gets more junk fax than a newsroom, and we are getting tired of going through reams of expensive fax paper, so we're looking at replacing the machine with a computer and fax board. Our computer gurus have found some software that will turn a fax message into a PCX or TIFF file and another program that will convert THAT into ASCII, and want to write a bath file to transmit that into our main system. The problem is this has to be done for each individual fax, because the software they want to use (ReadRight is one of the programs) apparently can't be automated. Unfortunately, it all seems more complex than the average reporter or editor is willing to deal with, especially since we probably get 40-50 faxes (maybe more; I've never counted) a day. Does anybody know of any decent software for turning fax into ASCII, preferably automatically, or, at the least, through macros? Any help would be most appreciated! Thanks! Adam Gaffin Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass. adamg@world.std.com Voice: (508) 626-3968. Fred the Middlesex News Computer: (508) 872-8461 ------------------------------ From: jonm@microsoft.UUCP (Jonathan MARK) Subject: Phone/PC Interface Hardware Date: 6 Jun 91 16:20:41 GMT Reply-To: jonm@microsoft.UUCP (Jonathan MARK) Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA I'm curious about what kind of gear I would need to have my PC answer the phone for me. Can anyone point me to a vendor or mail-order shop which would have such a thing? I can do whatever programming is needed but I'm not adept at hardware hacking. Desired features would be: * send voice greeting (hopefully my voice, not a chip voice) * read incoming voice messages to memory/disk * recognize a data call and connect via my modem * receive Caller ID if available Thanks for any ideas ... Jonathan Mark uunet!microsoft!jonm [not speaking for my employer] ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Service Overlap Reply-To: rees@citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 18:03:49 GMT I have recently moved from an apartment to a house half a block away, on the same (aerial) cable. When I called TPC to get my phone changed, they offered to provide service at both locations for a while. This works just like an extension phone, as far as I can tell. It's a great convenience. The cost is the same as the cost of having a second line, so it's not terribly cheap, but for ten days it will only cost me $5 or so. They had this all set up within two hours of my call to them. I was impressed. How is this physically done in the CO? Is it just software in the switch (mine is a 1AESS)? What would happen if I picked up phones in both houses at the same time? I may try this just to see. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #431 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23709; 8 Jun 91 22:11 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19571; 8 Jun 91 20:44 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa17523; 8 Jun 91 19:39 CDT Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 18:41:28 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #432 BCC: Message-ID: <9106081841.ab30592@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 8 Jun 91 18:41:25 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 432 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Jamie Mason] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Brad Hicks] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Cliff H. Wallach] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Greg Andrews] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Al L. Varney] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Dave Levenson] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Peter Creath] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jamie Mason Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: University of Toronto Computer Services Advisor Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1991 02:34:24 -0400 In article the Moderator Notes: > [Moderator's Note: Register S-6 in many modems sets the length of time > to wait off hook before dialing. In the USR, the command ATX6 > overrides the two second delay and dials immediatly. The ten attempt Oops. I looked *right past* that in my modem manual. You are right: S6 (default) "Number of seconds modem waits before dialing." However, the modem does not dial immediately after picking up the phone -- it waits for a dial tone. And even X does it: "If set to X2, X4 or X6, modem ignores this regiser and dials as soon as it detects a dial tone." I don't find this unreasonable. The two second delay is to stop the equiptment from dialing before the CO switch is ready. If there is a dial tone (even before two seconds), then the switch is ready --- that is what the dial tone means. This takes about 1sec on my exchange. Of course I could set S6 to a lower value than two, but why bother when my modem can detect dial tone? > limit is to prevent repeated harassment of people who get wronh number > calls intended for modems. Telco's repeat dialing feature won't change > this; the modem does not care if it dials 7-D or *66. After ten tries, > it will stop dialing. PAT] *66 and *69 don't just call the appropriate number here. The call the number, then if it is busy, they 'camp on' in. That is to say, they switch calls *me* back to let me know that the number is free. When I pick up the phone, it calls the number automatically. So it does not have to try ten times -- just once. Then the network tries all by itself. That's why "this is obsolete". Jamie [Moderator's Note: Sure, and when the network connects, it will ring you back, and your modem will respomd in *answer mode* to the ringing phone. Or do you manually intercept it at that point and gie ATD to the modem to force it to go on line? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 06 Jun 91 10:33:51 EDT From: "76012,300 Brad Hicks" <76012.300@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) > Also, I have heard of, but never heard officially, of a telco > tariff which requires that autodialers not retry the same number > more than ten times in a row automatically. Doubtless some legal type will look this up for us and cite the exact ruling, but it's not a tariff, it's a law. It was passed by Congress in the aftermath of that guy who got hacked off at one of the televangelists (I can't remember if it was Falwell, Roberts, or Robertson) and set up his modem to dial their fund-raising 800 number every minute or so for several weeks. Since they got charged $1 for every "completed" call, this guy ran up a bill on their nickle that reached into the tens of thousands of dollars. Since the guy left it going for a LONG time, it was trivial to trace the calls back to him. The "ministry" in question tried to bring phone harrassment charges against him, but due to a quirk in the law of the time, phone harrassment couldn't be brought in a case where the person charged never spoke into the phone, or some such triviality. That's when Congress got involved. (Televangelists + Congresscritters = Danger.) Some Congresscritter held hearings on the matter, which concluded that (a) what this guy had done was Bad and should be stopped, and (b) lots of other people were complaining about getting repeated redials from modems when BBS listings were wrong or out of date. Result was new legislation making it illegal to dial the same number more than ten times in a row. This may well be the most worthless piece of legislation short of National Rutabaga Day, since (a) the telcos don't enforce it in any way, so most modem users ignore it, and (b) it doesn't achieve the stated goal, since there's nothing that requires you to actually DO anything to confirm the phone number ... just dial "time and temp" once after every tenth try, and you're in the clear. So I guess it's just in there to have something to throw at guys like Perpetrator "A" above. Of course, this didn't rescue the televangelists, either. Did you hear about the 800 Club? In the aftermath of all of the above, a Minneapolitan (active in both gay rights and Pagan rights, among other political causes, and a member of the Minnesota Democratic Farm Labor Party) came up with the bright idea of putting together a single sheet with a list of the 800 numbers of all of the televangelists that she perceived were using tax-exempt donations to attack the civil rights of gays or Pagans, with instructions that all you had to do "join" the "800 Club" was to dial one of the phone numbers every day; preferably a different number each day. Minimum "compliance" was to get the person on the other end to answer; "bonus points" were allotted if you could draw them out into a conversation. (My favorite: Caller: "Excuse me, but what time is it?" Operator, startled, usually answers. Caller hangs up. Drove several operators crazy enough to quit, we heard.) At its peak three years ago or so, I heard an estimate that there were literally thousands of "members" of this club. The activist who started it claimed that during her calls, almost all of the ministries told her that because of those "awful gays and satanists" tying up the lines and adding so much to the phone bills, most of the ministries were going to have to give up fund-raising in this manner. And all as legal as church on Sunday -- to turn a phrase. - J. Brad Hicks [Please send direct responses to jbhicks@mcimail.com, not to the address above. Thank you!] [Moderators Note: All quite legal? Maybe ... all quite petty? A definite ten-four, good buddies ... People who hide behind a phone line to harass and play games do NOT get any sympathy from me, regardless of the validity of their cause otherwise. I have to wonder how (for example) {The Advocate} -- which advocated harassing Falwell in this way -- or the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force or other gay rights organizations would like seeing *their* 800 numbers polluted like this, giving them a multi-thousand dollar phone bill and forcing them to disconnect the number and preventing people who need to call them on that line from doing so? Actually, the guy in Georgia who did that to Falwell ran the bill up more than 'several thousand dollars'. It was about a hundred-thousand dollars, and Falwell's only loss was the time spemt by a dozen operators answering bogus calls once a minute and the time spent during one month by the Director of Telecom Services for Falwell's organization and the local telco in tracking down the problem. (At first they thought it was a failure in their own equipment (they take incoming calls through an ACD behind a centrex). AT&T (his 800 carrier) took a goodwill charge-off for the whole thing, and I think the originating telco agreed to accept a chargeback for some of what AT&T wrote off. So who lost money? Only us ratepayers, that's all. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 12:47:28 CDT From: "Cliff H. Wallach" Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: Motorola Inc. - Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL In article is written: -X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 423, Message 13 of 13 > Since my switch will reliably take 36ms, I see no reason to not allow > me to dial at that speed. Anybody (Toby?) know why the newer modems > are handicapped/differently-abled in this manner? Some foreign administrations have laws about the minimum DTMF time. Modem chip vendors hardwire some limit so they can sell chips to multiple markets. US Robotics designs their own modem datapumps, so any DTMF time limit is governed by the supervisory software. We used the modems that we designed. > [Moderator's Note: And while Toby is answering that, here is another > question: how come US Robotics has a condition you can set which > allows for 'quick dialing', or dialing without waiting the obligitory > two seconds before starting? Hayes used to claim (maybe still do) > that telco tariffs require a two second pause before dialing. You > could not set that particular S-register less than 2. Telebit seems > to feel the same way ... but USR lets you go off hook and bang those > digits right out if you set the register for it. PAT] The fast dial mode checks for dial tone before dialing. I believe this is the only US telco requirement. USR has advertised fast dialing for seven years with any complaints. How many people will pick up a handset and start dialing without waiting two seconds? Cliff Wallach uunet!motcid!wallach ------------------------------ From: Greg Andrews Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services UNIX System 408 241-9760 Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1991 19:34:40 GMT In article forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > This reminds me of a "pet peeve" (sic?) that I have with the newer > modems. Both the Hayes 9600 V-series and the $74 2400 card-modem I > have won't accept an ATS11 value (DTMF duration) of less than 50ms. > The default seems to be 100ms. The Hayes will take a smaller value, > but use 50 during tone generation. The clone returns ERROR for a > value less than 50. The old 1200 geniune Hayes that I have will take > values down to 1ms, and actually do it as well. Hmmm. You want your modem to use 36 ms instead of 50? So exactly how much time would you save with that extra 14 ms? I note that the S11 register controls the duration AND spacing of the tones, so every tone would be 14 ms faster and the space in between would be 14 ms faster. Seven digit numbers would be seven multiplied by the S11 setting, multiplied by two: 555-1212 = 7 x 50 ms x 2 = 0.7 seconds to dial the number 555-1212 = 7 x 36 ms x 2 = 0.5 seconds to dial the number A savings of 0.2 seconds Eleven digit numbers (ten digit with a leading 1 or 0): 1-408-555-1212 = 11 x 50 ms x 2 = 1.1 seconds to dial 1-408-555-1212 = 11 x 36 ms x 2 = 0.8 seconds to dial A savings of 0.3 seconds So for every eleven digits that the modem dials, the user can save 1/3 of a second if the modem uses 36 ms tones instead of 50 ms tones. How many switches in this country (and the world) can reliably handle DTMF tones faster than 50 ms? How many can handle them even that fast? Should modem manufacturers take steps to ensure their equipment works reliably with the broad range of switches out in the field, even at the expense of 0.2 - 0.3 seconds per call? Are modem users such speed demons that 0.3 seconds is begrudged? In my humble opinion, it's a little silly to get upset over such a small amount of time. Of course, I happen to work for Telebit technical support, so that may explain my viewpoint a little bit... Greg Andrews | UUCP: {apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!gandrews | Internet: gandrews@netcom.COM ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 18:37:03 CDT From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article jmason2@utcs.utoronto.ca (Jamie Mason) writes: > Anyone know *why* 35ms (or 36ms) seems to be a universal limit > on modern exchanges? Is this designed in? Yup, designed in. In order to meet the goal of less than one occurrence of false digit simulation in 1500 calls from room noise, etc., the digit tones have to be present for a period of time with no other significant frequencies, except dial tone must be ignored. Thus the standard for requiring 40 msec. as a lower bound, for both the digits and the inter-digital interval. Switches should reject digits shorter than 23 msec., and since the loop can distort signals somewhat (Right, Toby?), the transmitter should use about 50 msec. Switches use 50 msec. when using DTMF to PBXes. Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL varney@ihlpf.att.com ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Date: 8 Jun 91 03:22:43 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > Since my switch will reliably take 36ms, I see no reason to not allow > me to dial at that speed. Anybody (Toby?) know why the newer modems > are handicapped/differently-abled in this manner? The noise picked up by a telephone mic, including some human voices, may contain brief bursts of energy that may be mistaken for touch tone signaling. Many touch tone signaling receivers are designed to reject tone signals shorter than 50 msec in an attempt to reduce their sensitivity to these false signals. Perhaps the modem makers are trying to prevent you from mis-dialing when using one of these switches. In article , jmason2@utcs.utoronto.ca (Jamie Mason) writes: > Also, I have heard of, but never heard officially, of a telco > tariff which requires that autodialers not retry the same number more > than ten times in a row automatically. This lead to: a) some > crippled terminal programs which won't do more than ten retries before > having to be restarted, and b) crippled hardware -- my DUoFone 195 (an > old Radio Shack gadget) has an auto redialer which keeps trying till > there's no more busy. But it will only try a maximum of ten times. > Of course, this is all obsolete now, in the days of Call Return, where > the Network does it for you. The reason they don't allow an autodialer to dial too many times or too rapidly is to prevent 'gridlock' in the network. If a bunch of people with auto-redial equipment are rapidly redialing each other and getting busy signals because the called party is also busy redialing, the network tends to block, and all with non-revenue calls! If your auto-redial equipment backs off a bit, it lets some of those calls reach you. Call*Return does not do its work by continually redialing, but by queueing a request in a database common to your switch and the called switch. This does not result in network blockage from busy attempts, as CPE rapid-dialing does. 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: Peter Creath Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1991 16:56:28 GMT Telco's desire for a two-second delay is to give their equipment time to register your line and give you a dial tone. You forgot to mention that the only way a USR (at least that's what it says in MY manual) can skip the delay is to listen for the dial tone and begin dialing as soon (read about 1 or 2 ms) as it hears the dial tone. The difference between ATX5 and ATX6 is that X6 listens for dial tone and gives you the ability to speed dial. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #432 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25709; 8 Jun 91 23:16 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac04508; 8 Jun 91 21:50 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab19571; 8 Jun 91 20:45 CDT Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 20:11:09 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #433 BCC: Message-ID: <9106082011.ab04845@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 8 Jun 91 20:10:53 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 433 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Guy R Berentsen] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Robert Savery] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Tim Smith] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [John Eaton] Re: Telecom in New Zealand [Ross Keatinge] Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? [Terry Kennedy] Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security [Ehud Gavron] Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone [Steven S. Brack] Re: Cellular Modems [John Richard Bruni] Re: PacBell Does Something Right [John Higdon] Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? [Brett G. Person] Re: N.Y. Metro North Commuter Railroad [Howard Pierpont] Re: 908 Area Code Switchover [Dave Levenson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 19:38:28 EDT From: Guy R Berentsen Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories 1.) The version I recieved was pushing a service package with a monthly fee, so even If I switched back I would be liable for all or part of the monthly fee. 2.) Some of the fine print said that I would have to pay the BOC fee to switch. 3.) After the part of the agreement that said I would selecting MCI as my primary long distance carrier by signing the check, there was more fine print that said If I select more than one carrier none of my selections would be considered valid. To me this sounds like one could cash the check, but invalidate the selection wihtout technically violating the agreement. Of course, that would certainly violate the spirit of the agreement, and could cost more than $20 if you have to pay several switch over fees. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 03 Jun 91 23:26:58 CST From: Robert Savery Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion Reply-To: ivgate!drbbs!robert.savery@uunet.uu.net Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha In a message of <30 May 91 20:26:50>, Rick Anderson writes: > I believe MCI is currently undergoing a nationwide promotion whereby > they will give you $20 if you switch over to them as your primary > carrier. I recently received a check in the mail from MCI for $20. > The check was a normal check on the front, but on the back, it said if > I endorsed and cashed the check, I would be switched over to MCI. > My question to the net: is it legally feasible to cross out this > endorsement message, sign the check, collect the $20, and then legally > expect to not be switched over to MCI?? Legally I don't know. But since everyone agrees that "getting it in writing" is the best way to kill slamming, and MCI'll have it in ink, you should be switched. I'd go ahead and cash the check. Then, after you're switched to MCI, call the Telco and switch back to your carrier of choice. If your Telco charges the same as US West in Omaha does ( $5.00 per switch), you'll make a $10.00 profit. Or, since the Telco is so used to slamming calls, you can call and claim you didn't order the switch. Chances are you'll get full credit. But I didn't suggest that! ;-) Then again, since I have my account flagged to never ever be switched with out my going down to the office, I just might make $20. Now, if MCI'll just send me the promo! Bob msged 1.99S ZTC [200:5010/666.5@Metronet] Trebor's Castle, Lavista Ne. [Moderator's Note: He could *claim* he did not order the switch, but his signature on the check would be produced by MCI to demonstrate he certainly knew something was going to happen. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ts@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 04:29:22 PDT Let me see if I understand this offer from MCI. If I am willing to prefix all my long distance calls with 10288, I can stay with AT&T but get a free $20 from MCI? Is this right? Sounds like a pretty darn good deal to me! Tim Smith ------------------------------ From: John Eaton Subject: Re: MCI's $20 Promotion Date: 6 Jun 91 18:06:57 GMT Organization: Hewlett Packard, Vancouver, WA > After a period of time, the customer could initiate a PIC-change to > another carrier, incurring yet another $5 charge by the RBOC. At that > point, the net value of MCI's promotion to the end user is a CLEAR, > $10! > Not a bad deal, really. It just depends on how much value one > places on his / her time - to place the PIC-change order. Better go back and read the fine print. You are agreeing to sign up for MCI's PLUS program which charges you a fee of $7.50 a month. If you can do it in a single month you only make $2.50. Getting out of these programs is not as easy as one might think. Last March I called the ATT customer disservice line and asked to be taken off the Reach Out America plan. The charge was still on the April bill so I called again. Ditto for May. I'm as patient as the next man but if it is still there in June then we are going to war. If anyone has any hints on the best way to attack a problem like this then please let me know. John Eaton !hp-vcd!johne ------------------------------ From: ross@tcnz1.tcnz.co.nz (Ross Keatinge) Subject: Re: Telecom in New Zealand Date: 31 May 91 00:50:42 GMT Reply-To: ross@tcnz.co.nz (ross Keatinge) Organization: Thomas Cook NZ Head Office, Auckland, NZ I am new to this group and have found the discussions interesting. Some of you may be interested in some of the quirks and features of our telecom system in New Zealand which has had major changes over the last few years. Until a few years ago the N.Z. Post Office ran and controlled all phone systems in N.Z. Then the Government made it into a 'state owned enterprise', ie a commercial company but still owned by the people of N.Z. Recently a part of Telecom N.Z. has been sold to Bell Atlantic and Ameritech. The public can buy shares in the rest. The good part of all this is that we now have a very modern system. Some technicalities: Our rotary phones (just about all gone now) had the dial numbering opposite to most countries, ie 0 was in the same place but then it went 123456789 instead of the more common 987654321. I guess the logic was that to dial N it sent N pulses, except 0 which sent 10. This obviously caused problems with overseas sourced modems etc, to get a modem to dial say 234-9876 you had to program it as 876-1234. Our emergency number was and still is 111 when the rest of the world was 999 ( we never had 199 which would be the equivalent of 911 !). I am please to say we now have standard DTMF tones. Our ringing signal is a double -- -- -- type ring. - - - - means busy. They are in the process of rationalizing area codes throughout the country. We used to have a real mix of anything from one to seven digit numbers with area codes from one to five digits. We will now have only five single digit area codes and all seven digit numbers. All private local calls are 'free'. ie there is a fixed fee charged. Businesses pay about 4c per minute. (They were also free until recently). No, you cannot call US 800 numbers from here or Australian 008 which is their equivalent. We have 800 and 900 numbers just like the US. We have most of the modern features like call redirection, call waiting etc. My phone at home beeps if there is a call waiting and I can hit the hookswitch and toggle between the two callers. Our cellphone system seems quite good. It operates just like another area code across the whole country. Likewise for pagers. The debate about the pros and cons of caller identification has begun here. There are similar arguments here along the "telco's making too much money" line. Yesterday Telecom N.Z. laid off about 500 staff in Auckland and Northland. Ross Keatinge, Systems Engineer (ross@tcnz.co.nz) Thomas Cook N.Z. Limited, PO Box 24, Auckland CPO, New Zealand, Ph (09)-793920 Disclaimer : I am not an official spokesperson for Thomas Cook ------------------------------ From: "Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr" Subject: Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? Date: 5 Jun 91 16:47:58 GMT Organization: St. Peter's College, US In article , forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > Does anyone have ideas as to how to get these types of problems > resolved? I've tried in vain on a couple of occasions to get Pacific > Bell to fix wrong recordings or other minor CO trouble, and Repair > Service seems very uninterested. At first, they can't understand the > problem, and resort to "we just tested your line, and didn't find > anything wrong." Once I convince them that it's not "in my line", > they take the report, the ticket soon gets cleared, and the problem is > still there. I've all but given up. For over a year (from the day the exchange was activated), the 201-915 1A ESS had garbled messages. For example, dialing an invalid number would give a very noisy recording: "Your call cannot be comas in the system." At first, I thought this was due to a Centrex configuration - the "not in the system" message was used for unassigned extensions. However, I tried it from a 915 coin station, and had the same problem. Repeated calls to repair failed to clear it. Finally, I called the person in charge of configuration on the switch and __he__ couldn't get it fixed. Finally he had them change something in the switch hardware and we now have clean (and LOUD!) messages that make sense. The unassigned extension message is now "We're sorry, your call can not be completed as dialed. Please check the number or ask your attendant to help you." I suppose they are reluctant to fix it because there's no revenue loss in a bad recording. Still, you'd think they'd pay some attention to it. Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, US terry@spcvxa.spc.edu (201) 915-9381 ------------------------------ From: Ehud Gavron Subject: Re: Cellular "Harrassment" at Airport Security Date: 5 Jun 91 22:49:34 GMT Reply-To: sunquest!alpha!gavron@uunet.uu.net Organization: Sunquest VMS Internals, Tucson AZ In article , pturner@eng.auburn.edu (Patton M. Turner) writes... > At one time Israel placed all baggage in a decompression chamber > before loading it on planes. I guess they still do. No wonder they > don't have any sucessful bombing/skyjacking since the days of Entebe. Not that this is topical to telecom any longer, but the Entebbe hijacking was of an Air-France flight which was boarded at Athens. Not since the early 60s has an Israeli plane been skyjacked. None has ever been blown up -- even in all five wars. Ehud Gavron (EG76) gavron@vesta.sunquest.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone From: "Steven S. Brack" Date: Wed, 05 Jun 91 15:08:05 EDT Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[0][2][4]) cbmvax!.UUCP!robert@uunet.uu.net (Robert L. Oliver) writes: > It makes flashing easier: you don't have that annoying problem of > trying to flash but realizing that you haven't held the hook down long > enough. Used to happen to me all the time until I convinced our ITT > maintenance people to change the flash interval; it was ridiculously > high. On our NT SL100 PBX, the individual 2500 sets have a "tap" button, which, pressed once, sends a flash of the correct length. It seems to be some sort of capacitor arrangement, but since OSU is more paranoid than ATT about people opening up their phones, I haven't investigated. The tap button also houses the voicemail waiting lamp. This lamp also lights when ring current is applied to the instrument. What is the relation between the light and the ringer? Steven S. Brack | sbrack%bluemoon@nstar.rn.com Jacob E. Taylor Honors Tower | sbrack@bluemoon.uucp The Ohio State University | sbrack@nyx.cs.du.edu 50 Curl Drive | sbrack@isis.cs.du.edu Columbus, Ohio 43210-1112 USA | brack@ewf.eng.ohio-state.edu +1 614 293 7383 or 419 474 1010 | Steven.S.Brack@osu.edu ------------------------------ From: John_Richard_Bruni@cup.portal.com Subject: Re: Cellular Modems Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 22:27:11 PDT Aw c'mon guys, deep cycle batteries for laptops??? And warnings about running laptops off 12 volt 'hostile' environments. Any decent chip designed to convert DC-to-DC should handle this, and to h... with the power loss. We're talking *CAR* batteries running laptops for gosh sakes, not C cells running Honolulu Light & Power. Just do it! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 02:07 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: PacBell Does Something Right Dave Levenson writes: > Hey, John, is looks like one of your ten single-drop loops may be > unbalanced! The ONE thing I cannot complain about regarding my marginal phone service is the transmission quality. There are no buzzes, clicks, hums, or other noises of any kind. On any line. > Is that $300/month in addition to the monthly rate for service on the > ten loops? But of course. Only Pac*Bell can so cheerfully charge you, and then charge you again. If you order a phone in a distant city and have it delivered to you via T1 on which you pay mileage, Pac*Bell will also tack on FOREIGN EXCHANGE charges! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Brett G Person Subject: Re: Did Western Electric Also Make Sound Recordings? Date: 7 Jun 91 05:57:13 GMT Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND In article haynes@cats.ucsc.edu, aynes@cats.ucsc.edu writes: > Re: 16-2/3 RPM recordings - I suspect they are still in use as > "talking books for the blind" though they may have been supplanted by > cassettes by now. Your public librarian could probably tell you. At > [Moderator's Note: I've done volunteer work for ten years for the > Chicago Public Library producing programs for visually-handicapped > people. The 16 2/3 rpm records were gone *long* before I started. PAT] Actually, they still do produce some of the magazines for talking books in this format. I also beleive that the rpm is closer to 8. I haven't actually used my talking book turntable for a few years, so my mind may be slipping. I still get those flexible records every week though. And yes, they have gone over to cassettes for most things. Brett G. Person North Dakota State University uunet!plains!person | person@plains.bitnet | person@plains.nodak.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 05:23:01 PDT From: Howard Pierpont Subject: RE: N.Y. Metro North Commuter Railroad In TELECOM Digest Volume 11 : Issue 430 Carl Moore wrote: > The New York MetroNorth commuter railroad has lines which run from > Manhattan (New York City) into the northern suburbs. I have used this system am I am VERY impressed. The functionality that it provides is amazing. The number of easy selections that you can make are almost unbelievable. Does anyone know who designed this system? I would like to nominate it for a "Best in Class" award. Howard Pierpont Standard disclaimers apply Digital Equipment Corp 77 Reed Road 49 Carter St Hudson, MA 01749 Danielson, CT 06239-3500 508.568.6165 203.779.2570 ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: 908 Area Code Switchover Date: 8 Jun 91 03:31:26 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB) writes: > I believe the 908 area code became available in January 1991 (not > 1990). 908 became _available_ to some of us in January of 1990. It was available to all by June of 1990. It became official (documented) in January of 1991, and will become mandatory June 8, 1991! 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 #433 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27641; 9 Jun 91 0:23 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa23847; 8 Jun 91 22:55 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab04508; 8 Jun 91 21:45 CDT Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 20:41:27 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #434 BCC: Message-ID: <9106082041.ab13737@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 8 Jun 91 20:41:23 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 434 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Mike Bell] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Al L. Varney] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Bob Schreibmaier] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Julian Macassey] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Paul Cook] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Tom Ace] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [David E. Martin] Ring-Busy Problem: Causes? [Gil Kloepfer Jr.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? Date: 6 Jun 91 03:20:53 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes: > I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. > Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some > investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging > a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should Back in pre-electronic days, your line was apt to be fed by a balanced pair of 200 ohm relay windings fed 48 volts DC. That is 400 ohms total, and a short rignt in the CO would pull 120 ma. Many 1A2 KTU cards used a 135 ohm 5 watt resistor for hold. If that resistor were to be put right across the line in the CO, it would only get 1.1 watts. Any farther out on the loop, obviously gets less. Sure there were dial long line units that used 96 volt battery, but those were on LONG LINES. At the other end, a TT pad spec expects 23 ma min to work. Sure many run with less. If you were on a VERY long loop, you might want something lower that you picked to really hold the line busy reliably. For years our NYC office busied ALL lines except the first at night. The answering machine was on the first line, and 135 ohm resistors were slammed across all others by a 12 pole wire spring relay. If they went up on permanent signal,and 'dropped a card' each night, so what. Every morning everything would go back to normal. If the test board ever looked at it, they soon knew what to expect and ignored it. I bet in NYC they never noticed. Today I never bother with a resistor. Take a four inch piece of modular cord, crunch a plug on one end, strip the outer jacket about an inch on the other, and stuff the two center wires into a 'chicklet' (eight connector, or whatever) and squeeze it in a presser to connect T + R together. This will never fail to busy a loop start line. There is no reason to try to be 'nice' with a resistor. To busy a ground start line, you could just ground ring, but for several reasons it is best to ground BOTH tip and ring. The simple answer is just short Tip to Ring and be done with it. ------------------------------ From: Mike Bell Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? Organization: Spar Aerospace Ltd, Toronto, Canada Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 09:42:46 EDT In article , Marc Unangst writes: > I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. > Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some Dumb question: couldn't you just move the modem at the end of the hunt group into the broken modem's position? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 18:22:22 CDT From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net (Toby Nixon) writes: > In article , Marc Unangst ann-arbor.mi.us> writes: >> I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. >> Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some >> investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging >> a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should Any DC value less than 330 ohms should do it, if it's legal. >> Is this an "accepted" way of busying out a phone line? > The FCC has said that it will no longer allow Part 68 registration of > modems that busy out the line in this manner (i.e., by just going > "off-hook"). On the other hand, would a modem that had a switch that caused the modem to refuse to drop new calls still conform to Part 68? The first incoming call would "hang" the line, but you wouldn't have made it "busy" by just going "off-hook". How picky is the FCC on this section? > Centrex is supposed to have a way to tell the CO that a ^^^^^^^ I believe this can be ANY line, for a price. Another option is to use a Hunt Group option that doesn't always start from the same line, assuming that there aren't many "bad" modems. > Bellcore is working > on a DTMF signal that can be sent on the line to tell the switch that > the circuit is busied-out (like the "Do Not Disturb" function on many > PBXes). And what will this "feature" cost on a per-line basis??? Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL varney@ihlpf.att.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? Date: 6 Jun 91 09:49:11 EDT (Thu) From: Bob Schreibmaier mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst): > I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. > Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some > investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging > a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should > have almost the exact same effect as an off-hook telephone does -- > thus busying out the line. Now, my question is, is there anything > wrong with doing something like this? Will a 1/2W resistor be enough? > Is this an "accepted" way of busying out a phone line? On most lines the 1/2 watt resistor would be plenty. However, if you happened to be REAL close to a central office you could see as much as 24 volts across the resistor and, therefore, might have to dissipate as much as two watts. As long as you have that VOM handy, measure the voltage across the 270 ohm resistor. Then, square the voltage reading and divide by 270. That is the amount of power you are asking the resistor to dissipate. Should be 1/4 watt or less if you want to use a 1/2 watt resistor (safety factor of two). By the way, I have used this trick myself and it seems to work. Doesn't seem to be any problem with the telco "siren" signal that they put on off-hook lines that are not calling anyone. Bob Schreibmaier K2PH | UUCP: ...!att!dxis!k2ph a.k.a. "The QRPer" | Internet: k2ph@dxis.att.com Middletown, New Jersey | ICBM: 40o21'N, 74o8'W ------------------------------ From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? Date: 6 Jun 91 15:03:42 GMT Reply-To: Julian Macassey Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 425, Message 15 of 15 > I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. > Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some > investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging > a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should > have almost the exact same effect as an off-hook telephone does -- > thus busying out the line. Now, my question is, is there anything > wrong with doing something like this? Will a 1/2W resistor be enough? > Is this an "accepted" way of busying out a phone line? A regular telephone measured with an Ohm Meter looks pretty much like a 300 Ohm resistor. As I recall the "DC Resistance" Used for testing phone devices is considered to be 200 Ohms. But a real phone (AT&T, ITT, Comdial et al), has "Loop Compensation", this is a usually a silicon carbide varistor. The varistor resistance drops as the voltage is raised. This works as an "Automatic Gain Control (AGC)", so if you are near the CO, the audio won't clean the wax out of your ears. When the phone is on a short loop (Short loop means close to the CO and the loop of wire between your phone and the CO is short), the resistance is quite low. This means there is no absolute DC value for a phone. But read on, and you will see that it doesn't really matter. Part of the whole equation is, how far are you from the CO. Here is why that matters. You can consider that the average distance from a CO is 15 Kilo-Feet (This is another dumb US measurement, the rest of the world uses Kilometers). The wire is a pair, that is a total of 30,000 feet of wire. The wire is usually 24 AWG (0.5mm). The resitance of this wire is 26.17 Ohms per thousand feet. So you will have about 785.1 Ohms worth of resistance between you and the CO. Add to this, about 400 Ohms for the CO. So if you shorted your wires, the total current that can flow assuming the CO voltage is 48V DC is 40 Ma. So for the hell of it, clear the short and add a phone. This adds 200 Ohms more to the loop resistance for a grand total of 1385 Ohms. Your loop current is now 34.6 Ma. My point is, it doesn't really matter whether you put a paper clip across the line or a 300 Ohm resistor. But yes, a half Watt resistor is fine, as is the paper clip. The paper clip has better transient handling capabilities though. Note that after all this resistance drop, what was 48 Volts at the CO is now between 3 and 9 volts depending on your loop length. I have used 1,000 Ohm resistors in the past to busy out lines. Note that many COs will go off hook and feed dialtone supplying only 8 Ma of current. Not many phones will work with 8 Ma. The US minimum current is 20 Ma. The lowest current spec is Sweden with 12 Ma. Sweden is a big country with not many people. Like the Western US, they have some very long loops. I recall when this question last came up, Brian Kantor mentioned that he used an LED and resistor combo which lit up and reminded him that he had a bad line or modem at that location. This is an excellent idea. It is also cheap and simple to implement. Note that the above discussion has been strictly about the DC characteristics of a phone line. They do not address the complex impedances of miles of wet cable, aerial wire, bad splices and crummy quad cable. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 18:25 GMT From: Proctor & Associates <0003991080@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? In issue 425, Marc Unangst writes: > I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. > Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some > investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging > a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should > have almost the exact same effect as an off-hook telephone does -- > thus busying out the line. Now, my question is, is there anything > wrong with doing something like this? Will a 1/2W resistor be enough? A half watt resistor is not enough. The worst case would be if you were next door to an old C.O. running fixed battery feed of 52 vdc and A-relay resistance of about 400 ohms. This would give you about 78 ma of loop current and the resistor would have to dissipate around 1.6 watts. So that the resistor wont heat up too bad, it is best to spec the resistor wattage around twice that, so figure a three watt resistor. As long as you can draw at least 20 ma of loop current, the C.O. should detect an off hook condition. A safe bet is to use a 400 ohm resistor, which will give you a lower current draw. But the higher the resistance, the more power must be dissipated by the resistor for a GIVEN amount of current. If the C.O. battery was 48 volts and total loop resistance was about 700 ohms, the power load on the 400 ohm resistor (this all is emitted as heat) would be about 3/4 watt. Paul Cook Proctor & Associates Redmond, WA 206-881-7000 3991080@mcimail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 10:21:09 PDT From: Tom Ace Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus John Higdon writes: > ... If the reason you are hearing an unusual ringing > signal involves a PBX, it is probably a DID connection. Answer > supervision occurs when, and only when, the call is picked up by the > ringing extension. Busy, no answer, and even local customer intercept > recordings do not return supervision on a properly set up PBX. > In essence, the PBX becomes the terminating CO. It seems there's a potential for fraud here. I assume there are rules for what may be sent out as a local intercept without returning answer supervision. I assume that a call answered by a "we're closed now, call back in the morning" recording ought to be paid for. Are businesses with DID on an honor system in this regard? Tom Ace tom@aptix.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 16:24:11 EDT From: David E Martin Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, IL In article mitel!Software!grayt@ uunet.uu.net (Tom Gray) writes: > The double ring will indicate that the destination has answered your > call on its own equipment. The real implication of this is that you > are now being billed for the time that you are listening to ringing. Only if the PBX returns answer supervision at that point. PBX's can transfer you all over the place before signaling the calling CO that the call is connected and billing should start. David Martin, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Naperville, IL dem@iexist.att.com, (708) 713-5121 ------------------------------ Subject: Ring-Busy Problem: Causes? Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 16:54:38 CDT Reply-To: gil@limbic.ssdl.com Organization: Southwest Systems Development Labs, Houston, TX From: "Gil Kloepfer Jr." I've recently noticed a problem I originally thought was CO-related, but am now thinking is CPE related, and I need to know about the following scenario from those "in the know". To start, I know (from talking to the phone guy who came to install my lines) that I'm on a AT&T #5ESS. The situation is this: You call your telephone line, and you "hear" one ring, then a busy signal. Your phone line at home is DEFINITELY free, that is nobody is using it and it SHOULD be clear. The line is NOT on a SLC-96, so it shouldn't be a problem where the line isn't accessable for some reason. What I have found is that a bad phone can busy the line out in this manner by seemingly "picking up" the phone RIGHT BEFORE the first audiable ring is heard on the CALLED line (I made it happen in this manner). Here's my problem: I originally had this problem once with a bad phone. Now I'm having the same problems with a device I built to decode the different ring patterns for my personalized ring numbers. The device is essentially a resistor (15K) in series with a .22uF capacitor and the AC input to a bridge rectifier. The output of the bridge rectifier feeds a 12V zener and RC filter to smooth out the signal, and ultimately an opto-isolator. I know I should technically be using a FCC certified DAA, but let's not get into that discussion here. Can anyone think of a reason why this circuit should produce the results I describe? Does anyone have specs on what kind of current drain a typical residential subscriber line can tolerate during ring before an "answer" is detected? Can a proliferation of these .22uF/15K resistor combos produce some kind of capacitive "kick" which the CO thinks is line trouble and/or something using the phone line (and what are the specs for this)? Thanks in advance for any info y'all can provide! Gil Kloepfer, Jr. gil@limbic.ssdl.com ...!ames!limbic!gil ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #434 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27854; 9 Jun 91 0:30 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab23847; 8 Jun 91 22:59 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ad04508; 8 Jun 91 21:50 CDT Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 21:22:07 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #435 BCC: Message-ID: <9106082122.ab03055@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 8 Jun 91 21:22:03 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 435 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Emergency Highway Phones [Brian Kantor] Re: Emergency Highway Phones [Brian Cuthie] Re: Cellular Modems [Joshua Putnam] Re: Cellular Modems [Dave Levenson] Re: Surprise!! [Brian Gordon] Re: Surprise!! [John Higdon] Re: Surprise!! [John Higdon] Re: Surprise!! [Dennis Blyth] Re: Surprise!! [Fred R. Goldstein] Re: Question About PC Pursuit and MNP [Earl Hall] Re: Question About PC Pursuit and MNP [Michael Schuster] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Brian Kantor Subject: Re: Emergency Highway Phones Date: 7 Jun 91 21:02:04 GMT Organization: The Avant-Garde of the Now, Ltd. In article decwrl!well.sf.ca.us!well! dag@uunet.uu.net (Darren Alex Griffiths) writes: > A local newscast reported on some interesting highway emergency phones > this morning. It seems that CalTrans is installing phones throughout > the San Francisco bay area on major highways.... Yes, they are solar-powered cellphones. When you open the door on the phone box (a bright yellow weatherproof housing about a cubic foot or so), the phone autodials the local CHP office on a special hunt group, downline signals its identification code (which is mapped by a computer at the CHP office to the location), and then cuts through to voice so you can speak to the dispatcher or phone attendant, who will take care of your problem or patch you through to someone who can. That means that even if you can't make an intelligible noise, they'll ask the beat patrol unit to stop by and check on a phone that's open, so it's enough to stagger from the burning wreck, grab the door open, then faint. The phones also have other sensors to signal low battery [presumably solar supply failure], tampering, tilt, or self-check diagnostic failure. I'm assuming the ones in SF are the same as the ones we've had here in SoCal for a couple of years; they're manufactured here and just over the border in Mexico by a division of Cubic Corp, and checked and installed by their techs. I'm told the phone number dialled, ident, and other such things are burnt into a ROM in the phone controller which also holds the software; apparently it's designed to make it difficult to use the phone for any other purpose were you to liberate one from its roadside loneliness. [This is from a friend of mine who is a senior field install/repair tech for these, and has travelled all over the state supervising installations. I didn't take notes but I think the previous description is fairly accurate.] Brian ------------------------------ From: Brian Cuthie Subject: Re: Emergency Highway Phones Organization: Univ. of Maryland Baltimore County, Academic Computing Services Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1991 23:10:46 GMT In article decwrl!well.sf.ca.us!well! dag@uunet.uu.net (Darren Alex Griffiths) writes: > A local newscast reported on some interesting highway emergency phones > this morning. It seems that CalTrans is installing phones throughout > the San Francisco bay area on major highways. The phones connect you > All that is fairly standard, the interesting part is that the phones > are all cellular and run on solar power so no wires are needed to hook > 'em up. The reported said that the phones could be installed in about We have had those here on the Baltimore-Washington Parkway for some time now. Pretty neat idea. As far as I know, the cellular companies cannot charge for emergency 911 calls. Whether this applies to non-911 emergency calls from the phones in question, I don't know. Even if the local government was required to pay for the calls, it's nothing like the cost ofinstalling wiring to each location. brian ------------------------------ From: Joshua_Putnam Subject: Re: Cellular Modems Date: 6 Jun 91 19:23:24 GMT Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA In dplatt@ntg.com (Dave Platt) writes: > In article is written: >> Seeing as how a car battery can provide a substantial amount of power, >> I was wondering if anyone knew of any product that would allow us to >> run something like this off of the car's lighter jack, or even to hook >> directly to the battery if necessary. Or of any portable with that >> much power and a slot that you can take along with your cellular >> phone. > If you want to run a laptop, cellular, etc. from an auto's electrical > system, you'll probably have to buy an external high-amperage 12-volt- > to-5-volt stepdown regulator (probably a switcher, with extensive > surge protection and some big filter capacitors), and a "cheater" > which will let you plug the regulator's output into the laptop's > charger input or directly to the battery-compartment contacts. A power inverter (like the guts of a UPS) will turn your 12v DC into 120v AC, letting you use your standard AC adapter. Not very efficient having so many power conversions, but probably one of the simplest to plug together. You could use it in a car, or with a separate 12v battery pack. You'd probably want to be sure the inverter produces a regulated sine-wave output considering the fluctuations in the car's electrical system. Some of the cheaper inverters produce noisy square wave power with no regulation or filtering. I don't think I'd want to run my computer on that. I can't recall the brand name, but I've seen lots of ads lately for a fairly compact 100 watt inverter that plugs straight into the lighter socket of a car. For any load larger than that, I wouldn't want to trust the car's standard wiring. If you always drive the same car, just install a 500 watt inverter and put a 120v outlet in your glove box. :) Watch out for dead batteries, though. Joshua_Putnam@happym.wa.com Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x102 4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399 fax x108 E-mail: patty@happym.wa.com ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Cellular Modems Date: 8 Jun 91 03:12:49 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , dplatt@ntg.com (Dave Platt) writes: [ regarding the use of lap-top computers and cellular phones from an automobile 12-volt electrical system] > If you want to run a laptop, cellular, etc. from an auto's electrical > system, you'll probably have to buy an external high-amperage 12-volt- > to-5-volt stepdown regulator (probably a switcher, with extensive > surge protection and some big filter capacitors)... Perhaps I'm confused, but I thought that most cellular phones are designed specifically for operation from an automobile electrical system! Mine certainly is! On the subject of operating computers in cars, you might want to check out TrippLite and others who make inverters. These devices take 12-volt DC and deliver 120 volts AC. They are used on boats and in motor homes to operate small household appliances. Some inverter power supplies are clean enough to operate computers. 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: Wed, 5 Jun 91 09:03:33 PDT From: Brian Gordon Subject: Re: Surprise!! I just talked to my local business office about the change in the "permissive" 1+ dialing change. To my surprise, they seemed to know exactly what I was talking about. Their rule is that the leading "1" indicates a toll call. Before the widening of the local area on Saturday, the numbers of interest to me (415/336-xxxx, for example) were toll calls, and now they are not. Hence it used to be permissible to dial 1-415/336-xxxx and now it is not -- is is, in essence, rejected by the toll-call processing equipemnt. So I get cheaper calls, but have to change a lot of entries for my modem's phonebook. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 01:49 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Surprise!! Dennis Blyth writes: > BTW, is this the furthest distance one can go, 'toll free' in the > states. (Pls, no flames for 800 service, I'm new to the net and > somewhat sensitive!) Have you checked out the Mojave Desert area of California, various and sundry areas of Nevada, or, for that matter, the big island, Hawaii? Do these areas count as being "in the states"? Nick Sayer writes: > Given the post-Greene reality, would it not make a BIT of sense to > reform area codes a bit? How about one simple rule: No area code could > be in two LATAs? Given that we are just about out of area codes, this would be a very bad idea (tm). In California alone no less than five new area codes would be required to fulfill your reform proposal. 1. The Chico LATA shares 916 with Sacramento. 2. Monterey shares 408 with San Francisco. 3. San Luis Obispo shares 805 with Bakersfield. 4. San Diego shares 619 with Los Angeles. 5. Stockton shares 209 with Fresno. And that is just in California. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Dennis Blyth Subject: Re: Surprise!! Date: 6 Jun 91 17:59:49 GMT Organization: NCR International - Europe Group, Dayton Reply-To: dblyth@oatseu.Dayton.NCR.COM (Dennis Blyth) Organization: NCR International - Europe Group, Dayton Regarding the suggestion to re-align area codes to handle situations like Cincinnati's where the metropolitan area includes three codes in three states: There have to be many locales with this situation. What about: Louisville, Saint Louis, Minneapolis-St Paul, Omaha-Council Bluffs, Philadelphia-Camden, Washington DC-Alexandria, etc. etc. So is that a practical suggestion, given how many would be affected? Apologies for lack of knowledge of geography and area code structure :-) Pls, flames and corrections by e-mail, not this newsgroup. It is interesting that the e-mail replies to my earlier post arrived to our NCR TOWER system before the newsgroup comp.dcom.telecom did. Ain't it so, the person most involved/concerned is usually the *last* to know? :-) BTW, might there be any interest in creating a news category for marketing research, and especially high technology marketing research?? I know this is not the place for such discussion, and if enough interest develops, I'll post to the net (in another newsgroup). I'm primarily interested in marketing research for both the telecommunications and computer fields, but have interests in other industries and topics as well. One hot topic in the research field is 'customer satisfaction' research tracking. May sound mundane, but there are a lot of ways to go about it, and enough organizations do it so there might be enough interest for a network newsgroup. (Here at NCR we have a separate, company private newgroup for quality. This is nothing new, but is almost always interesting. OR, feel free to have 'private' e-mail discussions with me. Dennis.Blyth@daytonOH.NCR.COM NCR/AT&T Marketing Research NCR Europe Group PMD AT&T: 1-513-445-6580 Fax: 1-513-445-6078 ------------------------------ From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Subject: Re: Surprise!! Date: 7 Jun 91 16:26:09 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , dblyth@oatseu.daytonoh. ncr.com (Dennis Blyth) writes: (Speaking of Hamilton, OH to Covington, KY, which from the description sounds like about 45 miles ...) > BTW, is this the furthest distance one can go, 'toll free' in the > states. (Pls, no flames for 800 service, I'm new to the net and > somewhat sensitive!) If it's 45 miles or so, that may not be the longest. This is another old topic ... frequently discussed here in the past. Castle Rock to Boulder CO is a local call at 58 miles. 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? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 04:43:38 PDT From: cdp!erhall@labrea.stanford.edu Subject: Re: Question About PC Pursuit and MNP Steve Forrette writes: > I need to know how to tell an MNP-compatible modem to pretend that it > doesn't have MNP, so that when it calls out and reaches another MNP > modem, it will "play dumb" and not enable MNP mode. In other words, > the connection will be a standard 2400 baud connection. [Describes problems when Outdial modem connects with MNP enabled.] > The Customer Service people at Telenet were of no help - they couldn't > quite understand the problem, and said that the only valid commands to > give an outdial modem were ATZ and ATDT. The PC Pursuit people should have known this one. The following is from one of the help files available on their own Net Exchange support BBS (from the '@' prompt, do a "c pursuit" to access it): "To modify MNP setting in the Hayes command mode: AT*E0 No MNP AT*E1 Auto MNP AT*E2 Force MNP (call will fail if MNP unavailable)" The ATZ command will reset the Outdial modem to default settings, including disabling of its MNP4 capability. It's wise to do that as soon as you connect to it, then enable MNP with AT*E1 if you want. The problem you're experiencing (with garbled data when MNP is enabled) seems to be caused by incorrect flow-control at the far end. Some BBSes I call work fine (EXEC-PC, for instance), while others (Channel1, in Boston, included) seem to ignore requests from SprintNet's side to stop sending data. If they continue to send, SprintNet's X.25 network has no choice but to throw away packets of data. I keep track of which ones don't work properly and don't enable MNP for those calls. Earl Hall | via PeaceNet: | GEnie: ERHALL Chicago IL | cdp!erhall@labrea.stanford.edu | +1 312 685 9735 ------------------------------ From: Michael Schuster Subject: Re: Question About PC Pursuit and MNP Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 00:32:32 GMT Organization: PANIX - Public Access Unix Systems of NY In article forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > I need to know how to tell an MNP-compatible modem to pretend that it > doesn't have MNP, so that when it calls out and reaches another MNP > modem, it will "play dumb" and not enable MNP mode. In other words, > the connection will be a standard 2400 baud connection. There are two possible ways to do this. One is from Racal mode (enter control-E then after an ATZ; enter I [idle] to return to Hayes mode). I'll spare you the details, since there seems to be a security block now which prevents you form altering the option tables in Racal mode (PHOOEY!!) On my RV 2400VP you also could toggle the EC from Hayes mode using the AT*En command, where (if I remember correctly) n=0 disabled error correction n=1 allowed for error correction with fallback to "vanilla" mode n=2 disconnected if EC mode could not be negotiated. These are different modems, so the options might be different. Try a few. But AT*E0 might just do the trick for you. Mike Schuster | -CIS: 70346,1745 -NY Public Access UNIX: schuster@panix.com | -MCI Mail, GENIE: -The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #435 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00328; 9 Jun 91 1:39 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa18147; 9 Jun 91 0:04 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac23847; 8 Jun 91 22:59 CDT Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 22:05:44 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #436 BCC: Message-ID: <9106082205.ab22231@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 8 Jun 91 22:05:32 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 436 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cellular One Dialing Procedures [Steve Forrette] Re: Talking Books For the Blind [Steve Forrette] Re: Movie Review: The President's Analyst [William Hawkins] Re: Caller ID Comes to Florida [David Lesher] Re: 908 Area Code Switchover [Paul S. R. Chisholm] Re: Western Electric Guitar Amplifier [Scott Dorsey] Re: Modem Trouble on Subscriber Loop Carrier [John Higdon] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Dave Levenson] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Mark Terrible] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Gordon D. Woods] Re: Emergency Highway Phones [David Lemson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 23:43:13 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Cellular One Dialing Procedures In-Reply-To: Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Ole J Jacobson writes: > I am trying to convince Cellular One here in the Bay Area that they > need to start accepting "canonical numbers" from cellular phones in > order to be in compliance with generally accepted industry standards. > (I've heard that there is even an IEA recommendation for this.) If you > can help me put forward my case I'd be grateful. > By "canonical numbers" I mean 10 digit numbers of the form: > <10 digits without a preceeding 1> > I am trying to get them to accept canonical dialling *AS WELL AS* > their current silly scheme, but so far I have not had much luck > finding anyone who even understands what I am talking about. Some of > the answers I have received so far include: "All our calls are > routed through Pac*Bell, so we have to follow Pac*Bell's dialling > procedures!" This has long been a sore point for me as well. When did the most recent change occur? Eleven-digit dialing for local calls worked for me until I moved form the Bay Area just two weeks ago. I had made several attempts to find out why ten digit dialing was not allowed for long distance calls, and got nowhere each time. They would mostly compare it to regular phones, and say it works just like them, so why should I complain? "Pacific Bell requires it, so that's why!" I would offer that Pacific Bell does not allow ten digit dialing of local calls, but it worked on their system, so the MTSO had to be capable of reformatting numbers before handing them off to Pacific Bell. Additionally, I brought up the fact that all the other cellular systems in California (and elsewhere) allow ten digit dialing, even though the local companies that serve them require eleven digits. Of course, I got nowhere. They either didn't understand those points, or just ignored them, going back to the "Pacific Bell requires it" argument. The thing that really annoys me is not that the reps don't know much about the technology, but rather that they can't reason things out based on evidence presented to them. So, I would say that you'll just have to live with it. Part of the reason may be that Pacific Bell owns a substantial minority of Cellular One of SF, and doesn't want anybody getting fancy ideas about ten digit long distance (or, heaven forbid, LOCAL) dialing. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 01:09:18 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Talking Books For the Blind In-Reply-To: Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Martin McCormick writes: > Since virtually all of the books which are turned into Talking > Books are copywrited, the Library of Congress or any other > organization which wants to transcribe a book onto an audio tape must > get permission from the publisher. Such permission is usually granted > as long as the information in the book or article is not modified in > any way. In fact, the government promotes giving such permission. There is a check-off box right on the copyright filing form where you can give the Library of Congress permission to do the conversion. I would imagine that just about everybody does so (I did!). Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 23:00:07 CDT From: William Hawkins Subject: Re: Movie Review: The President's Analyst You happen to be talking about a truly classic Coburn spoof, not some mediocre effort. This is one of my favorite movies (the other one is High Society, or maybe Forbidden Planet ... but, I digress). The funniest spoof starts in a scene without words. The President's analyst is aboard a yacht, having been rescued from the FBI (who had orders to kill him) by the Russian spy. When he awakens from a drugged sleep, he finds a loaded gun left over from the previous struggle. He picks up the gun - and the most interesting grin spreads across his face. He puts the gun down, and the next thing you know, he has talked the Russian spy into admitting that he hates his father. The spy then wants to keep him out of trouble so he can be cured by analysis. Coburn and the spy are heading back into the States when they have the trouble with the phone booth while trying to call Godfrey Cam- bridge, the CIA spy. Obtelecom: When Coburn is rescued from the phone booth, while in Telephone Central (with lots of armed guards - did the real PC ever used armed guards within a facility?) he goes over to the bland, smiling, businessman who said he was the head of TPC, but went quiet when the power failed. In the back of his right shoe heel, he finds a standard (tip and ring, round) phone plug and cord leading away. The movie ends with a Christmas get-together of heros and heroines, and then pans back to show a view of the scene on a screen in Telephone Central, being watched by a whole lot of bland, smiling businessmen, with cords coming out of their right heels. Great stuff! ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Caller ID Comes to Florida Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 7:37:46 EDT Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers > Per-call blocking will be available dialing *67 (tone) or 1167 (pulse) > before the call. > "Per-line blocking is availabble to law enforcement agencies' office > lines aas well as domestic violence intervention agencies' access > lines at established shelters." > Looks like they have some pretty specific ideas about who they're > going to give per-line blocking to. This does not do justice to the fight that's being going on here. SBT was bound and determined to give NOBODY either blocking. First they "gave in" a little - they'd offer some LE/Shelters per-call block. Hearing, complaints and more hearings followed. The PSC came up with the "compromise" reported above. But it sounds as if Bell South still wants its pound of salt. I hear they've also set up *67 for a per-call UNBLOCK on a blocked line. So the cop (who has NO way of confirming that the line she's using is/isn't line-blocked) dials the same *67 she uses at home, and guess what ... wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (305) 255-RTFM [Moderator's Note: As before, may I suggest that any continuation on this thread be conducted in the telecom-priv group. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 10:12:50 EDT From: Paul S R Chisholm Subject: Re: 908 Area Code Switchover Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Tom Neff writes: > Just a reminder that New Jersey's 908 area code becomes mandatory on > Saturday, June 8, 1991 at 2 A.M. This affects 1.5 million phones > (314 exchanges) in central New Jersey, formerly part of 201. The > area code has been available since January 1990. As of Saturday you > will get a recording if you still dial 201. (I think it's been mostly working since June 1990, though certain operations in the network didn't accept 908 until January 1991.) I'm typing this on Friday (10 a.m. EDT), and my office mate just made a discovery: from a phone in 908, trying to dial a number that will still be 201 tomorrow results in the following message: "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check the number and try again. 201-2T." Paul S. R. Chisholm, AT&T Bell Laboratories, paul.s.r.chisholm@att.com, AT&T Mail !psrchisholm I'm not speaking for the company, I'm just speaking my mind. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 10:37:06 EDT From: Scott Dorsey Subject: Re: Western Electric Guitar Amplifier Organization: NASA Langley Research Center In article Billy Bradford writes: > I bought an old guitar amplifier about three weeks ago. On the back, > it says "LICENSED UNDER PATENTS OF WESTERN ELECTRIC AND AMERICAN > TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CO. LAUREL ELECTRONICS CO., SAN ANTONIO, > TEXAS. 110-120 VOLTS AC 40 WATTS". It uses three vacuum tubes, a > 12AU6, a 50C5, and a 35W4. Do any of you great telecom gurus out > there know what patents are being used? It's just got two instrument > inputs and a volume knob, and a built-in speaker. You have yourself a pretty valuable piece of equipment. From the tube complement I'd say this was one of the later WE guitar amps, but I have no idea which one. Which cabinet did you get? Is there a horn driver in addition to the main speaker? These were two or three watt amps, but with very efficient speakers that could get decent sound. For an example of how good these things can actually be, get your hands on some Charlie Christian recordings. For most of his stuff with the Benny Goodman band, he was using WE amps. By the way, it is still possible to get good quality 50C5 tubes. E-mail me if you want more details. Scott ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 08:49 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Modem Trouble on Subscriber Loop Carrier Jim Hickstein writes: > One of my users tried to dial in from home recently, only to discover > that the modem spit out garbage continually. I notice in your .signature a number that is in the Junction Ave. office. This place is packed with 5ESS, so what you describe could very well be a bad subscriber interface card in the switch. With digital, it can sound perfect and be totally unusable for data, for reasons I'll let others explain. > Thinking fast, I explained that certain adaptive compression and other > fancy techniques can cause trouble for modem users. He mentioned that > a representative of Pac*Bell had said that they "guarantee service > only for voice data [sic]". Call them back and tell them to check the handbook again. Pac*Bell considers the line to be meeting minimal spec IF it passes 2400 bps data. This they do guarantee. In other words, if you cannot get your 2400 bps modem to work through Pac*Bell facilities, then there is prima facie evidence that the line is not meeting minimal voice spec and someone should look into it. Oh, and do not be afraid to suggest things such as subscriber interface circuits (on the 5ESS). The days are long gone where those who knew ANYTHING about telco were immediately suspect. 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: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Date: 8 Jun 91 03:28:25 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , mitel!Software!grayt@ uunet.uu.net (Tom Gray) writes: > The double ring will indicate that the destination has answered your > call on its own equipment. The real implication of this is that you > are now being billed for the time that you are listening to ringing. This could be true, but may not be. If a DID PBX is generating the double-ring tone, it probably has not sent off-hook supervision. (There may be some other customer-provided-equipment that does go off-hook and then send ring tone.) 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: Sat, 8 Jun 91 03:04:04 -0400 From: westmark!mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus >>> Were you calling a commercial establishment? A college dorm or campus? >>> Some other place where you were dialing directly to an extension of a large >>> private network? >> To answer your question: I heard the double-ring when calling the >> "Management Services" department at Toronto City Hall. > The double ring will indicate that the destination has answered your > call on its own equipment. The real implication of this is that you > are now being billed for the time that you are listening to ringing. I don't believe so. If it's DID into a PBX, you shouldn't be billed until the PBX indicates that the call has been answered; the PBX can (and must, to be registered with the FCC) generate certain `call progress' tones before giving the electrical indication that the call has been answered (``returning answer supervision''). On the other hand, if you get an ``all of our agents are busy; please hold on'' message, the PBX should have returned answer supervision and you are being charged. (This man's opinions are his own.) From mole-end Mark Terribile ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 12:48:00 EDT From: Gordon D Woods Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article , by wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > I was surprised that the number 253 was used as Carrier ID and not 288 > like the PIC. It would have made more sense to use the PIC's. What is a PIC? I've seen it several times and no one has defined it. [Moderator's Note: His reference was to the five-digit carrier codes which can be used at the start of a long distance dialing sequence to route the call via a particular carrier; i.e. 10222 = MCI; 10777 = Sprint; 10288 = AT&T. These are a few, there are many more. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Lemson Subject: Re: Emergency Highway Phones Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1991 19:28:21 GMT decwrl!well.sf.ca.us!well!dag@uunet.uu.net (Darren Alex Griffiths) writes: > A local newscast reported on some interesting highway emergency phones > this morning. It seems that CalTrans is installing phones throughout > the San Francisco bay area on major highways. The phones connect you > All that is fairly standard, the interesting part is that the phones > are all cellular and run on solar power so no wires are needed to hook > 'em up. The reported said that the phones could be installed in about Are you sure they're cellular? We have those along I-270 between St. Louis, MO and Collinsville, IL, and I believe they are either VHF or UHF, judging by the antennas. It's easier to build a lower-power- requiring radio that's VHF than Cellular! Also, these types of radios would be cheaper to operate, I'm sure (since you "cut out the middleman" by not using a cellular carrier). Also, I've seen these types of radios in Israel, where it's not surprising to see solar-powered utilities on the sides of the road. The radios there all have a little "Motorola" flag on them ... free advertising, which must have them gotten a break on the price of the phones. David Lemson University of Illinois Computing Services Consultant Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #436 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02890; 9 Jun 91 2:41 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa07057; 9 Jun 91 1:11 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab18147; 9 Jun 91 0:05 CDT Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 23:25:33 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #437 BCC: Message-ID: <9106082325.ab12306@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 8 Jun 91 23:25:30 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 437 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted [Francesco Caserta] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Bob Frankston] Re: MCI $20 Promotion [Andy Jacobson] Re: Visit to California [Andy Jacobson] Re: Question About PC Pursuit and MNP [David Lemson] Re: The President's Analyst [Colston Sanger] Re: Questions on LAPD [Marco S. Hyman] Re: Ctrl-A's at Beginning and End of Digest [Fred E.J. Linton] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Francesco Caserta Subject: Re: Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 00:52:31 GMT In article , hv@uwasa.fi (Harri Valkama) writes: > Who can recommend for me an automatic fax/phone switch that has a > reasonable price. Let's say under $100. It should sniff the incoming > call and whether it is a phone call or a fax call direct it to my > telephone or fax modem. Here in Finland they are overlypriced; the > local telephone company tried to sell me one that cost 1500FIM (about > $350) !!! > Also a fax number for the company that sells these is very welcome. I > guess this device should work the same whether it is used in US or > Europe or what. Power supply is perhaps different but not a real > problem. I mean that it should work with phone and fax signals or are > there any differences concerning this kind of scheme. I'm also in the market for one of these devices, although, more specifically, for a fax/modem/a.m./phone switch. Lately I've done some `homework' and come up with the following products. Before I start the list, I should premise a few considerations. I've been told that even among G3 fax machines there is no guaranty that they will issue a CNG tone when calling. I've heard that it's mandatory in Europe, but not in North America. I don't know if this is true and if, anyway, the exceptions are actually very few. The behaviuor of modems seems even more unpredictable regarding the issueing of a distintive tone. I hope that someone more knowledgeable will clarify this for us on this matter, because otherwise it's better to forget that these boxes do any good. 1) Hello-Direct sells two of these devices: the Crosspoint Autoswitcher I and the Crosspoint Autoswitcher II. The former is a fax/modem/a.m./phone switch, the latter is a fax/a.m./phone switch. Some of the options include: customized access codes, ring delay, phone and auxiliary ring count, ring deduction, open line notification, automatic fax detection. Crosspoint Autoswitcher I $229 Crosspoint Autoswitcher II $129 Hello-Direct, 140 Great Oaks Blvd., San Jose, CA 95119-1347 1-800-444-3556, 1-408-972-1990, (fax) 1-408-972-8155 2) VSI sells SmartMaxII. Model 6000 is a fax/phone switching, while model 6500 adds an auxiliary port for a computer modem or another accessory. VSI sells also many other of these switches. You may want to contact them at 1-800-999-8232, 1-714-687-2492, (fax) 1-714-687-2513. 3) FAX MANIA is another source. They can be contacted at 1-800-33-FAX-55, (fax) 1-804-498-3263. COMMENTS: I have the impression that Hello-Direct's C.A._I is actually the same as the ASAP TF 555 made by Command Communications and sold for much less (~$170) by Lechmere. Francesco Caserta ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 01:28 GMT From: Bob Frankston Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell The issue of protocols raises its ugly head. Pac*Bell is able to provide some compelling features because it owns the network. The issue is not simply one of pricing but rather the fact that it can create the protocols it needs to provide the services. In fact, many of the protocols are intranetwork protocols that are generally available to telcos. A common theme of my messages is that these protocols must be exportable. Unfortunately, protocols generally means CCITT and a design cycle that guarantees irrelevance. In the spirit of naive optimism I'd like to see a law that allows telcos to offer these services but with the condition that the services be done with an arms length subsidiary and that any protocols used would be made generally available to third parties. Understanding the difficulty of designing good protocols, there would be a grace period in which they can experiment with protocols without invoking the full standards wrath but that they would have to have a process for advancing the protocols beyond their initial design. Perhaps they would also be allowed a not-for-profit grace period in which they can experimentally try out the services. I do appreciate the difficulty of creating good protocols and I don't want to inhibit the process but with transition from POTS to ISDN and other digital interfaces, we need to realize that the ability to offer these services, even in arms-length subsidiaries with no revenue sharing, is based on a policy of proprietary protocols. Making these protocols available external raises many network integrity and performance issues, but these issues must be faced otherwise the Judge Greene error is for naught. [Moderator's Note: One of the nicest features of telco-operated voice mail is the stutter dialtone which advises the subscriber of new messages waiting. It should not be that hard for telco to provide this to the competitors: A third-party voice mail system would send messages to the serving CO (of the subscriber) saying 'turn on stutter' or 'turn off stutter'. They'd send this message on a special data circuit, and your CO would toggle it on or off, just as it does now for telco's own voicemail service. Also, telco *could* now provide 'programmable forward on busy / no answer' if they wanted to. Ameritech Mobile presently allows me to toggle 'forward on busy / no answer' as I wish; AND program it to any number, anywhere, but Illinois Bell (my hardwired service) insists that this feature can only be programmed in the CO on a work order (that of course means a fee), and that it cannot be turned off or on (except by CO action), and that forwarding MUST be to another number in the same exchange! Phooey on that ... it is useless to me. So they could give these two items to competing voicemail operators if they wanted to. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 08 Jun 91 19:03 PDT From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: MCI $20 Promotion In Telecom Digest V. 11 # Rob Stampfli says: > I am not a lawyer, and neither are you. I have tried very diligently > to get an answer to this question (not related to the MCI offer, > incidently) and the best that I could ascertain was that it is far > from a clearly defined point of contract law. I may morally agree > with what you say, but I don't believe it would make a strong case in > a court of law. I AM NOT QUALIFIED TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER ... But that doesn't stop me from shooting my keyboard off..... While a mere undergraduate at the fine institution that hosts this excellent forum, I took a course in Business Law (so named). In that course, I was instructed, and confirmed in the tome of all such great knowledge (The textbook by Weast), that, according to the Uniform Commercial Code: In cases where the payment of a bill or other such compensation for a contract is IN DISPUTE, one can indicate on the check, (or include a statement attached to some other item of value so designated), something to the effect that the check, (or item) is payment for all debts, past and present. If the party owed payment accepts the check or item (a pen was given as example), then its over, they got paid, and that's that. Note the two sections in all caps. I'm not a lawyer, I took that course ten years ago, and the part about dispute is the key. If there was no legitimate dispute due to variations in the terms of the contract, then you're gonna look mighty foolish in court trying to use a cheap device to wheedle out of the deal. That I think gets at the heart of the matter. Advice on the clock: Don't try this with commercial contracts, Holmes, unless you really know what you're doing. I would guess that with the MCI slam check, a judge may attempt to simply reach the status quo, i.e., they give you control of your phone service back, and you give them their $20 back. Andy Jacobson or [Moderator's Note: As you noted, 'satisfaction amd accord' is a very tricky area. Without some legitimate written correspondence outlining your DISPUTE, and something from the other side indicating a willingness to accept partial payment as full satisfaction, the court is quite likely to rule that you unjustly enriched yourself at the expense of MCI. Remember also that when remittances go to a lockbox, the courts have said more than once that a minimum-wage employee for the bank processing hundreds of checks daily as agent for the bank's customers cannot bind the bank's customer to any agreement. A lawyer here in Chicago tried that stunt with Diner's Club: he owed them a thousand dollars on his bill, and sent them ten dollars marked 'payment in full'. It went through the lockbox, and later on, Diner's tried to collect the balance, eventually placing him with an agency when he kept resisting further payment. Finally, Diner's returned his ten dollars and sued him for the full amount. The Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Committee found out and the guy damn near lost his license to practice law here. The ARDC told him, "you are an attorney and you know better than that ... you don't stiff your creditors and abuse some eighteen-year old kid working for Diner's lockbox remittance processing center." ARDC complaints about judges and attornies here go directly to the Supreme Court for administrative review, and the court accepted the ARDC ruling completely, especially since the guy was an attorney. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 08 Jun 91 19:04 PDT From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Visit to California Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) writes: > 213/310 -- prefix list provided for 213 with asterisk to show if a > prefix or range of prefixes is moving to 310. There is a 310 PREFIX > (huh?) listed for Santa Monica, which is moving to 310. The only > prefixes staying in 213 will be Los Angeles (including FX lines > serving places which are otherwise in 818 and in the future 310) and The 310 prefix is for GTE internal offices. No subscriber lines are on this prefix. Very few of these numbers are ever given out to the public. Several I know are translations of 800 numbers for various flavors of customer service. It will be curious to see if this prefix persists after the cutover to the new 310 area code. If it does, it may be unique in being the only prefix identical to its own area code. (No reason why not really). Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ From: David Lemson Subject: Re: Question About PC Pursuit and MNP Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1991 19:23:42 GMT forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > quite understand the problem, and said that the only valid commands to > give an outdial modem were ATZ and ATDT. I suspect that some other > commands, such as ATS might work as well, but they would not tell me > about them. Unfortunately, I haven't had PC Pursuit for a while, and don't still have all of my lists of commands, but I can tell you that all of the outdial modems are Racal-Vadic modems, so if anyone can look up the command for disabling MNP on a Racal-Vadic modem, that's what you need. I have a more Hayes-ish modem that needs AT&E0 to disable MNP, but I doubt that will work for you. David Lemson University of Illinois Computing Services Consultant Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The President's Analyst Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 21:00:01 BST From: Colston Sanger Patrick, TELECOM Digest readers in London, UK may be interested to know that the film `The President's Analyst' (discussed in recent Digests) is showing at the National Film Theatre on Saturday, 27 July at 6.15 pm. Regards, Colston Sanger GID Ltd 69 Kings Road Tel/Fax: 0428 65421 Haslemere Surrey GU27 2QG, UK UUCP: colston@gid.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Marco S Hyman Subject: Re: Questions on LAPD Date: 7 Jun 91 21:05:43 GMT Organization: Ascend Communications -- San Francisco In article Stan@li.psi.com (Stanfield L. Smith ) writes: > I need HELP in trying to understand how LAPD is going to work on the > ISDN B channel of the telephone network. LAPD runs on the D channel. One of the many "rate adaption" protocols that runs on a B channel is V.120 which is based upon LAPD. > What I have been able to find out is there are many DIFFERENT > standards for LAPD, the CCITT, ATT, French and others. I have the > CCITT book, but no documentation about the other variations. Forget LAPD. What you are really talking about is Q.921 (layer two signaling between the switch and CPE) and Q.931 (layer three). Layer two is quite standard, layer three -- the call control layer -- is another story. While some countries mandate strict conformance to CCITT what you need to know is what type of switch you'll be connecting to and then grab the documentation from the switch vendor. Examples are AT&T's "5ESS Switch: ISDN BASIC RATE INTERFACE SPECIFICATION" which has version for the various generics and Nothern Telecom's "ISDN BASIC RATE ACCESS USER-NETWORK INTERFACE SPECIFICATION". The CCITT specs are in Fascicle VI of the Blue Books and are only available in hard copy. Call the switch vendor for information about ordering their manuals. > 2) Can anyone explain how these different incarnations for LAPD are going > to inter-operate as a world wide telephone system? You only need CPE that talks to your switch. Once you get to your switch it's the switches job to get the call the rest of the way. Rate adapted data on the B channel does require use of the same standard. The common standards in use are DMI Mode 2 (an AT&T proprietary protocol used by AT&T 7500 series phones and terminal adapters), V.110 (defines which bits will be used to for data), and V.120 (the Q.921/LAPD look-alike). Fujitsu phones and TA's probably define the "standard" V.120. At least that's the TA you see in many test labs when testing interworking. marc work: marc@ascend.com uunet!aria!marc home: marc@dumbcat.sf.ca.us {ames,sun}!pacbell!dumbcat!marc ------------------------------ Date: 7-JUN-1991 22:40:45.49 From: "Fred E.J. Linton" Subject: Re: Ctrl-A's at Beginning and End of Digest In , the Moderator writes: > When various messages are kept in a mailbox here, > the control A's are separators between them. Good thing I wasn't using the old AT&T 1300 "Video Transaction Terminal" I started modeming with -- an incoming control A would have locked the keyboard irretrievably! [Reminiscence mode on: these were the little beasts banks like ChemBank of New York and Union Trust of New Haven were pushing, at about $50.00, for use as Pronto(tm) Home Banking terminals, with a little help from a (now defunct?) consortium including ChenBank, AT&T, Time-Life, and an outfit called (I think) Covidea; not too different from the AT&T 1310 appearing a few years later as a TDD-compatible 300-baud KSR-modem for the deaf -- er, hearing-impaired.] Fred or ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #437 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05926; 9 Jun 91 3:45 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa16428; 9 Jun 91 2:17 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab07057; 9 Jun 91 1:12 CDT Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 0:17:19 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #438 BCC: Message-ID: <9106090017.ab15316@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 9 Jun 91 00:17:04 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 438 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: What Will Turn the Telcos On [Darren Alex Griffiths] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Jim Gottlieb] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Charlie Mingo] Re: RBOCs Own Cellular [John Higdon] Re: Calling Card Calls From Canada [Steve Forrette] Re: Caller ID in the UK [Andrew Morley] Re: Surprise!!! [root@surya.uucp] Re: Ringing Tones Around the World [David E. A. Wilson] Re: Wrong Recordings [Floyd Davidson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darren Alex Griffiths Subject: Re: What Will Turn the Telcos On Date: 7 Jun 91 21:20:25 GMT Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA In article peterm@rwing.uucp (Peter Marshall) writes: > Phone Spots holds a patent on the concept of directly accessing an > originating client's transmission path during the audible ringing > portion of a call during call set-up and delivering an audible message > or signal to the caller between the ringing signals without delaying > the call progress. Expressed in its more likely and intended context, > this firm intends to launch a business of delivering ten second > recorded advertising messages between ringing signals simultaneously > on a potentially very large number of telephone lines. When offered > in the residential market, it is contemplated that subscribers will > receive a discount on their monthly bill for tolerating the ads. Ick!!! Next thing you know we'll be getting advertisements during calls to 911, people trying to hock "real Rolex" watches to us while we sit in an emergency room waiting for a doctor, lawyers sticking ads above the stretcher in ambulances, lord the opputunities are endless. I can just see calling 1-900-1RIP-OFF at $50 a second and getting ads for 1-900-GET-MUGGed while waiting for it to pickup. Actually, I don't see how this would work. There's a whole bunch of enduser equpiment and older, smaller switches that expect rings to be uniform. I'd get extremely agitated if my modem insisted that a line was busy because some dork was trying to sell me insurance between rings. Smart people word refuse to have the "service" on lines that are likely to receive modem calls, but what about switches at hotels and companies that do billing based on when someone answers by listening to the ring. I understand that newer switches don't do this and older switches also assume that someone answers after a certain time so they can deal with unusual rings, but it still seems like things would break in some cases. I'd bet that a few COCOTs would get confused as well ... hmm, this might not be a bad idea after all :-). Cheers, darren alex griffiths (415) 708-3294 dag@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Date: 9 Jun 91 03:39:04 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles In article 76012.300@compuserve.com (76012,300 Brad Hicks) writes: >> Also, I have heard of, but never heard officially, of a telco >> tariff which requires that autodialers not retry the same number >> more than ten times in a row automatically. > it's a law. It was passed by Congress in the aftermath of that > guy who got hacked off at one of the televangelists ... First off, I believe the limit is 16 retries. And I'm pretty sure the law was passed because of what happened when Bruce Springsteen tickets went on sale in D.C. and the network came to a standstill due to the number of people trying to call the ticket vendor. The real solution would have been to put such numbers on a high-volume prefix, or as they do here in L.A., the number to Ticketron is a special case in all local switches and tandems. But it being D.C., our lawmakers thought they had to pass a law. Never mind that I doubt that autodialers were a significant portion of the traffic that day. Most autodialers try only once every thirty or sixty seconds. More probable were people doing multiple manual repeat dials. If I press the Last-Number-Dialed button 17 times, do I go to jail :-) ? ------------------------------ From: Charlie Mingo Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Date: 08 Jun 91 18:14:41 In a recent posting, John Higdon attacks Pac*Bell's new voicemail service, because it is priced "well below" that of Pac*Bell's competitors, and because it offers features which the local telephone company is uniquely capable of providing. He claims that this is part of a strategy of "predatory pric[ing] designed to murder the competition," and argues that Pac*Bell's voicemail service offers "a glimpse of the future under the Hollings bill" (which would permit RBOC's to manufacture telephone equipment) and goes on to call for the bill to be defeated in the House. Although I take no position on the Hollings bill itself, it sounds perverse to me to attack a company for offering quality service at a low price. It must be remembered that antitrust law generally (and the Bell divestiture in particular) was designed to benefit *consumers* not competitors. "Predatory pricing," for example, is defined as selling a product *below the cost of production* for the purpose of eventually monopolizing a market. Mr. Higdon provides no evidence that Pac*Bell has priced its voicemail service below the cost of providing it; on the contrary, he himself shows that Pac*Bell's size and credit rating give it easier access to capital, which lowers its cost of providing the service. This is a natural advantage which large, established companies have over smaller ones; pricing one's goods to reflect one's lower cost structure is neither anticompetative nor "unfair." Mr. Higdon also writes that "[w]hen the field has been thinned out sufficiently, then the price can be whatever [Pac*Bell] wants." It should be clear that Pac*Bell cannot raise the price of voicemail in the future above what independent providers currently charge, without allowing the competition to reestablish itself. Given this limitation, any such "predatory pricing" strategy would be decidedly unprofitable. Likewise, his argument that Pac*Bell should be prevented from offering voicemail, because it alone is in a technical position to provide special services (such as "stutter" dialtone and free call forwarding), is similarly flawed. Consumers would not be better off by making these desirable features unavailable merely to protect inefficient competition. (Of course, if it is possible to extend these feature to competitors' services, Pac*Bell should be required to.) The key concept here should be service to consumers, and not "fairness" to competitors. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 22:29 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: RBOCs Own Cellular Ken Jongsma writes: (quoting) > Of the top 10 cellular carriers, only No. 1 McCaw Cellular > Communications is not now owned by a conventional "wireline" phone > company. Indeed, phone companies are mainly battling one another: > Ameritech and Southwestern Bell will go head to head in St. Louis and > Chicago. And in San Francisco, even McCaw's Cellular One is held in partnership with Pacific Telesis (Pac*Bell). This means that you have, in essence, GTE battling Pac*Bell. > I find the second paragrah very disturbing. Some may claim that there > is no way that the local service ratepayer subsidizes this business, > but at the very least, it distracts the RBOCs from doing what they > ought to be. That is, delivering improved local wireline service. And judging from the way Pac*Bell's wireline service is deteriorating, there is probably some truth to this. Oh, you would like some examples? The business office has now gone to 'automated attendent'. Most COs are completely unmanned after hours. The program services department has gone completely to hell. The right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing anymore. Frankly, I have never seen worse service from Pac*Bell, and it appears to be going down hill rapidly. Rather than offering The Message Center, Centrex, Cable TV, Cellular Service, Long Distance, and a host of other non-regulated products, I would like to have an LEC that can provide what I cannot go anywhere else to get: telephone and leased line service that works. Weeks ago I ordered a pair of 15Khz program circuits for a radio station in preparation for a repeater project. Last week's due date was missed because the circuit was engineered BACKWARDS. That is right: it was designed to carry audio from the repeater site back to the studio. Very useful indeed. A new due date was scheduled for Wednesday (last). Instead, the day before (Tuesday) I got a surprise call: could I let them into the repeater site for an end to end test and turn-up? No, but we rescheduled for today (Friday). After standing around ALL DAY with the installer, it turns out that no one had bothered to check some interoffice equalizations and the line was not ready for turn-up after all. They will try again on Monday. I have never seen such incompetence in a quarter-century of professional dealings with telephone companies. I have seen GTE perform substantially better than that which has come from the most recent transactions with Pac*Bell. What is happening? Insiders tell me that the most intense handwringing at Pacific Telesis centers around the inevitable loss of the intraLATA monopoly. This has been the cash engine since divestiture. In preparation for this, there has been considerable "fat trimming" in addition to the expected search for new revenue sources. Apparently, some of the meat has been removed with the fat, since the number of competent people available to customers has noticeably dropped. As mentioned before, since Pac*Bell is afraid to increase business rates much for fear of bypass, affordable residence service may become a thing of the past. Look for a substantial rise in the not-so-distant future. Unlike big business, you and I have nowhere else to go. I have said it before and I will say it again: prevent companies providing regulated LEC service from branching out. Let these holding companies sell their monopolies to investors who would like to provide telephone service for a nice guaranteed rate of return. And break up the RBOCs. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Calling Card Calls From Canada Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article M. R. Baker writes: > Dial the number as 0+XXX+YYY+ZZZZ. > Wait for the "bong", and enter my card number/pin. > After a few seconds, get a synthesized (or recorded) message: > "Please hold for operator assistance" > I interpret this to mean that Network Interconnect between U.S. and > Canada has not been completely implemented, and CCS7 messages can't be > automatically exchanged across the border yet to the AT&T NCPs, etc. At least in British Columbia, it is automatic. I've called from the phone at the ski lodge at the top of the mountain at Whistler to Los Angeles, using my AT&T Calling Card. Just 0+213+xxx+xxxx, wait for kabong, then my card number. The call then went right through, just like in the U.S. This was about two years ago. My card was a "Traditional" Calling Card, related to my phone number. Perhaps the Universal Cards and the new random calling cards are not supported in an automated fasion by the current system. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: abm88@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Morley A.B.) Subject: Re: Caller ID in the UK Date: 5 Jun 91 15:04:11 GMT In SAMcinty@exua.exeter.ac.uk (Scott A. McIntyre) writes: > As far as I am aware, this is the first of these devices to be on the > UK market. I would think that it will not be trememdously successful > since most of the UK is not on Tone yet (the device requires it). I think that this came up on telecom some time ago. Apparently the box doesn't receive caller ID (neither Telecom nor Mercury transmit it), but automatically answers any incoming call with a digitized voice saying "Please enter the number you are calling from". Therefore there is nothing to make them tell the truth and if the caller hasn't got Tone then they cannot get through at all! A bit of a con really. Andrew Morley, - abm88@uk.ac.soton.ecs abm88@ecs.soton.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: The unknown Florentine Subject: Re: Surprise!!! Date: Tue, 04 Jun 91 21:58:16 PDT Organization: Sunshine in a box Brian.Gordon@eng.sun.com (Brian Gordon) writes: > The good news is that, as of today, 01 Jun 91, PacBell has expanded its > local calling area, so I can call work, for example, without incurring > toll charges. > The bad news is that, without notice, the "permissive" 1-plus dialing > has stopped working. The normal dialing from 408 has been, for > example, just 415-336-xxxx. It was permissible, however, to dial > 1-415-336-xxxx, which, I presume, will someday become the norm. As of > this morning, using the "1-" form reaches a reorder tone ... In 415 land where I work, they did that to us a year ago. Our phone people here reprogrammed the phone system to prepend a 1 to any number that is long enough to include an area code( unless it already has one) . It is amazing the lengths we will go to to stay lazy. ------------------------------ From: David E A Wilson Subject: Re: Ringing Tones Around the World Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 07:18:32 GMT cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB) writes: > The ABCDEF codes apparently are those in the British Telecom booklet > dated September 1990 which I received recently. It shows Denmark as > BD, not ED; apparently this is intended for people calling from the > U.K. The codes are identical in the OTC International Direct Dial pages of Telecom Australia phone books - and Denmark is listed as Ring=B, Busy=D. David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ From: Floyd Davidson Subject: Re: Wrong Recordings Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1991 11:41:08 GMT In article HOEQUIST@bnr.ca (Charles Hoequist) writes: > Steve Forrette, in reference to his and Tim Irvin's difficulty with > inappropriate automatic-intercept recordings from Pac Bell, asks what, > if anything, can be done to correct this. Well, as always, 'it depends > ...', in this case on where the problem lies and how Pac Bell stores > its recordings. > If this is in fact a software problem (the switch is programmed to > play the "line is being checked" message at the wrong time), the > correction will wait until subscriber irritation forces Pac Bell to > have a patch made. The software that selects intercept recordings would certainly be different with every switch. But one would hope that most if not all the larger switches do it the way the ones programmed by BNR do it! It is table driven on the DMS-100/200 and Super Node switches so that telco personnel can select routing to intercepts in just about any way they choose. The number of different intercepts may be restricted however, due to not enough equipment assigned and equipped for recorded announcements. In that case it may well take an earthquake to get anyone to upgrade the switch to allow reasonable intercepts. DMS-10's may do it differently, I don't know. There are lots of smaller switches (Redcom and Harris for instance) that do burn everything into a PROM, and it becomes a political nightmare trying to get one changed. All of it comes down the the equipment can do it, if only the people realize it and are willing to pay for it. Floyd L. Davidson | Alascom, Inc. pays me, |UA Fairbanks Institute of Marine floyd@ims.alaska.edu| but not for opinions. |Science suffers me as a guest. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #438 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25991; 10 Jun 91 0:00 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06710; 9 Jun 91 22:27 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14859; 9 Jun 91 21:19 CDT Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 20:49:13 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #439 BCC: Message-ID: <9106092049.ab30500@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 9 Jun 91 20:49:08 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 439 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Another Legend About Cyrus Field [westmark!mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net] Modem Dialing Speed and Delay [Toby Nixon] USR's 'Fast Dial' Feature [Charlie Mingo] GTE Airphone [Carl Moore] Canadian Regulations on Auto Dialing, etc. [Tony Harminc] How to Connect (Cheaply) From Marin to Berkeley? [Richard Stanton] Transporting a Bitstream on a Video Channel [Bj|rn Remseth] Ease of Getting Info From Telco [David Gast] Clicks on Line After Hangup [Ken Levitt] Caller ID / Per Line Blocking [Rob Boudrie] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 12:57:30 -0400 From: westmark!mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net Subject: Another Legend About Cyrus Field In Vol 11, Issue 373, Donald E. Kimberlin writes: > Suffice it to say in this short note that Cyrus Field, the > American that U.S. history books start their submarine telegraphy > history with, was a businessman, not a technologist ... Field really > got his technology (and eventually his capital) from England. I know at least one legend on this note. Verse VI of *Peter Cooper's Table at McSorley's Bar* runs: Peter Cooper's cable was the third unreeled. Most of all the credit went to Cyrus Field, But canny Peter Cooper made the durn thing yield. Is it any wonder that he died well-heeled? (Peter Cooper was a 19th century New York industrialist and philanthropist who sunk most of his considerable glue and iron fortunes into what he planned to call ``The Union for the Advancement of Science and Art'', and which was incorporated over his objections as ``The Cooper Union for the Advancement ...'' It's still giving full scholarship educations in engineering, architecture and art ... yes, on Cooper Square right around the corner from McSorley's Old Alehouse.) (This man's opinions are his own.) From mole-end Mark Terribile ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Modem Dialing Speed and Delay Date: 5 Jun 91 17:47:31 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , forrette@cory.berkeley. edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > Since my switch will reliably take 36ms, I see no reason to not allow > me to dial at that speed. Anybody (Toby?) know why the newer modems > are handicapped/differently-abled in this manner? CCITT Q.24 specifies that COs must be able to accept DTMF signals that are at least 40 ms long, so I'm not surprised that your switch accepts 36 ms. But with the vagaries of local loops, it's necessary for modems to send somewhat more than 40 ms, to have some confidence that at least 40 ms will actually arrive at the switch. EIA/TIA-496-A ("Interface Between Data Circuit-terminating Equipment (DCE) and the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN)") includes the following requirements in section 4.3.3.3 (DTMF Pulsing Rate for Automatic Dialers): Minimum duration of a two-frequency signal: 50 ms Minimum interdigit interval: 45 ms Maximum interdigit interval: 3 seconds Minimum cycle time: 100 ms Manufacturers who are aware of this standard generally want to be compliant with it in order to meet various government, military, and corporate purchasing specifications, and so these specifications are enforced by the modem firmware. The timing specified was contributed to the TIA TR-30.3 committee by representatives of LECs and switch manufacturers, and the committee took their word for it. > [Moderator's Note: And while Toby is answering that, here is another > question: how come US Robotics has a condition you can set which > allows for 'quick dialing', or dialing without waiting the obligitory > two seconds before starting? Hayes used to claim (maybe still do) > that telco tariffs require a two second pause before dialing. You > could not set that particular S-register less than 2. Telebit seems > to feel the same way ... but USR lets you go off hook and bang those > digits right out if you set the register for it. PAT] In Hayes modems, you can bypass the two seconds by taking the modem off hook with the "H" command before issuing the "D" command (e.g., "ATH1D...". The "D" command procedures check to see if you're already off-hook, and don't enforce the blind-dialing delay if you are (in case you're using multiple "D" commands to dial a long number, you don't want two-second pauses on the "D" commands after the first). Where did THIS requirement come from? I really don't know. Section 4.3.3.1.2 (Start Dial Delay) of EIA/TIA-496-A says "Some central office equipment may not accept network signaling information earlier than 70 milliseconds or later than five seconds from the time dial tone is applied", and that's it. There is no two-second minimum, so I can simply surmise that it is "traditional" and has "always been done that way". Oh, well. I DO know that have ZERO delay between going off-hook and initiating dialing is unreliable, and fails frequently. The switch needs SOME time to recognize that you want to dial and present dial tone. You can provide ONE second by setting S8 (pause time for comma) to 1, and use "ATH1D,..." to get a fixed one-second delay. The default is to ignore the fixed blind dialing delay, anyway, and actually detect the dial tone before starting dialing. Many countries REQUIRE this, and don't even permit blind dialing. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 USA | Internet hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: Charlie Mingo Date: 05 Jun 91 16:18:04 Subject: USR's 'Fast Dial' Feature The Moderator Notes: > [H]ow come US Robotics has a condition you can set which > allows for 'quick dialing', or dialing without waiting the obligitory > two seconds before starting? Hayes used to claim (maybe still do) > that telco tariffs require a two second pause before dialing. You > could not set that particular S-register less than 2. Telebit seems > to feel the same way ... but USR lets you go off hook and bang those > digits right out if you set the register for it. According to the manual for my USR HST Dual Standard, using the "Fast Dials" feature is not the same as setting S6 to zero. Fast Dials causes the modem to wait for a dial tone and then dial immediately. Although S6 *can* be set to zero, my local exchange will not accept the whole number unless the modem waits at least one second or uses Fast Dials. Fast Dials is part of the Adaptive Dialing feature, where the modem monitors the response to its dial attempt. In addition to Fast Dials, the HST will first attempt to tone dial, and then revert to pulse if dial tone is not broken. Pretty neat, eh? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 9:46:09 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: GTE Airphone When I flew recently from Philadelphia to Los Angeles and back, I saw GTE airphones in use on board. It requires a credit card (which could be AT&T) to release it for use, and charges $2 (U.S.) for setup and $2/minute of the call. Aside from 0 operator help, calls are dialed with area code + seven digits, no leading 0 or 1. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 91 13:16:16 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Canadian Regulations on Auto Dialing, etc. > [Moderator's Note: And while Toby is answering that, here is another > question: how come US Robotics has a condition you can set which > allows for 'quick dialing', or dialing without waiting the obligitory > two seconds before starting? From another writer: > Also, I have heard of, but never heard officially, of a telco > tariff which requires that autodialers not retry the same number more > than ten times in a row automatically. This lead to: a) some > crippled terminal programs which won't do more than ten retries before > having to be restarted, and b) crippled hardware -- my DUoFone 195 (an > old Radio Shack gadget) has an auto redialer which keeps trying till > there's no more busy. But it will only try a maximum of ten times. > Of course, this is all obsolete now, in the days of Call Return, where > the Network does it for you. Well - referring to the bible (for Canada at least) I find: (conveniently the same section covers both these matters) Definitions: AUTOMATIC DIALING The process of dialing the nth (n greater than 1) in a series of calls which is not interrupted by human stimuli to initiate each call attempt. Calls must be to different numbers ("repertory", "random", or "sequential"). AUTOMATIC REDIALING The process of repeatedly and automatically dialing the same number (last number called). For the purpose of this document, Automatic Calling Units under external computer control, and emergency alarm dialers are not considered to automatically redial. OK - now to the *real* bureaucratese: 3.18 Automatic Dialing and Automatic Redialing 3.18.1 Requirements Terminal equipment shall comply with the following requirements: 1) Audible or visual indication shall be provided during automatic redialing. 2) a) Automatic redialing to any individual number shall be limited to 10 successive call attempts. b) If a pause of at least 60 s is provided between the completion of one call attempt and the initiation of the next call attempt, then up to 15 call attempts may be made to any individual number. The dialer shall return to the on hook (idle) state after 15 call attempts to any individual number and remain on hook until manually reactivated. 3) If the called number does not answer, the dialer shall return to the on hook state within 120 s of the commencement of dialing. 4) Sequential dialers shall only dial once to any individual number before proceeding to dial another number. 5) Network addressing signals shall be transmitted no earlier than: a) 70 ms after receipt of dial tone at the network interface OR b) 0.6 s after automatically going off hook (for single line equipment that does not use dial tone detectors) OR c) 70 ms after receipt of central office ground start at the network interface. < section 6 dealing with the rules after you have applied simulated lightning strikes and so on to your dialer omitted :-) > ------------------- (The bible here is DOC document CS-03, available from the Department of Communications in Ottawa (or your local regional office)). I posted the address a couple of weeks ago. BTW, please don't order this stuff just for fun - although it is "free", we hard working taxpayers end up paying for it. Order it if you have a genuine use for it.) So it looks as though there is no need for *any* delays if your modem is under "external computer control". Also, the required dialing delay is much less than two seconds; even if you don't listen for dial tone you can dial after 0.6 seconds. Caveat: my copy of CS-03 is getting rather old (1988). Things may have changed since then. Tony H. ------------------------------ From: Richard Stanton Subject: How to Connect (Cheaply) From Marin to Berkeley? Organization: Stanford GSB Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 19:39:10 GMT I've just moved to Larkspur in Marin, and will be spending a lot of time connected to a computer in Berkeley. To do this directly costs 21c/10c per minute on Pacific Bell. I can cut this by about 60% using one of their calling plans, but it will still be a lot of money if I stay connected for a few hours every day. Can anyone think of an alternative way of making this connection (the machine at Berkeley has telnet / FTP access, so a local Internet site would be perfect). Thanks a lot. Richard Stanton pstanton@gsb-lira.stanford.edu ------------------------------ From: Bj|rn Remseth Subject: Transporting a Bitstream on a Video Channel Organization: Institute of Informatics, University of Oslo Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1991 01:40:30 GMT Does anyone know about existing hardware that puts a bitstream on a video channel and let you extract the same bitstream out of the video video signal, after it has been transmitted on standard video transport media such as satellite links, video cassettes and cable TV networks. This kind of equipment could use spare capacity on local cable networks and satellite sattelite links to spread e.g. usenet news quite inexpensively. But, the Big Question is: Does this hardware exist? Bj\o rn Remseth Institutt for Informatikk Net: rmz@ifi.uio.no Phone: +472 453466 Universitetet i Oslo, Norway Mail: rmz@neste.ifi.uio.no ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 20:02:34 -0700 From: David Gast Subject: Ease of Getting Info From Telco There was a repeat of a program last night on the local PBS channel about Bail Bondsmen. If you have bail and don't show up at court, these people come after you. While I was not following the program in detail, it quoted one them as saying ``I am not sure what we do is legal ... I mean, we do misrepresent the truth, but ...'' The telecom aspect, which seems particularly relevant after the recent leak of info, was that this guy calls up the telephone company and gets all sorts of information about what calls are made. Based on that info, they decide to go out to a specific house in San Bernardino. It was truely amazing the info they got and how easily they got it. The info that was released about the telemarketing company in Chicago was nothing in comparison with the information this guy got from what I presume was GTE or PacBell. David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 91 13:44:27 EDT From: Ken Levitt Subject: Clicks on Line After Hangup I have a Watson voicemail board that answers my phone when I'm not at home. If someone leaves a message for me, the Watson system is programmed to call out to my beeper number to let me know that I should pick up a message. If no message is left, the system is not supposed to call the beeper. I'm having a problem when someone hangs up without leaving a message. When the caller hangs up, there is some sort of clicking on the line. The Watson is listening for silence or a dial tone and thinks that the clicking is an actual message. When a dial tome finally comes on, Watson disconnects and then calls my beeper. I called New England Telephone and was told that the clicking is normal and that there is nothing they can do about this. Is this true? Should I give up and do my best to work around the problem, or is there something I can do to get them to get rid of the clicking? Ken Levitt - On FidoNet gateway node 1:16/390 UUCP: zorro9!levitt INTERNET: levitt%zorro9.uucp@talcott.harvard.edu ------------------------------ From: Rob Boudrie Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 12:13:12 EDT Subject: Caller ID / Per Line Blocking A recent posting mentins that Florida Caller ID will make per call blocking (by dialing a prefix) available to anyone free of charge, but that only privliged persons and agencies can get "per line" blocking. So, I was wondering : (a) Are there any phones available which may be programmed to automatically insert a user defined prefix befure the dialed number? (b) What about an in line gadget that you put in the line to do this for all of your phones? Rob Boudrie rboudrie@encore.com [Moderatpr's Note: I'd think any speed dial phone could be programmed to include *67 (or whatever) in front of the phone number in that position in the directory. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #439 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00561; 10 Jun 91 1:30 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa06217; 9 Jun 91 23:33 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab06710; 9 Jun 91 22:27 CDT Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 21:48:49 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #440 BCC: Message-ID: <9106092148.ab24532@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 9 Jun 91 21:48:36 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 440 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Remote Call Forwarding [Business Week via Ken Jongsma] Local Calling Areas (was: Surprise!!) [Glenn R. Stone] Share FAX, Modem and Voice Line [Ken Jongsma] CT Sales Tax on International Calls [Fred E.J. Linton] PCs Through Airport Security [Jim Redelfs] A Historical Note - Ringdown Interoffice Signaling [haynes@cats.ucsc.edu] Phone Outages [Dave Niebuhr] RBOC's Can Now Manufacrture Equipment [Ken McVay & David Leibold] Do Passive Repeater Antennas Work For Handheld Phones? [Seng-Poh Lee] Pacific Bell Local Calling Area Expansion [Steve Forrette] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ken Jongsma Subject: Remote Call Forwarding Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 20:55:19 EDT From the June 17th issue of {Business Week}: Forwarding telephone calls is a great way to stay in touch when you head out of town, but it has one big drawback: In most places, you must enter the forwarding number from your own home or office phone. That's a problem if you don't know that number until you arrive at your new destination. Now, more phone companies are beginning to offer "remote access to call forwarding," which lets you punch in a forwarding number from any telephone. Within the past few months, Southwestern Bell Corp. began offering the service in Austin, Tex.; Bell Atlantic Corp. started it in the Maryland suburbs of Washington; and BellSouth Corp. introduced it throughout North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. It's not exactly a technology breakthrough: Centel Corp. has offered it Las Vegas since around 1985. But Centel charges $15 a month- far more than the Bells. Southwestern Bell, for instance, is charging residential customers $1.50 a month for remote access, plus $2.10 a month for basic call forwarding. Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org Smiths Industries jongsma@esseye.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com [Moderator's Note: But SW Bell had a *major* problem in St. Louis last week affecting a few thousand data lines. A special mailing from the Digest late Sunday night will go out with full details. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Glenn R. Stone" Subject: Local Calling Areas (was Surprise!!) Date: 7 Jun 91 18:36:31 GMT Organization: Dead Poets Society In dblyth@oatseu.daytonoh.ncr.com (Dennis Blyth) writes: > In Cincinnati Bell territory, one can call from a residence phone in > Hamilton, Ohio (about 30 miles north of the Ohio river) to the > Cincinnati International airport ... about 15 miles south of the > Ohio river... The Metro Atlanta calling area extends for 80 some miles in a couple directions ... it'll be in its own area code in March, 1992. Whee, life in the big city. Can anybody top that? (Cobb, Fulton, Dekalb, and portions of Cherokee, Henry, Paulding, Gwinnett, Clayton counties ...) Glenn R. Stone gs26@prism.gatech.edu ------------------------------ From: Ken Jongsma Subject: Share FAX, Modem and Voice Line Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 8:46:51 EDT There have been a number of people looking for devices to allow the use of one phone line for several purposes. I received a catalog from TigerSoftware (1-800-888-4437, FAX 1-304-444-5010) that has a couple of these devices: Extraline (by Lynx Automation) - Listens for the sound of an automatic FAX machine. If detected, or if a specific touchtone key is pressed, routes call to FAX machine. If modem tones are detected, routes call to modem line (Not sure this would work in usual modem config, since receiving modem usually makes noise, not sending modem, until connection is established.) $199.00. Ring Detector (also by Lynx) - Uses distinctive ring service offered by most RBOCs to route calls. Two line version $89.00, Four line version $149.00. I have no experince with this company. Ken ------------------------------ Date: 7-JUN-1991 23:16:47.15 From: "Fred E.J. Linton" Subject: CT Sales tax on International Calls I live in New Haven, CT (area 203). My most recent phone bill month with SNET had me placing lots of calls to Poland, with whatever carrier could get me through: AT&T, ITT, MCI, Sprint. ITT's bill has not shown up yet, but: MCI (who bill me directly) charged 3% FET but not the 8% CT tax. AT&T (for whom SNET does billing) likewise: 3% FET, but no 8% CT tax. Sprint (for whom SNET also does billing) charged not only the 3% FET but also the 8% CT tax. A call to SNET Customer "Service" taught me that SNET only bills in accordance with the LD carrier's instructions -- to find out why they're billing this 8% for Sprint but not for AT&T, they offered to contact AT&T to learn why AT&T was NOT charging 8% CT sales tax (though based on MCI's not charging it either, I'd have thought they'd want to contact Sprint to find out why they, alone, ARE). So I call Sprint Customer Service for another perspective, reaching an agent who immediately contacted Sprint's "Tax Liaison" office (I was on hold a few minutes), reported back that there should NOT have been any CT state sales tax imposed, and suggested I contact my SNET rep and ask them to remove that charge. Needless to say, I did; equally needless to say, they didn't. Can any of the tariff experts out there help me sort this all out? As another netter so neatly puts it: aTdHvAaNnKcSe . Fred or ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 91 18:19:24 CST From: Jim Redelfs Subject: PCs Through Airport Security Reply-To: ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@uunet.uu.net Organization: Macnet Omaha Max Rochlin wrote: > For fun, I changed my os-prompt to: > "Yes, this really is a computer and thanks for checking" > Which amuses most airport security guards. I've often wondered how amused they would be if I brought my trusty Macintosh, fired it up only to have it crash which, for most Macs, is indicated by a cute graphic of an old-style, ball and fuse BOMB!! "Sorry, a system error occured!" JR Tabby 2.2 MacNet Omaha 402-289-2899 On loan from Mrs MacWidow (1:285/14) ------------------------------ From: 99700000 Subject: A Historical Note - Ringdown Interoffice Signaling Date: 8 Jun 91 06:54:35 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Open Access Computing In days of yore toll calls often required operators to string together circuits from one office to another until the two end offices were connected. In many cases the interoffice trunks were operated with ringdown signaling. That is, the operator trying to make a connection would plug into a circuit leading to the next office in the chain and ring, just as if she were ringing a subscriber, to get the attention of the operator at the distant end of the circuit. At least in my home town the incoming toll trunks appeared on the switchboard with magneto drops, exactly the same as if they were magneto subscriber lines. Incidentally jacks on the toll testboard were designated 'line' and 'drop' according to whether they connected away from the switchboard or toward the switchboard, respectively; and this terminology persisted for a long time - maybe it still does. On some toll circuits the ringdown signaling was accomplished by simply sending 20Hz ringing current down the line, just as if it were a subscriber line. On other circuits this was not possible. One such case is a circuit 'composited' for telegraphy. A 'composite set' (CX) is basically a pair of filters: telegraph signals get on and off the line through a low-pass filter, and voice signals go through a high-pass filter, at each end of the circuit. So the telephone company could use the circuit for toll voice, and also sell each wire as a ground-return telegraph circuit to some customer wanting that service. In addition to the filters of the composite set, the repeating coils (transformers) in the voice path were designed to have poor low frequency transmission, as a further aid in keeping the telegraph signals out of the voice path. Now 20Hz ringing is in the same frequency range as telegraph signals, so you can't use 20Hz ringing on composited circuits. The solution to this problem was to use a 'composite ringer' (CXX) between the switchboard and the line. At the originating end the CXX responded to 20Hz ringing from the switchboard and transmitted 135Hz in its place, which was a high enough frequency to go through the repeat coils and composite sets at both end. At the answering end a resonant-reed relay responded to 135Hz and transmitted 20Hz toward the switchboard. The 135Hz ringing current was generated by an interrupter, basically a buzzer with a tuned resonant reed for an armature. There were two of these for redundancy; I don't know how switching between them was accomplished. Nor do I know whether they ran all the time or only when ringing current was needed, which wasn't very often in a small office. The receiving relay was rather like a telegraph polar relay, except that the armature was resonant at 135Hz, with an adjustable weight. The CXX was entirely electro- mechanical. There was a strong incentive to keep electronics out of an office as long as possible. Introducing vacuum tubes meant the need for a 130-volt plate supply, with battery backup, and that was something else that had to be maintained. Also the 24-volt talking battery plant might have to be enlarged somewhat because the vacuum tubes always draw filament current regardless of whether they are doing anything interesting. 135Hz signaling wouldn't work over circuits containing vacuum tube repeaters, being below the lower cutoff frequency of the amplifiers, so yet another technique was used for these circuits. The ringing signal consisted of 1000Hz amplitude modulated by 20Hz. I don't have any first hand experience with this technology; presumably they used vacuum tubes to generate 1000Hz and also to amplify the incoming signal to the point where it could operate a relay. haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@ucsccats.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1991 9:02:33 EDT From: "Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093" Subject: Phone Outages "J. Philip Miller" writes: > "I had expected to see a posting from someone else here in St. Louis > because it has been front page news for the last several days that a > SWBT computer went out last friday with serious outages." > several hundred ATM terminals were not functional. > teller terminals within some branch banks were not functional. > money transfers for the Federal Reserve bank were disrupted. > off track betting at a local race track was not operational. That's nothing. Last winter, a computer malfunctioned in New Jersey and proceeded to shut down a good portion of whatever uses data lines for transaction processing: ATM's, stock exchanges, bank teller machines, etc. The geographical area was Northern New Jersey, New York City, Long Island and, I believe parts of Westchester County north of NYC. The shutdown might have even spread into lower Connecticut. I forget the cause but I think the malfunction was caused by a fire somewhere near the main switch. What surprised me was the apparent lack of a backup system and the following confusion along with the inability to take simple precautions. Dave Niebuhr Brookhaven National Laboratory BITnet and Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov [Moderator's Note: A special mailing going out later tonight will contain excerpts from the {St. Louis Post Dispatch} report. This apparently was a major incident there last week. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Jun 91 11:11:33 PST From: Ken McVay Subject: RBOC's Can Now Manufacture Equipment Reply-to: dleibold@attmail.com From a story in the {Ft Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel}, based on wire services, the U.S. Senate had approved a bill that gives the RBOCs the right to manufacture telephone equipment in competition with AT&T. This bill passed 71-24 although there was concern of a presidential veto due to provisions preventing the RBOCs from running foreign manufacturing operations. In other words, the bill has a "buy American" slant to it, to maintain domestic manufacturing. All products made by the RBOC's must contain at least 60% domestic parts, and their equipment would have to be made available for purchase by independent telcos. Furthermore, a new bill could let the telcos compete directly with cable companies, while setting forth a goal of a nationwide fibre optic network by 2015 (presumably this means local fibre access; long distance fibre should mostly be in place by the major carriers). Sen. Albert Gore supported the cable bill, stating high rates and poor service of cable companies while claiming that competition could reduce cable TV rates by half. A separate bill sponsored by Gore would bring back federal regulation of cable TV while preventing telcos from buying existing cable systems within their territory. To compare cable TV rates and illustrate the cost situation, Rogers Cable in Toronto charged CAD$18.56 per month, including tax (or about USD$16.90, depending on exchange rates). Com-Cast out of West Palm Beach, FL charges well into the USD$20's/month and has plenty of local advertising superimposed on its offerings (like CNN). Meanwhile, there are tales of vastly reduced rates in those U.S. jurisdictions that have allowed a competing cable company to start up business. David Leibold dleibold@attmail.com Dave Leibold - via IMEx node 89:681/1 Dave.Leibold@f135.n82.z89.onebdos.UUCP Uucp - via IMEx node 89:681/1 Uucp@onebdos.oneb.wimsey.bc.ca Ken McVay - via IMEx node 89:681/1 Ken.McVay@onebdos.oneb.wimsey.bc.ca ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 14:54:30 -0400 From: "Seng-Poh Lee, Speedy" Subject: Do Passive Repeater Antennas Work For Handheld Phones? Organization: FSF Guest Machines I keep seeing adverts for these passive repeater antenna for hand held/portable cellular phones. Has anyone tried one of these, and if so do they have any effect, or are they just a gimmick? I live in Central Connecticut and my handheld is with Linx (B carrier). I get pretty good coverage and can usually make a call from inside the car without even extending the attenna. However, there are a few areas where I am marginal. If those passive antennas result in a measurable improvement, then I'd consider getting one. Seng-Poh Lee splee@gnu.ai.mit.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 13:13:46 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Pacific Bell Local Calling Area Expansion I have an interesting report on how Pacific Bell implemented the recent local calling area expansion on my exchange. I just moved, and am now on 916-983. The expansion made a big difference for this area, as a lot of businesses/friends that people around here have to call were previously just outside the local calling area. As of 4:30pm on Friday, May 31, I noticed that the change had already taken effect. Calls to numbers in the 9-12 mile range (previously Zone 2, now Zone 1 "local") no longer required a preceeding "1", and in fact went to an error message if you tried to use the 1. I wondered how much automated equipment would not work properly for awhile because of this. Just think how many monitored alarm dialers would not work, among other things. This is particularly important, as even thought advance notice was given by Pacific Bell, there would be no way for an alarm company to provide uninterrupted service unless all customers' units were reprogrammed at precisely the moment that Pacific Bell made the change, which wasn't even at the published time of midnight on June 1. The interesting part is that by the evening of Monday, June 3, the (optional) 1 was again allowed. Calls would complete with or without the 1. Further investgation revealed that ALL local calls would allow the 1, even those that had never been toll. So, I can now dial ANY number in 916 by using a preceeding 1. Toll calls still require it, though. Since this change was not made until a couple of days after the official cutover, I wonder if Pacific Bell made the change as the result of a storm of complaints from all sorts of people complaining about things that dial not working right, and the time required to make the change. I assume that allowing 1 for local calls will not last forever, and is being done as an interim solution only, but only time will tell. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #440 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02840; 10 Jun 91 2:22 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa01436; 10 Jun 91 0:40 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab06217; 9 Jun 91 23:33 CDT Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 23:11:28 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: SPECIAL REPORT: St. Louis Phone Outage BCC: Message-ID: <9106092311.ab30100@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> [Moderator's Note: Here is a special report sent to the Digest by Brad Hicks which discusses the major service outage in St. Louis last week. It was too large for a regular issue of the Digest. PAT] Date: 09 Jun 91 15:57:19 EDT From: "76012,300 Brad Hicks" <76012.300@compuserve.com> Subject: SWBT Drops 2,800 Data Lines {St. Louis Post-Dispatch} , 6/4/91, pp. 1A, 7A: COMPUTER FAILURE SHUTS DOWN AUTOMATIC TELLERS ACROSS AREA by Jim Gallagher Of the Post-Dispatch Staff Scores of automatic teller machines across St. Louis have been shut down for four days because of a computer failure at Southwestern Bell. The glitch also slowed the transfer of billions of dollars on Friday through the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and afected dozens of other businesses that send information by computer. A Southwestern Bell spokesman said Monday that crews were working aroundthe clock to put 2,800 data transmission lines back in service. The failure hit Friday morning. It immediately froze 55 automatic teller machines belonging to 18 St. Louis credit unions with 135,000 customers. An additional 26 automatic tellers owned by Mercantile Bank and several owned by United Postal Savings Association also went blank. Tellers in some branches lost their links to the main computers at the credit unions, Mercantile and United Postal. The branches remained open using backup systems, although the glitch is slowing business, officials say. "It's been a major pain," said Bill Humpfer, president of St. Louis Teachers Credit Union, where automatic tellers are used 50,000 times a month. Southwestern Bell said the problem was in a "high capacity digital cross-connection system" in the 2600 block of Olive Street. The machine shuttles computer calls between stations. Phone company officials don't know what caused the problem but sabotage is not suspected, said Bell spokesman David Martin. Engineers got the computer working again on Saturday and began the slow process of reprogramming it. By Monday night, Bell had restored 1,500 lines -- mostly high-speed lines used by businesses -- but the automatic tellers remained down. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis -- which wires $15 billion a day between banks around the country -- switched to a backup system Friday to keep the money moving. "We got all our work done, but it delayed things," said a Fed spokesman. The Fed was still using the backup system Monday afternoon. Besides financial institutions, the system serves scores of businesses that send information by computer. AT&T leases about 280 of the Bell lines for its own long-distance customers. Most were back in service Monday, an AT&T spokesman said. The problem hit on a very busy day for banks. It was a "double payday" -- a Friday on the last day of the month. Many customers who could not used automatic tellers lined up in front of human tellers instead. Lines were longer than normal, although officials said the extra crowd caused few problems. But credit union officials said the breakdown was costing them money. Customers who can't use their own credit union's automatic tellers may use acompetitor's instead. When that happens, the credit union pays a fee to the competitor. "We're starting to talk megabucks," Humpfer said. Credit unions affected are part of a single automatic teller machine processing system. The credit unions include Anheuser-Busch, Aerospace, Educational Emerson, Gateway Telco, Telephone, First Community, WestCommunity, RAC, First American, Sunset, St. Louis Federal Center, St. Andrew,Arsenal, Wetterau, Victory, South Community and Electro. ---------- {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}, 6/5/91, pp. 1C, 3C: CRASH! SW Bell Computer Expected Back on Line This Morning by Jim Gallagher Of the Post-Dispatch Staff The computer breakdown that paralyzed dozens of automatic teller machines and apparently frustrated crowds of horse-racing fans should be fixed by this morning, Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. says. The phone company was methodically reactivating 2,800 high-speed lines that carry electronic data around St. Louis and beyond. "We're finishing it up," phone company spokesman David Martin said Tuesday afternoon. Crews hoped to have the work done by Tuesday evening, he said. ATMs were slowly coming back on line through the day. Mercantile Bank said nearly all its machines were working. On Monday, 26 of the bank's ATMs were down. But 55 ATMs operated by 18 credit unions were still down early Tuesday evening. Relief couldn't come too soon for Brian Zander, general manager of Fairmount Park. The park lost $500,000 in weekend wagers when its data phone lines went dead, stalling the computerized bet-taking system. "It is a major, major problem," Zander said. About 1,000 would-be race goers were turned away at the track gates Saturday when the glitch slowed betting to a crawl. The track decided to send half its customers home, rather than create huge lines at the betting windows. The turned-away patrons weren't in a kindly state of mind, Zander said. "People don't understand it's the phone lines. They blame it on us." Zander said AT&T officials had told him the problem was at Southwestern Bell, which rents data phone lines to the long-distance company. AT&T and Southwestern Bell spokesman said the couldn't immediately confirm that Fairmount's problem stemmed from the computer crash. "It's entirely possible," the AT&T spokesman said. The problem struck Friday morning, when a Southwestern Bell computer in downtown St. Louis suddenly broke down, cutting off 2,800 data lines. Martin said Southwestern Bell still doesn't know why the system failed. Workers are trying so hard to fix it that they haven't had time to look for the cause, he said. Besides frustrating bettors and ATM users, the failure also cut computer links between main computers and some branches at Mercantile, many credit unions and United Postal Savings Association. The branches remained open, but business was slowed. At St. Louis Teacher's Credit Union, for instance, workers have to bring records in from the branches each day and punch them into the main computer by hand. The lines are used by a variety of businesses to link their computers to others around the nation. Fairmount Park wasn't using the computer betting system Tuesday, and Zander said he didn't know if it was working yet. The computer system requiring phone lines is used only for bets on races run at other tracks. Fairmount has its own computer system for its races. The computer failure forced Fairmount to hook its computers to regular phone lines. But data lines move information 20 times faster, he said. ------------ {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}, 6/4/91, pp. 1C, 3C: COMPUTER FAILURE SHUTS DOWN AUTOMATIC TELLERS ACROSS AREA by Jim Gallagher Of the Post-Dispatch Staff A king-sized computer snafu that silenced 2,800 data phonelines has beenfixed "for the most part," a Southwestern Bell spokesman said Wednesday. All but eight of the 55 credit union automatic teller machines were working Wednesday, after being shut down since Friday. The computerized betting system at Fairmount Park race track is working again. But United Postal Savings Association says its data lines are still down -- and its executives are getting angry. "It's been a nightmare," said Michael Gorman, executive vice president at St. Louis' second-largest savings and loan. The high-speed lines connect the S&L's main computer to terminals at half of United Postal's branches. Gorman said Southwestern Bell can't tell him when the problem will befixed. "They give us stories and every couple of hours it's different. I can't believe them any more," he said. Dave Martin, spokesman for Southwestern Bell, said only a few lines were still out Wednesday evening. "When you do a major repair job like this, there are going to be glitches,"he said. "We are taxing the patience of the few remaining customers with problems." At its height, the five-day breakdown affected scores of businesses andfroze more than 80 automatic tellers at 18 credit unions, Mercantile Bank and United Postal. A Fairmount Park spokeswoman said the track lost "tens of thousands of dollars" in profit when betting slowed to a crawl Friday and Saturday. About 1,000 race fans had to be turned away at the gate. Bankers complained of lost automatic teller fees and large costs for worker overtime caused when people had to do the work of computers. But the companies stand little chance of recovering their losses from Southwestern Bell. Under the law, victims normally can't collect damages for a failure in phone or electric services, said Rob Hack, assistant general counsel for the Missouri Public Service Commission. To collect, they would have to prove that the utility deliberately cut service or was willfully negligent. The law was designed to protect utilities from massive losses after breakdowns and power failures, Hack said. Perhaps the most the victims can hope for is not to be charged for phone services for the period the lines weredown. The breakdown hit Friday morning in a computer switching machine in downtown St. Louis, and Southwestern Bell engineers have been struggling since to get it fixed. They were joined by engineers from American Telephone & Telegraph Corp.,which sold the equipment that failed. Officials at United Postal were struggling, too. It took them until Wednesday to switch their computers to normal phone lines. Branches remained open and customers weren't affected, Gorman said. But many employees were placed on overtime to work around the glitch. United Postal hasn't yet counted the cost, he said. At Fairmount Park, officials said their losses go beyond lost betting profits. Many of their customers left the track angry, said spokeswoman Mary Ozanic. "The hardest thing to measure is what the ill will will cost us," she said. -------------- Three-quarter page advertisement in the 6/9/91 {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}, p. 13D: AN OPEN LETTER TO OUR BUSINESS CUSTOMERS: At Southwestern Bell Telephone, we've built a high standard of customer service and we take pride in that. Unfortunately, we recently experienced a rare failure in a computer system that transmits data. As a result, about 750 St. Louis-area business customers lost access to important day-to-day services. For those of you whose service was impaired, that failure translates to a disruption in your operations and, at best, an inconvenience to your customers. We apologize for letting you down in this instance. Though the problem lingered longer than any of us would have liked, we made every effort to see that it was fixed as quickly as possible. Our technicians worked around the clock, logging more than 2,500 hours, to correct the problem. We enlisted the help of experts from across the country. Still, I know that even though we pulled out all stops to restore service, you would rather it not have happened at all. So would we. Now that service has been restored, our focus has shifted to further upgrading the system's reliability. While some of the solutions may take time to complete, we will persist until the service we provide meets your high standards and ours. In the next few days, we will individually contact customers whose service was interrupted. We want to share with you our plans for improving the system,and we want to hear your comments on how we can continually improve our service to you. We are committed to earning your confidence once again. Sincerely, (s) Randy Barroy President-Missouri Division Southwestern Bell Telephone -------------- {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}, 6/4/91, pp. 1E, 8E: VITAL LINES Phone Net Vulnerable, Crash Shows by Jim Gallagher Of the Post-Dispatch Staff Brian Zander, manager of Fairmount Park, faced a lot of unhappy customers in the past week. But one fuming customer took the cake. "He was pretty red-faced," Zander recalled. The man said he had waited a year for his favorite horse to race at Arlington Park racetrack near Chicago. But when he came to Fairmount to place an intertrack bet, he was turned away at the gate. The high-speed data phone lines linking Arlington to Fairmount had gone down -- part of a Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. computer failure that rattled companies around the region last week. Fairmount turned away 1,000 racing fans last weekend when phone problems slowed its computerized betting operation to a crawl. The man was livid because his horse won, Zander said. "He said he was going to bet $500. He was not a happy camper," Zander said. The six-day failure, which ended Thursday, affected 2,800 data lines. At its height, it shut down more than 80 automatic teller machines, cut off bank branches from their main computers and slowed the transfer of billions of dollars through the Federal Reserve System. It also illustrated the region's growing reliance on phone lines to keep business running. The installation of high technology over the past decade has left the nation's phone system with an odd contradiction. Experts say the new technology is making the system more efficient andusually more reliable. But by squeezing more phone lines into fewer computers and cables, the system may have also become more vulnerable. A routine foul-up or accidents that would have silenced a few thousand lines a decade ago now can affect millions. Take these examples: Jan. 4., 1991. An AT&T construction crew in New Jersey mistakenly cracks asingle fiber-optic cable. The cable is the width of a person's thumb. The crack halts 60 percent of AT&T's long-distance calls to New York City. Aviation control centers are paralyzed, causing gridlock in the skies throughout the Northeast. Jan. 23, 1990. More than 42,000 people in north St. Louis county lose some or all of their phone service when a fire under a bridge burns a mainfiber-optic cable and other phone lines. Hospitals, police and fire departments can't get calls. Some customers wait three days for service to be restored. Jan. 15, 1990. AT&T's national switching system suffers a collapse, and half of its long-distance calls go uncompleted. The company takes nine hours to restore full service. AT&T blames a bug in its software. May 8, 1988. Mother's Day is soured for thousands as a fire breaks out in an unmanned switching center in Hinsdale, Ill., near Chicago. The blaze knocks out service for 35,000 customers for up to a month. Communications experts say spectacular advances in computer systems andfiber optics are improving service in general. In Missouri, for instance, telephone trouble reports fell 18 percent during the past six years, according to Southwestern Bell. But some wonder whether technology has left the system too vulnerable toproblems at critical choke points, where simple accidents can mushroom intocommunications disasters. In the 1970s, the biggest telephone cable could carry 50,000 calls. Now fiber-optic cables carry 300,000 to 500,000. That means that a backhoe operator these days can knock out 10 times as many telephones in a flick of a lever. "Technology has concentrated things to the point where, when you do have a major failure, you can have a much more widespread and devastating failure," said Don Mitchell, division manager of planning and engineering at Southwestern Bell. Phone calls are funnelled through computerized switching centers. The number of such centers has dropped by about half since the mid-1980s, as technology allowed more phone connections to be squeezed into fewer computer boxes. This means a crash at a single switching center affects many more people, experts say. And with fewer centers, phone companies have a harder time routing calls around a failed switch. The Hinsdale switching center wasn't even manned. It was monitored by phone lines from Springfield, Ill. As a result, the fire burned for 90 minutes before the Hinsdale Fire Department heard of it. "It was designed never to fail, and as a result, they couldn't put the fire out," said David Farrell, spokesman for the Illinois Commerce Commission. The complexity of today's computers can compound the headaches. Take the most recent failure in St. Louis. The problem centered on complex software in a "digital access and cross-connect system" computer. The $330,000 machine links thousands of customers' computers by high-speed telephone lines. When the software failed May 31, Bell technicians replaced it with a standby copy on a floppy disk. But the spare software was "contaminated" with errors, Mitchell said. It destroyed the computer's main memory, forcing technicians to spend five days painstakingly reprogramming the machine. "It was just a freaky thing," Mitchell said. Bell has two such computers in St. Louis. They are four years old and neither had failed before, Mitchell said, although a similar machine in Kansas City shut down in 1988. The phone company plans to install a new computer with safety features to prevent a repeat of the snafu. "We don't anticipate this happening again," he said. Despite the spectacular collapses of recent years, the American phone system remains remarkably reliable, experts say. Modern telephone computers are designed to work with only two minutes of downtime a year. That compares with hours for other mainframe computers. "There is absolutely no comparison," said Jonathan Turner, a computer science professor at Washington University. Designers pile backup systems upon backup systems to keep the machines clicking. Telephone engineers compare the phone system to the highway system. In both, there are points of vulnerability where a lot of routes intersect, Mitchell said. "If the Poplar Street Bridge collapsed, you'd have a real mess," he said. To bypass the choke points, Southwestern Bell is building interconnected loops of fiber-optic cable, so that one cable break can't silence whole towns. Last year's North County outage couldn't happen today, Mitchell said. At the time, the area was served by a single line of main cables. Now it'spart of a broader loop. If part of the loop breaks, calls simply travel the other direction to reach their destination. The loops are steadily expanding, although some outlying areas -- Eureka, for instance -- are still served by single cables. AT&T, which carries nearly 70 percent of the nation's long distance calls,has four cables linking St. Louis with the world. If one connection is cut,long-distance calls could be sent through the others, AT&T says. That's what was supposed to happen in New York this January, but didn't. Dale McHenry, AT&T divisional manager, said a system designed to prevent such a spectacular failure wasn't fully operational in January, although it will be by the end of the year. "We will resond better and better to this type of incident," he said. AT&T, meanwhile, says it is busy adding to its own system of loops and backup switches designed to head off major failures. But efforts to make the system less vulnerable run smack into twoobstacles -- price and competition. "We could design a fail-safe telephone system. But who could afford it?" said Sam Goldman, head of utility operations for the Missouri Public Service Commission. Many customers, meanwhile, buy long-distance and computer-line servicethe same way they buy nuts and bolts. The company with the lowest price gets the business. Washington University's Turner suspects that such price-consciousness may put phone companies in a bind. To make the system less vulnerable means increasing the price -- and possibly losing the business. "You try to protect things. You get backups to backups to backups. But at some point it's no longer cost-effective," Mitchell added. ------------- [Moderator's Note: My sincere thanks to Brad Hicks for typing all this in and submitting it o the Digest. Which direction would you go? Backups at any cost ... or if not, up to what point? Are occassional outages like St. Louis this past week or Chicago in 1988 worth the difference in cost? PAT]   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05863; 10 Jun 91 3:22 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09658; 10 Jun 91 1:48 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab01436; 10 Jun 91 0:40 CDT Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 23:51:45 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #441 BCC: Message-ID: <9106092351.ab12077@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 9 Jun 91 23:51:25 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 441 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Product Announcement / Testing Request [Larry Krone] Help Us Select Our New Phone System Please! [Doug B. Erdely] AT&T 'The Right Choice' ?? [Gollapudi Pramod] SJ Merc Explains New Rates Badly [Michael Graff] COCOT on Sesame Street [Michael Kerwan] Reverse Directory Strikes Again [Steve Forrette] Cellular Phone Info Sought for Oki 710, et al [Jim Youll] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Jim Redelfs] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Krone Subject: Product Announcement / Testing Request Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 9:05:06 CDT We have developed a product that utilizes centrex service provided by the local BOC and provides integrated Voice Mail and Fax capabilies. This product will do all the usual stuff for products in its class, plus allow call screening and off premises call transfer (If that feature is available in your local BOC centrex offering). There is also a facility for faxing product information to callers (the system will prompt for a FAX #). The fax information can be stored in either TIFF,Text or Postscript format. Since this package runs under Unix, it does not require a dedicated machine. We can currently run the product, our Public Access Unix system and several DOS (VP/IX) Page Maker jobs concurrently on our system without problems. System requirements: (1) An 80386 or 80486 based SCO Unix Machine with at least 10MB of free disk space and 5MB of memory. (2) A third party voice board (Dialogic or Rhetoric). (3) A compatible fax board, or a fax service such as AT&T mail. What we are looking for: We are a small company and this is our first 'product'. Our in-house testing has been as thorough as possible, but considering our low call volume (Fort Smith, Arkansas is not exactly the world's crossroads), we are still a little reticent to release it without some further testing. Therefore, we are looking for a few companies willing to supply the necessary hardware (if desired we will sell the hardware to a beta tester at our cost, we are dealers for various hardware lines) and sign a beta test agreement. Not being sure how this sort of thing is done in the industry, we would probably want to charge a small amount for the software to cover our costs (Telephone calls and the like) but no more than several hundred dollars to our beta testers (This point is negotiable.) We have considered the idea of turning our product into a PC Baseds switchboard . (The additional hardware to build a 16X8 switchboard out of it would not be that excessive (circa 2K)). If any one is interested in such a product, we would like to know also. We are also interested in interfacing our product to PBX systems, if interested let us know what you have .... How to reach us: By email: root@mus.com By telephone: (501) 452-9920. This line will be picked up by our product. Since we are still developing, the voices in the prompts change frequently and may not always be 'elegant'. Also, we occasionally bring the machine down to single user mode for system changes (We are testing performance on various disk drive and controller configurations) so the system might not always be up. (501) 784-2883. Our Answering Service. Thank you, Larry Krone ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!Doug_B_Erdely@uunet.uu.net Subject: Help Us Select Our New Phone System Please Date: Fri, 7 Jun 91 17:20:45 PDT Hello, The company I work for is going to be moving into a new building, and I was asked to check into a new phone system. We would require say up to 10 phone lines, 25 phones ... intercom, paging and voice mail would be nice. If someone can recommend a system, and better yet a place I can contact to get a catalog ... this would be great! So if you know of a place that has info, and we can order from ... we are also open to used equipment as well ... I would like to hear from you. Thanks! Doug_B_Erdely@Cup.Portal.Com ------------------------------ Reply-To: anon@usl.edu From: Gollapudi Pramod Subject: AT&T 'The Right Choice' ?? Date: 9 Jun 91 15:57:30 GMT Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette Since January of this year, AT&T has been billing me $0.00 for long distance usage of their services. I called in to report the error and asked for verification as I share my apartment with three others and there is no way of knowing how much I should bill each one for their usage. (The billing name is mine). The representatives always told me 'This is what our computers indicate'. South central Bell, through whom their billing is routed, said they only collect what AT&T charges and so I should discuss with AT&T. When I finally disconnected the services in May, I was sent a whopping four figure bill which dated back to calls from previous months. There are significant errors on the bill (will elaborate later) and when asked for an explanation, AT&T could not provide satisfactory answers. Previously, (in September) when my charges exceeded $250, I was sent a notice saying that I should pay up or my services would be disconnected. So what were they doing now when my bills were running so high ??!! When asked why I was not contacted sooner and sent a notice, they said they don't have to do so. They insist that it is a case of 'late billing'. Why establish a credit limit or collect deposits when you don't adhere to policies?? To quote a few discrepancies, A New Orleans number begins with 04xxxxxxx when it should have been 504xxxxxxx. When questioned, AT&T answered, the five could have fallen off or there is a printing error. If a '5' could have fallen off in one place, isn't it possible that it could be added elsewhere? Two calls have been registered to the same number, starting at the same time, for different amounts of time. They did give me credit for the call, but isn't it an error? Some international calls appear with a '0' appended at the end in some places, with a '00' appended at the end in some other places and appear with the right number in some places. Please note that the same number is being talked about. When questioned, no convincing answers! If a portion of the billing is suspect, doesn't it make the whole thing suspect ?? Although I am willing to pay up for calls that I have made, or for that matter, any correctly billed calls originating from my number, I need answers to these questions. Any suggestions, comments welcome on how I should handle the situation. Pramod. pyg@pc.usl.edu (INTERNET) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 00:49 GMT From: Michael Graff <0004450555@mcimail.com> Subject: SJ Merc Explains New Rates Badly On Friday, May 31, {The San Jose Mercury News} (motto: "Not John Higdon's Favorite Newspaper") printed an article describing the new expanded local calling area in California. I'm no telecom expert, just a reader of this Digest, but I cringed at some of the misstatements and confusion that permeated the article. By comparison the mailing sent by Pacific Bell explained the changes much better. I'm not sure where to begin ... how about the headline: "Calls up to 12 miles away to be free starting Saturday" Well, 12 miles from your "rate center" anyhow, and free only if you have unmeasured service. The Pac Bell mailing said "Your local calling area is expanding" which is a more accurate description. "Those who do not make a minimum number of calls will find their bills increasing slightly." I'm not sure what this means at all, but perhaps it's a reference to a reduction in the billing credit ("Rate Surcharge" on our bill). Discussing measured rate service, they say it includes "$3 worth of free local calls a month, about 50 calls." If they're free, how can they be worth $3? Actually, you get a $3 allowance toward your zone 1 (local, 0-12 miles) and zone 3 (13-16 miles) calls. At the daytime rate, $3 is equivalent to 50 3-minute local calls. "A customer who uses less than the $3 a month can apply the excess to other calls." The $3 applies only to zone 1 or zone 3 calls. You can't apply it to more distant calls. There are probably a few other mangled details that I missed, but that's the general idea. Overall, the article was just plain sloppy with details and seemed to be written by somebody who didn't have any understanding of the subject. Michael ------------------------------ From: Michael Kerwan Subject: COCOT on Sesame Street Date: 9 Jun 91 03:37:04 GMT Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino I wonder how many caught the recent (6/8 in San Francisco) episode of Sesame Street that had a telephony theme. The show opened with Sesame Street resident Gordon finding a new COCOT telephone booth blocking the view from his window. After a little investigation Gordon found that the owner of the booth was none other than the resident of a nearby garbage can -- muppet Oscar the Grouch! Gordon soon found that he could not complain directly to Oscar. Instead, he had to call from the phone booth. When Gordon called, he was answered by Lily Tomlin in her classic Ernestine the Operator role. When she answered "A gracious hello", Oscar complained that that was no way for a grouch's phone to be answered, Ernestine defended herself by saying that she was being insincere. Maybe other viewers can recall other highlights? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 13:01:46 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Reverse Directory Strikes Again In watching the news the past week, I realized that two of my friends lived in the same apartment building as Sacramento's recently-arrested "Thrill Killer". They moved a couple of months ago (the killings were in February). In speaking with them, it turns out that they got a call from a reporter with the {San Francisco Chronicle}. They had no idea how they had been tracked down. I asked them if they had had their telephone service listed at their old address, and if there was a referral from that number to their current number. Yes on both counts was the answer. They were surprised when I told them that some people had directories ordered by address. They didn't have a phit about their privacy, though. :-) Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: Jim Youll Subject: Cellular Phone Info Sought: Oki 710, et al Date: 8 Jun 91 22:41:29 GMT Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh. Assistance, please, for a neophyte about to buy his first cellular phone. Forgive me, but your discussions convinced me to do this, so y'all have only yourselves to blame ... The local high-pressure low-price electronics store has an Oki 710 handheld and a "CelQuest" CS876Q bag phone. The price is right on both (i.e. cheap)... Would appreciate any comments on either phone, and if anyone has programming info for either, or knows where to get it, PLEASE!! let me know. I don't have a compelling desire to hack the system, but when I buy a car I get a service manual with it ... same here. The sales rep tried to say the programming "code" is secret and "against the law" to give out. I don't think I believe that, and I wonder what would happen and I needed to set the phone for local service in a location where nobody knows how to reprogram the phone I buy ... would cellular service providers really turn me away if I called them myself to establish service? What if I bought a phone used cross-country and wanted to do the same thing? Again, the salesperson managed to answer none of my questions, but I expected that much. Thanks in advance. [Moderator's Note: The only 'law' being broken by giving out the programming data is the law of the jungle the cannibal dealers live by! You programming your own phone is less profit for them! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Jun 91 10:02:55 CST From: Jim Redelfs Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Reply-To: ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@uunet.uu.net Organization: Macnet Omaha [Disclaimer: I am an 18+ year employee of US WEST Communications - JR] John Higdon wrote: > Pac*Bell has given those of us who care to look a glimpse of the > future under the Hollings bill that permits the RBOCs to enter the > world of equipment manufacturing. It is call "The Message Center", > and while it is not exactly "hardware", it is a good example of how > Pac*Bell intends to compete in the marketplace. The "Message Center" > is a voicemail service... Sir, I believe I have seen enough advantages of the uniqueness of TelCom within the state of Nebraska that I can conclude that (nearly) complete DEregulation of the these companies are in the ratepayer's best interest. By some accounts, L.B.835, the landmark legislation that was passed into law by Nebraska's Unicameral several years ago, was RAMMED down the representative's throats. Be that as it may (but I disagree), the horrible effects that were predicted by the opponents have not come to past. Our local rates have not risen disproportionately. Competition has not been swallowed up - indeed it has thrived. Service is excellent and the rates are "reasonable" (certainly among the average, if not below). US WEST Communications began offering "Business Voice Messaging" quite a while ago, and it has been in the residential market for some months. All is going well, it is being well accepted and subscribed to. > [This service] ...will answer your phone after a preset number of rings, > allow you to retrieve your messages from anywhere, and will put "stutter" > dial tone on your phone if there are messages waiting. It is an excellent service. (I do not subscribe to it.) > [This service] ...directly competes with voicemail service bureaus. Horrors! > What is wrong with this? First, it is priced well below most > service bureaus. I have not checked, so I cannot dispute your claim, but what's wrong with charging less than your competition - even in this case? Do you suppose the regulatory agency would approve of the TelCo charging substantially MORE that it costs to PROVIDE the service? No way. > Using the vast capital resources available courtesy of its > ratepayers, Pac*Bell can offer this service at a preditory price that > is designed to murder the competition. When the field has been > thinned out sufficiently, then the price can be whatever it wants. Given that exagerated scenerio, you should be the first on your block, possibly state, to appear during their rate hearings and request that Pac*Bell charge MORE for their service! [Re: House Resolution that would relax some of the constraints that were placed on the Bell Operating Companies as a result of the Modified Final Judgement in 1984] ... > Let us hope the Hollings bill dies a well-deserved death in the House. I hope not. In fact, this concern may cause me to write my FIRST letter to my elected representatives - in SUPPORT of the bill. I think it is time for a little SUBSIDY of my local service! And if the little guy can't hack the competition (REAL competition) that is SLOWLY entering his domain after an absence of almost EIGHT years, so be it. The Bell Operating Companies have a great potential - a LOT of which was hogtied by Judge Harold Greene. I think the time is LONG OVERDUE that they be allowed to ENDOW us lowly ratepayers with some of this FABULOUS technology that, until now, had been either in development, legally KEPT from us, or available or AFFORDABLE only to business customers! I am not advocating, and would certainly resist, a return to the good, old days when the phone company was the only show in town. (Remember when they OWNED the wire and jacks in your home, as well as everything that was plugged into the system?) But, I think a little relaxation of the MFJ would be a good thing. The BOCs have concentrated their efforts since deregulation on those areas where they were legally allowed (with the odd exception [blush]), and the time has come to see what they can do in their other areas of expertise. JR [Dislclaimer: The above does not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employer - JR] --- Tabby 2.2 MacNet Omaha 402-289-2899 On loan from Mrs MacWidow (1:285/14) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #441 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05972; 10 Jun 91 3:24 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab09658; 10 Jun 91 1:54 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac01436; 10 Jun 91 0:40 CDT Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 0:24:30 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #442 BCC: Message-ID: <9106100024.ab03002@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 10 Jun 91 00:23:43 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 442 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Andy Sherman] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Joe Talbot] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [John Higdon] Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? [Jim Gottlieb] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Brent Chapman] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andys@ulysses.att.com Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 14:06:14 EDT Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill In article Charlie Mingo writes: > In a recent posting, John Higdon attacks Pac*Bell's new voicemail > service, because it is priced "well below" that of Pac*Bell's > competitors, and because it offers features which the local telephone > company is uniquely capable of providing. He claims that this is part > of a strategy of "predatory pric[ing] designed to murder the > competition," and argues that Pac*Bell's voicemail service offers "a > glimpse of the future under the Hollings bill" (which would permit > RBOC's to manufacture telephone equipment) and goes on to call for the > bill to be defeated in the House. Although I take no position on the > Hollings bill itself, it sounds perverse to me to attack a company for > offering quality service at a low price. That isn't what he attacked them for. He attacked them for a) using their regulated business to subsidize unregulated business b) using their position as a regulated monopoly to provide unregulated services that were unavailable to their competitors. > It must be remembered that antitrust law generally (and the Bell > divestiture in particular) was designed to benefit *consumers* not > competitors. Interesting mythology. Where did you find it? I've seen no evidence that government intentions regards antitrust law in general or in US vs AT&T in particular have anything whatsoever to do with consumers. The Sherman antitrust act was enacted to prevent anticompetitive behavior by large monopolies for the express purpose of keeping smaller less efficient competitors from being driven out of business. I've not seen anybody claim that US vs. AT&T was undertaken to protect consumers. The question was whether AT&Ts monopoly position in providing local phone service made it an unfair competitor in the long distance, manufacturing, and enhanced service businesses. Consumers were at best a tertiary concern in that courtroom. From what John describes, if the government's concerns were valid in 1984 then they are valid now. We have seen ample evidence that the RBOCs are capable of abusing a captive relationship between supplier and customer to either undercut competition or drive up the price to consumers of monopoly services. (The NYNEX case comes to mind, among others). > "Predatory pricing," for example, is defined as selling > a product *below the cost of production* for the purpose of eventually > monopolizing a market. Mr. Higdon provides no evidence that Pac*Bell > has priced its voicemail service below the cost of providing it; on > the contrary, he himself shows that Pac*Bell's size and credit rating > give it easier access to capital, which lowers its cost of providing > the service. This is a natural advantage which large, established > companies have over smaller ones; pricing one's goods to reflect one's > lower cost structure is neither anticompetative nor "unfair." It is not Pac*Bel's size and credit rating that gives it an advantage. It is its unique position as the owner of the network that enables the service. Nobody else can forward your calls for free, because nobody else is the phone company. Nobody else can make your dial tone stutter because nobody else owns the switch. > Mr. Higdon also writes that "[w]hen the field has been thinned out > sufficiently, then the price can be whatever [Pac*Bell] wants." It > should be clear that Pac*Bell cannot raise the price of voicemail in > the future above what independent providers currently charge, without > allowing the competition to reestablish itself. Given this > limitation, any such "predatory pricing" strategy would be decidedly > unprofitable. This is precisely the type of abuse that the antitrust laws were written to deal with. In real practice, rather than in Capitalist Theory 101, once competition has been driven out through artificially low prices, that the marketplace is much slower to respond to price increases from the predator. People can't jump back in the business -- they've gone bankrupt. > Likewise, his argument that Pac*Bell should be prevented from > offering voicemail, because it alone is in a technical position to > provide special services (such as "stutter" dialtone and free call > forwarding), is similarly flawed. Consumers would not be better off by > making these desirable features unavailable merely to protect > inefficient competition. *INEFFICIENT* competition? It is not the fault of other providers that they are not the local phone company. That franchise was awarded to Pac*Bel's predecessors long before there was voice mail. This is a classic case of what the antitrust lawyers and the FCC have called cross-subsidy. Pac*Bel's position as the provider of local phone services, *AS A MONOPOLY PROVIDER UNDER GOVERNMENT REGULATION*, is being abused to subsidize non-regulated business. The governement has handed Pac*Bel a juicy 12% guaranteed rate of return on service for which it has no competition. Let is go compete fairly in other arenas. > (Of course, if it is possible to extend these > feature to competitors' services, Pac*Bell should be required to.) > The key concept here should be service to consumers, and not > "fairness" to competitors. I see. People get financing, take jobs, quit jobs, start businesses, extend credit, use credit, all on the assumption that they are entering a level market place. The marketplace is not level when one competitor can muscle in on the strength of a government sanctioned monopoly. Is that fair to the creditors, investors, and employees? Are they not worthy of the same consideration as "consumers"? Pac*Bel *could* find a way to tariff services in such a way as to make for fair competition. A) It *MUST* offer the same arrangements for local forwarding and dial tone modification to all comers who are willing to use appropriate voice mail technology B) Its voicemail subsidiary *MUST* properly pay its phone company subsidiary a fair and reasonable market rate for network based services that a competitor would have to pay for. Ultimately, nothing else would be fair to either competitors or consumers. I agree with John Higdon. This is an ominous precursor of what we can expect from the post-Hollings RBOCs. Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ AUDIBLE: (908) 582-5928 READABLE: andys@ulysses.att.com or att!ulysses!andys What? Me speak for AT&T? You must be joking! ------------------------------ From: Joe Talbot Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Date: 9 Jun 91 20:15:55 GMT Organization: ATI, High desert research center, Victorville, Ca I think that RBOCs shouldn't be able to engage in ANY business other than providing local telephone service. Despite what many "I didn't have to understand it then, and I shouldn't have to now" people say, things are much better since divestiture. There are services available that the Bell System NEVER would have thought worth offering. They were not a great deal when they came out, but the fact that they were available may have caused more desirable services to appear. If Pac*Bell's voicemail service puts all the other providers out of business because it is selling the service below what non-telcos can provide it for, there is somebody paying the difference, or Pac*Bell's rates to the private voicemail providers are unjust. If Pac*Bell's service is the only one around (for any reason) then the only service improvements that will appear are the ones Pac*Bell feels will make it more money in a large marketplace (mass appeal). In article , Bob_Frankston%Slate_ Corporation@mcimail.com (Bob Frankston) writes: > In the spirit of naive optimism I'd like to see a law that allows > telcos to offer these services but with the condition that the > services be done with an arms length subsidiary and that any protocols > used would be made generally available to third parties. A good idea, but why should they be able to have an advantage at all? Laws don't seem to work with technical issues and we've seen some pretty creative examples of "creative accounting" for these subsidiary companies (ask your friends in New York about Materiel enterprises). Besides, these protocalls/services are supposed to be available to service providers NOW! This Hollings bill is very dangerous! We're headed for the Bell System all over again. I don't want to go back to that again because a few dummies don't want to make choices, but just "let the phone company do it." If Pac*Bell isn't satisfied with having the local service monopoly, guaranteed to make a profit, then I suspect there might be a few who'd take this thankless job off their hands so that they could make it big in all the other businesses they wish to pursue. joe@mojave.ati.com Slow mail: P.O. box 1750, Helendale California 92342 Phone: (619) 243-5500 Fax (619) 952-1030 ------------------------------ From: John Higdon Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1991 23:29:53 PDT Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell On Jun 9 at 1:28, Bob Frankston writes: > Pac*Bell is able to provide some compelling features because it owns > the network. The issue is not simply one of pricing but rather the > fact that it can create the protocols it needs to provide the > services. In fact, many of the protocols are intranetwork protocols > that are generally available to telcos. Information and service bureau providers will tell you that they can beg, plead, demand, suggest, and cajole until they are blue in the corporate face, but Pac*Bell could not care less about a given protocol or service enhancement until IT needs it. Then it will sluggishly make it available to outside parties at a cost that usually seems out of line. For example, service bureaus can offer stutter dial tone just like The Message Center -- IF they are willing to install and pay for a dedicated data line TO EACH SWITCH in which they wish to provide the feature. > A common theme of my messages is that these protocols must be exportable. > Unfortunately, protocols generally means CCITT and a design cycle the > guarantees irrelevance. But when they are exportable, they are almost always skewed to the regulated telco's advantage. > In the spirit of naive optimism I'd like to see a law that allows > telcos to offer these services but with the condition that they > services be done with an arms length sub and that any protocols used > would be made generally available to third parties. Given that the resources for completely auditing an RBOC do not exist, I would submit that there is no such thing as "arms' length". "No connection", "not affiliated with", "no common ownership", now THAT is arms' length. > Making these protocols available external raises many network > integrity and performance issues, but these issues must be faced > otherwise the Judge Greene error is for naught. It is the cornerstone of the whole divestiture exercise. If there is to be an expectation of fair competition, everything must ultimately become available externally. I thought I would share with all of you a little analogy. Let's say I owned a bus company (that competed with other bus companies) and I also owned a bridge that carried a major highway. I have decided that my bus company is going to "win". To do that, I put luxurious busses on my routes, increase my runs per hour (to make it convenient to riders), and lower my rates to the point that anyone would be stupid to ride the competition. What a boon to consumers. Excellent bus service at cheap rates. Only an ogre could attack that, right? But these things cost money. My busses don't pay their way as it is and now with my increased service the cash flow is really lacking. What do I do? I increase the tolls on my bridge to an astronomical figure. The people who cross the bridge have no choice; they must cross my bridge to get to where they are going. They must pay my toll. Now I have the money to run my superior bus company. I put the competition out of business. Now, not only must people cross my bridge (and pay anything I demand), but they must ride ONLY my busses and pay whatever I now decide to charge. The competition? They sold their busses to me (at distressed prices) before they went bankrupt. We won't be hearing from them any time soon. Far fetched? Have you ever heard of the Golden Gate Transit Authority? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? Date: 9 Jun 91 06:15:19 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles In article TERRY@spcvxa.bitnet (Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr) writes: > For over a year (from the day the exchange was activated), the > 201-915 1A ESS had garbled messages. For example, dialing an invalid > number would give a very noisy recording: > "Your call cannot be comas in the system." > I suppose they are reluctant to fix it because there's no revenue > loss in a bad recording. Still, you'd think they'd pay some attention > to it. One thing I have always admired about the Japanese is their attention to detail. And I think of this every time I hear some garbled telco recording here in the U.S. Because never once have I heard one in Japan. In fact, some of their telco recordings sound absolutely wonderful. Give a call to +81 3 5275 0000. Every time I hear this recording, I'm just blown away. Compare it to _our_ typical disconnect recording. This recording, by the way, comes from KDD, the international carrier, after doing an SS7 lookup to the telco (NTT) and discovering the number is not in service. It is in English and Japanese. I'd be curious to know if it is given in different languages depending on what country it is being dialed from (maybe in German and Japanese when dialed from Germany?). ------------------------------ From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1991 04:19:57 GMT peterc@sugar.neosoft.com (Peter Creath) writes: > Telco's desire for a two-second delay is to give their equipment time > to register your line and give you a dial tone. You forgot to mention > that the only way a USR (at least that's what it says in MY manual) > can skip the delay is to listen for the dial tone and begin dialing as > soon (read about 1 or 2 ms) as it hears the dial tone. The difference > between ATX5 and ATX6 is that X6 listens for dial tone and gives you > the ability to speed dial. I used to have one of these modems (a USR 2400e). The problem I had was, in the exchange I was in (415-655; Oakland, CA), the switch apparently was NOT actually ready to accept digits as soon as it started generating dialtone. The modem would usually fail to complete calls when in the "dial as soon as you hear dialtone" mode; I'd hear the first burp of dialtone, then the modem tones, then nothing ... my assumption was that the switch was missing the first digit or two. Brent Chapman Telebit Corporation Sun Network Specialist 1315 Chesapeake Terrace brent@telebit.com Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Phone: 408/745-3264 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #442 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18315; 10 Jun 91 20:52 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa17786; 10 Jun 91 19:14 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31936; 10 Jun 91 18:08 CDT Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 17:32:34 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #443 BCC: Message-ID: <9106101732.ab20072@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 10 Jun 91 17:32:22 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 443 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [John Higdon] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Al L Varney] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Jon Sreekanth] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Jerry M. Carlin] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? [Brian Kantor] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 02:34 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Charlie Mingo writes: [The usual uninformed, simplistic response citing the short term effects of monopolistic behavior.] Since my points, which I thought to be more than clear, were not understood by all, I will support them one by one. > Although I take no position on the > Hollings bill itself, it sounds perverse to me to attack a company for > offering quality service at a low price. Regardless of how it manages to do that? If it does so by taking from regulated ratepayers and then undercutting legitimate competition through its control of the network AND subsidization from capital derived from other captive customers, you do not feel that worthy of attack? Especially when those regulated ratepayers are taking it in the shorts with rate hikes and rapidly deteriorating service. Too bad those "inefficient" competitors do not have a nice regulated ratebase cash cow that they can squeeze more capital from when desired. > "Predatory pricing," for example, is defined as selling > a product *below the cost of production* for the purpose of eventually > monopolizing a market. Mr. Higdon provides no evidence... Sorry. Here is the evidence. For $4.50, Pac*Bell provides The Message Center. Nothing else is necessary. CF/No Answer, CF/Busy, and standard CF are included for voicemail purposes. Last time I checked, the going rate for the forwarding services alone exceeded $4.50. Either Pac*Bell is overcharging its forwarding customers, or it is giving away the store to its VM customers. Which is it? > This is a natural advantage which large, established > companies have over smaller ones; pricing one's goods to reflect one's > lower cost structure is neither anticompetative nor "unfair." It is also an advantage enjoyed by companies that control the MEANS of service delivery, have sources of income that are decreed in statute (FCC and PUC R&R), and have colusion with other entities. And I disagree: this is BOTH anticompetitive AND unfair. > Mr. Higdon also writes that "[w]hen the field has been thinned out > sufficiently, then the price can be whatever [Pac*Bell] wants." It > should be clear that Pac*Bell cannot raise the price of voicemail in > the future above what independent providers currently charge, without > allowing the competition to reestablish itself. I do not understand this at all. Why not? What magic force will prevent Pac*Bell from marching right up to the PUC to claim that it must charge more for the service? It will not be hard to make a convincing case, since it probably should have been charging more all along. Only at this point it can have ALL the business. > Likewise, his argument that Pac*Bell should be prevented from > offering voicemail, because it alone is in a technical position to > provide special services (such as "stutter" dialtone and free call > forwarding), is similarly flawed. Consumers would not be better off by > making these desirable features unavailable merely to protect > inefficient competition. (Of course, if it is possible to extend these > feature to competitors' services, Pac*Bell should be required to.) > The key concept here should be service to consumers, and not > "fairness" to competitors. In your imaginary, fairytale world, maybe. I am sorry to be so harsh, but you are obviously light years away from the day to day grunge of this business. Other VM companies can, indeed, offer any techincal service Pac*Bell provides IF they are willing to, themselves, buy the means from (guess who) Pac*Bell. This is the multi-layered whammy. Pac*Bell offers stutter dial tone. That is easy; the system lives in the CO anyhow. Mr. Service Bureau can do it by paying Pac*Bell for a dedicated data circuit to each and every switch that Mr. B wishes to serve. So now Pac*Bell has a bigger piece of Mr. B's income, it enriches itself, keeps Mr. B's prices higher, etc., etc. For Pac*Bell, it is a win/win/win situation. Pac*Bell only provides things like stutter dial tone activation when it deems such a feature useful for its own marketing purposes. VM bureaus have been requesting it for years. Now it is available because Pac*Bell, itself, wants it. But Pac*Bell gets it free (or rather buried under unauditable paperwork), while it SELLS it to others. Another example: From Pac*Bell payphones a call to any Bay Area Cellular One (owned by McCaw and PacTel) number cost twenty cents, untimed regardless of distance from the phone to where the number is based. Calls to GTE Mobilnet numbers from those same payphones go full toll. Why? The cellular companies buy a connection package to link to the landline carrier (Pac*Bell). The "no toll" payphone package costs MUCH more than the standard one. But since there is common ownership between the cellular company and the landline carrier, it makes no difference what the higher charge is; it all circulates in the same pocket anyhow. But cross subsidy is not permitted, you say. Maybe not, but until someone produces a full, verified audit of Pacific Telesis and its subsidiaries then I am going to assume that which appears to be self-evident. If you want to fall for the Pac*Bell line of "we can do it better and we can do it cheaper", then go for it. But please do not expect all of us to bury our heads in the sand with you. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 03:59:15 CDT From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article Bob_Frankston%Slate_ Corporation@mcimail.com (Bob Frankston) writes: > The issue of protocols raises its ugly head. An evil I'd love to stamp out, but I haven't thought of a better way. An the most evil part is the letter "s" at the end of "protocols". > Pac*Bell ... can create the protocols it needs to provide the services. > .... Unfortunately, protocols generally means CCITT and a > design cycle that guarantees irrelevance. It would be interesting to compare the US staff-years spent on CCITT and ANSI protocols in 1990 vs. 1980 (pre-divestiture). And the cycle is soooo slooooow. Even Bellcore's drags on. > In the spirit of naive optimism I'd like to see a law that allows > telcos to offer these services but with the condition that the > services be done with an arms length subsidiary and that any protocols > used would be made generally available to third parties. Most services are tested during the protocol discussion stage. I'm not aware of any TELCo yet stating they would NOT make protocols available to the public (but not free), and ONA probably forces this to occur. This does not mean a private vendor can't develop something without public input and offer it to one or more Telcos as a product. The standardization lag would give the original vendor a large market window, however. This doesn't happen often because TELCos don't like to be stuck with a hot-shot product with only a single source (unless they start manufacturing themselves, of course). There is always the threat that the Standard will be deliberately different from the original product ... > Understanding the difficulty of designing good protocols, there would > be a grace period in which they can experiment with protocols without > invoking the full standards wrath but that they would have to have a > process for advancing the protocols beyond their initial design. > Perhaps they would also be allowed a not-for-profit grace period in > which they can experimentally try out the services. Happens all the time today. I am not aware of any law/rule that prevents the TELCo from having "market trials", "technical trials", etc. Many RBOCs also have "test labs" for trialing new technologies in a "non-penalty" environment. The "Intelligent Network" view, where TELCos do their own feature programming would allow them some lead time over other vendors and/or RBOCs. > I do appreciate the difficulty of creating good protocols and I don't > want to inhibit the process but with transition from POTS to ISDN and > other digital interfaces, we need to realize that the ability to offer > these services, even in arms-length subsidiaries with no revenue > sharing, is based on a policy of proprietary protocols. > Making these protocols available external raises many network > integrity and performance issues, but these issues must be faced What protocols are not external, if you have the cash for the CCITT, ANSI T1 and Bellcore requirements? I know there is some black holes around Autovon, 911 and Call Trace mechanisms, but ISDN is well documented. Of course, you have to decide which version(s) to support .... The "stutter dial tone" issue, even in its old form, is simply one of providing access lines from the Message Center to the switch(s) of it's subscriber(s). If PacBell is using a different implementation, the only one that's available on AT&T switches is also Publicly documented. Again, there are 3 versions, but its standard :-) (See below). > [Moderator's Note: One of the nicest features of telco-operated voice > mail is the stutter dialtone which advises the subscriber of new > messages waiting. It should not be that hard for telco to provide this > to the competitors: A third-party voice mail system would send > messages to the serving CO (of the subscriber) saying 'turn on > stutter' or 'turn off stutter'. They'd send this message on a special > data circuit, and your CO would toggle it on or off, just as it does > now for telco's own voicemail service. Patrick, You ain't gonna believe your suggestion has been turned into code already!! Bellcore's TR-866 provides the interface spec. for ISDN-connected Voice Messaging Services, allowing them to turn stutter tone on or off, or light a lamp/indicator on your ISDN terminal. ANSI T1S1 has requirements mostly ready for approval that provide the National specs. for both the ISDN- and non-ISDN- Voice Messaging Services. This includes the method for switches to notify other switches (via SS7) to activate/deactivate the appropriate indicator. With ISDN, you can actually have multiple indicators, one per Message System. So in theory, the protocol IS available to the public (and the switch vendors). In SS7 areas, the Voice Messaging provider will only need connectivity to one switch (unless you want backup lines). The real problem here is the usual one with protocols. No, not the snails pace of design or the lack of detail. It's too many cooks. TR-866 specifies an inter-switch protocol that will not work with ANSI (even though Bellcore wrote the ANSI version??), and the two ANSI specs disagree on whether or not one parameter is required. > Also, telco *could* now > provide 'programmable forward on busy / no answer' if they wanted to. This isn't available on all Ameritech switches (especially those nice 1A ESS(tm) switches). Ameritech Mobile's oldest switch is probably two years old; they ditched all the original switches. Try to talk the regulators into allowing the wholesale replacement of all those old(er) switches!!! > Ameritech Mobile presently allows me to toggle 'forward on busy / no > answer' as I wish; AND program it to any number, anywhere, but > Illinois Bell (my hardwired service) insists that this feature can > only be programmed in the CO on a work order (that of course means a > fee), and that it cannot be turned off or on (except by CO action), > and that forwarding MUST be to another number in the same exchange! Actually, intra-office is no longer a restriction, if IBT wants to buy the feature ... But the Busy/DA forwarding is CO only unless you want to pay for a "Centrex Station Rearrangement" capability; your own Recent Change terminal (but only for lines in YOUR Centrex). So PAT, how about helping me out with something? I need the exact quote and author for something like: "That's the wonderful thing about Standards; there're so many to choose from!" Thanks, Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems Disclaimer: These are my opinions, and hardly proprietary. [Moderator's Note: I've heard this quotation before, but don't know who authored it. Maybe other readers can tell us. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jon Sreekanth Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Organization: The World Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1991 14:17:52 GMT In article john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > The "Message Center" is a voicemail service that directly competes > with voicemail service bureaus. It will answer your phone after a > preset number of rings, allow you to retrieve your messages from > anywhere, and will put "stutter" dial tone on your phone if there are > messages waiting. > What is wrong with this? First, it is priced well below most service > bureaus. Using the vast capital resources available courtesy of its .. There's already competition from other telecom giants: the LD companies. AT&T and probably the others are selling voice mail services. So the monopoly scenario above might not happen. It might require the resources of a large company to sell the idea. New England Telephone is still taking out expensive TV and radio ads for call waiting, some 4 - 5 years after introducing the service, meaning there's still a large inertia to using special phone services. About a year ago, I saw an ad in a small Boston area newspaper for a voicemail service targeted to students and mobile young professionals. They sank without a trace. IMHO, the voicemail services are really competing with answering machines, not small service bureaus. The latter have the option of sticking to the traditional answering service, using human operators, hence distinguishing themselves from voice mail. Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems Fax and PC products 346 Lincoln St #722, Marlboro, MA 01752 508-562-0722 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: "Jerry M. Carlin" Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Organization: Pacific * Bell Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1991 19:06:02 GMT In article joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe Talbot) writes: > If Pac*Bell isn't satisfied with having the local service monopoly, > guaranteed to make a profit, then I suspect there might be a few who'd > take this thankless job off their hands so that they could make it big > in all the other businesses they wish to pursue. What local service monopoly? We're already seeing large companies working with fiber companies to bypass the local loop and go directly to the long-distance carriers and to their other offices. The cable companies would like to do the same for residence customers. In a few years, we'll see competition in all areas of the business with the RBOC's forced to keep prices higher than the rest until the share of their business is down quite a bit judging by the precident of AT&T. Jerry M. Carlin (415) 823-2441 jmcarli@srv.pacbell.com ------------------------------ From: Brian Kantor Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor? Date: 9 Jun 91 20:16:24 GMT Organization: The Avant-Garde of the Now, Ltd. I use a 270 ohm 1/2w resistor in series with a red LED, and either crimp it into a modular plug, or solder it to one of those nifty AM-P widgets that can be stuffed over the pins on the 66 blocks. That way, I've got a red light glowing to remind me I've busied out the line. About a year ago, someone asked this same question and prompted a bunch of replies here on the net. Problem is, the archives are far to large to rummage through looking for an answer to a specific question. Ah well, maybe someday we'll have a really nice automated indexing scheme that can be queried by mail. Brian ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #443 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21673; 10 Jun 91 21:55 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24285; 10 Jun 91 20:19 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab17786; 10 Jun 91 19:15 CDT Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 18:14:41 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #444 BCC: Message-ID: <9106101814.ab27819@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 10 Jun 91 18:14:24 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 444 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Emergency Highway Phones [Lars Poulsen] Re: Emergency Highway Phones [Tim Irvin] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Macy Hallock] Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire [Macy Hallock] Re: Surprise!! [John Higdon] Re: Surprise!! [Carl Moore] Re: Telephone Advertising Consumer Rights Act [Dan Jacobson] Re: Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted [Howard Siegel] Re: Questions on LAPD [portal!cup.portal.com!TRADER@uunet.uu.net] Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone [Julian Macassey] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Lars Poulsen Subject: Re: Emergency Highway Phones Organization: CMC (a Rockwell Company), Santa Barbara, California, USA Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 04:18:40 GMT In article decwrl!well.sf.ca.us!well! dag@uunet.uu.net (Darren Alex Griffiths) writes: > It seems that CalTrans is installing phones throughout > the San Francisco bay area on major highways. The phones connect you > directly to to highway patrol and in will be spaced as close as a > half-mile apart. The phones will be installed in pairs, on each side > of the highway ... the phones are all cellular and run on solar power. > They are all being paid for by a one dollar surcharge on vehicle > registration. The same type has recently sprouted along US 101 throughout Santa Barbara County. I *think* the Maricopa Highway (Santa Maria to Bakersfield) is getting them too. I seem to recall that GTE Mobilnet was mentioned when the paper wrote about them three months ago. > ... I would be interested in whether or not someone could steal the > serial number to one of the phones and reprogram their own phone in > order to make calls at someone else's expense. It would also be > interesting to see if most of the phones have the same serial number > or if they are all different, and whether or not the phones are smart > enough to send their location to the dispatcher when a call is placed. I would expect that the ESN is programmed to connect DIRECTLY to CHP; i.e. if you steal the ESN, you can make free calls but only to the police. If the calls are routed through the E911 system, it would make sense to supply location info, but I did not see any mention of this in the article. On a separate note, GTE has just this week-end converted my exchange from a 2EAX (?) to a new shiny 5ESS. I tried to ask if they will be offering ISDN soon, but could not find anyone who knew. Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer CMC Rockwell lars@CMC.COM ------------------------------ Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: Emergency Highway Phones Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 12:18:54 -0400 From: irvin@lombard.dartmouth.edu In TELECOM Digest V11 #429, Darren Alex Griffiths writes: > The idea is pretty neat, but it does raise a few interesting > questions. I wonder what kind of security measures are taken. I'm not > to worried about some bad guy over hearing a distress call from an > helpless motorist at four in the morning and getting there before the > cops. Actually, this could be QUITE dangereous. The motorists could be in danger of having a rapist, mugger, etc. over hear the conversation and dash to the site ahead of the cops (I doubt it would much of a feat to beat the cops to the scene). With the number of murders, robberies, etc. that happen to stranded moterists on Interstates, I think this is a serious concern. Tim Irvin ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 21:24 EDT From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 In article is written: >>> Were you calling a commercial establishment? A college dorm or >>> campus? Some other place where you were dialing directly to an >>> extension of a large private network? >> To answer your question: I heard the double-ring when calling the >> "Management Services" department at Toronto City Hall. > The double ring will indicate that the destination has answered your > call on its own equipment. The real implication of this is that you > are now being billed for the time that you are listening to ringing. What? This sounds incorrect to me. My 20+ years (am I _that_ old?) tells me that: DID trunks provide answer supervision to the telco office. That means billing does not occur until answer supervision is provided to the telco by the PBX. All PBX software I have seen for DID trunks works just this way: no supervision until a call is terminated/answered at a station. Rings and busies (and usually recorded intercepts) do not give answer supervision. Just like The Phone Company (tm) ... and this is done to their specification, too. And the FCC and CRTC agree, too. Perhaps you are thinking of some pager terminals or old style IMTS/MTS equipment that used DID trunks in a different way. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG 216-725-4764 Home macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG Note: macy@ncoast.org is best reply path to me. uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy [No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 21:16 EDT From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 In article is written: > Patton M. Turner wrote: >> C-wire (drop wire) is hard to beat if you are going to use unshelded >> cable. It can be run overhead or plowed in the ground. > C Rural Wire is TOUGH stuff, but buried? I've never seen it buried in > my experience or heard of doing so before. Listen, I've seen C-wire aerial, buried, submerged, strung on fenceposts and hung to trees and it always worked. Even used it (well a couple of strands of it) to pull a tractor out of the mud once. At one point, a large part of most distant rural cable plant of a certain telephone company I worked for was made of the stuff. (Hint: one of John Higdon's favorite phone companies, and it ain't PB) In fact, much of the stuff was ten + years old. Saw some of it taken down off poles and buried. Worked for a couple more years, too. > I recommend against direct burial of C Rural Wire. It is designed as > an AERIAL wire (1-pr/1-line wire) and not really even as a "drop" > wire. C Rural Wire is used for exceptionally LONG aerial spans whose > length would cause ordinary F Service Wire (aerial drop wire) to fail > at the P-clamps or break in the span. Quite true, but its very well made stuff, or at least it was back in 1970. > A typical C Rural Wire installation includes terminating the C Rural > Wire at the pole closest to the station where it is connected with a > 105 block to conventional F Service Wire for the final span to the > station. Also correct. Except for the stuff we lay across the fields and construction areas. Do you have any idea what C-wire can do to a tractor running a brush hog? Hint: the tractor loses... > If the service MUST be hung, I would probably forgo the luxury and > expense of poles and simply hang the spans, with PLENTY of slack, from > the existing trees. Now, that what C-wire's for! It also held the Chatham Farmer's Mutual Telephone Company together for many, many years, just this way... Most of the stuff I used and saw way back then was General Cable or Brand-Rex. > AT&T's Phoenix Works manufactures an EXCELLENT, 5-pair, jelly-filled > buried service "wire". This is true, but I like Brand-Rex's six pair or two pair buried drop, too. Of course, you could just get your ham ticket and a couple of two meter handie-talkie's (Shameless plug: the technician ticket is now available in a no-morse-code version ... and while I'm on that subject: what's your excuse for no ticket, Patrick? [grin] We need all the decent hams we can get.) Macy M. Hallock, Jr. N8OBG 216-725-4764 Home macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG Note: macy@ncoast.org is best reply path to me. uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy [No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you] [Moderator's Note: The technician's ticket now available *without* the Morse Code test?? Shame ... shame on all! Anyway, some people say I am already a ham ... PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 14:06 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Surprise!! On Jun 6 at 1:59, I wrote: > Given that we are just about out of area codes, this would be a very > bad idea (tm). In California alone no less than five new area codes > would be required to fulfill your reform proposal. And then I gave a list of LATAs that shared area codes. Sufficient mail has come my way to indicate that I was not clear enough that I was naming LATAs, not cities. (Yes, I know that San Francisco, the city, does not share 408 with Monterey. But the San Francisco LATA shares 408 with the Monterey LATA.) Once again, I assumed too much. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 16:22:07 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Surprise!! The Newark (Delaware) exchange's calling area did NOT grow when Delaware went to county-wide calling recently (no comment intended on the southern fringe of New Castle County being in the Smyrna exchange and thus getting the Kent County calling area). The Newark exchange borders on both Pa. and Md., and has a lopsided local calling area; you are local to Claymont way up in the northeast and Middletown way down in the south, plus two exchanges in southern Chester County, Pa., but not to neighboring Elkton exchange in Maryland. ------------------------------ From: Dan_Jacobson@att.com Organization: AT&T-BL, Naperville IL, USA Subject: Re: Telephone Advertising Consumer Rights Act Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 18:17:37 GMT "Linc" == Linc Madison writes: > It turns out that if you have a "NO SOLICITING" sign on the > front of your house, it is entirely legal for someone to come to > your door anyway and solicit you for POLITICAL purposes, because > the First Amendment right of the solicitor [...] Same apparently applies to [major brand name religious group] as they left me at a loss for words when they countered my routine of pointing at my official City of Naperville, IL "No Solicitors Invited" sticker with "We're not soliciting anything". Seems like I need some kind of super sticker. [Moderator's Note: In a couple cases where there have been challenges to the 'no solicitors' sign by religious or political groups the courts have held the sign referred to *commercial* solicitation and *commercial* speech ... not political or religious speech. However, a 'no trespassing' or 'do not disturb' sign was held to mean exactly what it said even where politics and religion was conerned. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Howard Siegel Subject: Re: Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted Date: 9 Jun 91 23:07:33 GMT Reply-To: Howard Siegel Organization: TRW, c/o Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore Md. In , caserta@athena.mit.edu writes: > 1) Hello-Direct sells two of these devices: the Crosspoint > Autoswitcher I and the Crosspoint Autoswitcher II... > Crosspoint Autoswitcher I $229 > COMMENTS: I have the impression that Hello-Direct's C.A._I is actually > the same as the ASAP TF 555 made by Command Communications and sold > for much less (~$170) by Lechmere. In the most recent Hello Direct catalog, the Autoswitcher I was listed at $199. I have not verified that the price has come down or this is a misprint. The Autoswitcher's do look just like the ASAP models. I just saw them on display at my local Staples office supply wharehouse. There are two ASAP models with the same specs as those from Hello Direct. I didn't notice the prices though. Also, Black Box Corp has the ASD-4 Automatic Sharing Device for four devices listed at $199. All of these devices must be made by the same company and OEM'ed to these companies since all of them look identical, except for the colors; the Hello Direct and ASAP models are white (or off white) and the Black Box model is of course black. I have been thinking of picking one of these up too, but for my office where I only have one phone line and just put up my own Telebit T1600 modem (finally 9600 baud!). How well to these devices work with a campus voice mail system on the telephone instead of an answering machine? Howard Siegel siegel@stsci.edu 301-338-5415 TRW c/o Space Telescope Science Institute Baltimore MD 21218 ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!TRADER@uunet.uu.net Subject: Re: Questions on LAPD Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 14:06:40 PDT I've been working on an ISDN interface and I have also had questions about Layer 3 services (call control). I have a copy of the CCITT Q.931 specs, but I also have a copy of Bellcore Technical Reference TR-TSY-000776, "Network Interface Description for ISDN Customer Access" (You can get this from the CIC). The manual states that the call control protocol is a subset of Q.931, sort of a generic ISDN call control protocol. What's the status on this? From what I can see, the generic call control stuff looks like it would work with AT&T 5ESS switches and probably others, although there aren't many features that are used. If I wrote code for this kind of generic switch, would that be enough for simple call setup?? Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone Date: 9 Jun 91 18:17:23 GMT Reply-To: Julian Macassey Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article nstar!bluemoon!sbrack@ iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 433, Message 8 of 13 > On our NT SL100 PBX, the individual 2500 sets have a "tap" button, > which, pressed once, sends a flash of the correct length. It seems to > be some sort of capacitor arrangement, but since OSU is more paranoid > than ATT about people opening up their phones, I haven't investigated. It is actually a Motorola IC. I have the schematic for these Comdial phones somewhere, buried with schematics for Yugoslavian phones etc. I can't find it now, but I did discover lots of neat stuff I haven't seen for a while. This circuit the "TAP telephone" was as I recall designed by Joe Flamini, a real telecom character. He is an MIT Phd, ex cop, bon vivant and comedian. Anyhow, the IC is a Dual Timer. One half sets up the flash button for a 600Ms break and the other half, which is across the hookswitch is set up for 1500 Ms. This is why when you try to flash the hookswitch on the TAP phone you hang the phone up. Comdial sold a ton of these things to ROLM who installed them as "ROLM Phones". They are still available as Comdial TAP phones from your local telco distributor. They come with or without the message waiting light. > The tap button also houses the voicemail waiting lamp. This lamp also > lights when ring current is applied to the instrument. What is the > relation between the light and the ringer? The "voicemail waiting lamp" is called the message waiting light. It is most often seen in hotel rooms. In hotels when they have a message for you, they turn on the light. This is done automatically with voicemail. The light is a neon with a 100K resistor in series. The voltage applied to the Tip and Ring to activate the light is usually 90V at 100Hz. This frequency is ignored by the frequency sensitive ringer that responds to 40 - 150V at 20 Hz. The neon is not frequency sensitive, so it flashes for message waiting or ring current. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #444 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29765; 11 Jun 91 1:02 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27341; 10 Jun 91 23:26 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20703; 10 Jun 91 22:21 CDT Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 21:50:35 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #445 BCC: Message-ID: <9106102150.ab00364@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 10 Jun 91 22:50:23 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 445 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [Kath Mullholand] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [John Higdon] Re: Clicks on Line After Hangup [John Higdon] Re: SJ Merc Explains New Rates Badly [John Higdon] Re: Address of MaxTrek, Inc. [Jon Sreekanth] Re: Pacific Bell Local Calling Area Expansion [Nick Sayer] Re: St. Louis Phone Outage, Redundancy, and Backups [Bill Berbenich] Re: Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted [David Newman] Re: Easy Fax to ASCII? [Rich Szabo] Re: Easy Fax to ASCII? [William Vajk] Re: The President's Analyst :-) [Marty Brenneis] Information on v.22 biz Protocol Wanted [Richard Jules] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1991 13:10:13 EDT From: KATH MULLHOLAND Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus I think Tom Gray was right when he said if a PBX gives you a double ring you're paying for the call. I've asked three telecom CO people this question and all agreed -- the last CO through which the call passed passes the ringing tone. That is true even on DID connections. If you get a double ring from a PBX it is because the PBX returned answer supervision and is supplying its own ring. Yes, when you hear the phone ring, it rings twice, but we all know the ringing the caller hears is unrelated to the ringing the phone creates, don't we? :-} As I understand it, there are a few reasons you can get double ring from a phone company CO. 1) a party line of more than two parties. 2) a step office will supply a variety of wierd ringing and other tones. There may be others, as well. This is all second-hand, but what was coming in these messages didn't agree with my understanding of how our PBX related to TPC, so I started asking questions. Kath Mullholand UNH, Durham NH ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 22:32 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus Tom Ace writes: > It seems there's a potential for fraud here. I assume there are rules > for what may be sent out as a local intercept without returning answer > supervision. I assume that a call answered by a "we're closed now, > call back in the morning" recording ought to be paid for. Are > businesses with DID on an honor system in this regard? Yes and no. There is a potential for fraud, but businesses that have DID circuits maintain a fairly high visibility with the serving telcos. I have known some people who have done some pretty rude things with DID, but eventually someone from telco (or in one case AT&T) discovered what was going on and "suggested some changes" in the way supervision was returned. For example, 800 EAT SH*T used to terminate on a DID that had a barker for a 900 service where you could gripe about bad drivers. The clever person delivered the barker message without benefit of supervision so HE was not charged for the 800 call. When AT&T finally got wind of this, they threated and huffed and puffed, but the person explained that the recording on the 800 number was simply a "referral" to the 900 number. AT&T was not amused, but in lieu of other action disconnected the 800 number and gave it an unembellished referral to the 900 number. Interesting while it lasted. As far as "we're closed now, call back in the morning" is concerned, many businesses do this and get away with it. By the way, do not bother to write me for a list; I still have to live here :-) John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 23:23 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Clicks on Line After Hangup Ken Levitt writes: > I called New England Telephone and was told that the clicking is > normal and that there is nothing they can do about this. Is this > true? Should I give up and do my best to work around the problem, or > is there something I can do to get them to get rid of the clicking? If this is a 1/1AESS you are stuck with the clicking. However, I use a technique with my Watson that eliminates this. My script requires a person to enter a DTMF digit to leave a message. This means that when a person hangs up after realizing he has reached a wrong number, etc., the Watson is not left in a recording mode. Also, for those callers who actually intend to leave a message, I ask them to "press any key" when they are through. This terminates the recording and causes the script to move on. In my case, this is not a real problem. The moment a caller hangs up, the KX-T1232 sees the CPC and immediately sends reorder to the Watson. Within about two or three cycles of reorder, the Watson hangs up. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 03:07 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: SJ Merc Explains New Rates Badly Michael Graff <0004450555@mcimail.com> writes: > "Calls up to 12 miles away to be free starting Saturday" What the Merc failed to mention -- a considerable oversight for a San Jose paper -- was that the largest San Jose rate center, San Jose 2, had no change whatsoever. It has never had a "Zone 2" to become a "Zone 1". When ZUM (Zone Usage Measurement, pronounced "zoom", as in "zoom your bill up") was first set up, Los Gatos was to have been a Zone 2 call from San Jose 2. There was an outcry, and a little gerrymandering later it magically became a Zone 1 call before the plan was even implemented. I have an area phone book printed right at the transition that shows LG to be Zone 2 to downtown San Jose. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Jon Sreekanth Subject: Re: Address of MaxTrek, Inc. Organization: The World Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1991 13:35:37 GMT In article caserta@athena.mit.edu (Francesco Caserta) writes: > Could somebody please provide me with the address of MaxTrek, Inc. One > of their products I'm interested in is a modem/fax/phone switch called > SmartMax II which seems pretty nice. {PC Magazine}, Dec 11, 1990 did a survey of about 16 fax switches: MaxTrek Inc, 23210 Bernhardt St, Hayward, CA 94545, 800-445-4451 (If anyone knows of a more recent survey article on fax switches, I'd appreciate hearing about it.) Regards, Jon Sreekanth Assabet Valley Microsystems Fax and PC products 346 Lincoln St #722, Marlboro, MA 01752 508-562-0722 jon_sree@world.std.com ------------------------------ From: Nick Sayer Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Local Calling Area Expansion Date: 10 Jun 91 13:46:19 GMT Organization: The Duck Pond, Stockton, CA forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) writes: > The interesting part is that by the evening of Monday, June 3, the > (optional) 1 was again allowed. Calls would complete with or without > the 1. Further investgation revealed that ALL local calls would allow > the 1, even those that had never been toll. So, I can now dial ANY > number in 916 by using a preceeding 1. Toll calls still require it, > though. I just checked, and the same is now the case here in Stockton as well. I was under the impression that the BOCs operations in one LATA were supposed to be independant from the operations in other LATAs. If this is the case, why did the BOC here in Stockton suddenly get the same neat idea? If this is not the case, then Pac*Bell is a more evil threat to modern society than even I had imagined. I myself go a bit farther than Mr. Higdon. Why must Pac*Hell be the only phone company allowed to bring me dial tone? Granted, it would be expensive for a new phone company to come in and start from scratch, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be worth doing for them. Either there should be competing phone companies vying for my telecommunications dollar, or one BOC in each LATA whose job is to do nothing apart from providing local loops and dialtone for the least amount of money possible without drawing blood -- red ink. No Centrex, no Message Center, No 976, nothing. Perhaps even better would be a BOC whose job was ONLY the local loop (read: wire) management. Perhaps the dialtone and/or local calling could be broken open for competition too. Then each CO perhaps could be its own BOC. "Company Office" suddenly has new meaning. The CO could charge subscribers a nominal fee for each loop, and charge anyone who wanted to tie in a nominal fee for that. They would get from that enough money to maintain the wire plant and a small profit. Nick Sayer mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us N6QQQ 209-952-5347 (Telebit) ------------------------------ From: bill@baldric.eedsp.gatech.edu Subject: Re: St. Louis Phone Outage, Redundancy, and Backups Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 11:10:56 EDT Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu A lot of people depend upon the phone system for various reasons. For many, access to the phone networks have become a veritable necessity. But then again, if someone (anyone) depends upon one lone source for a service (any service) and then expects that that source will never ever fail or become backlogged, then the consumer of that service is very trusting and naive indeed. This brings to mind a theorem of some sort that I remember from some an engineering class that I had in the past (anyone know the name for this little nugget?); the more reliable and fail-safe a system is believed to have become, the more devastating will be its failure. I took this to mean that the more dependable something becomes, the more people there will also be who believe that the 'thing' will NEVER fail and those same people will trust 'it' implicitly and not arrange for an alternate source; therefore, when the reliable system fails, it will be quite devastating to many. I believe that this holds especially true for the nation's and world's voice / data networks. I believe that since they are inevitable, occasional telephone network failures are not only unacceptable but also unavoidable. Any entity or person who depends upon that network to supply uninterrupted, 24- hour, year round service with no degradation or failure is surely acting in a naive and irresponsible way. At least the St. Louis Fed had the foresight to plan a contingency method of transacting their usual affairs. Let's hope that our local emergency agencies such as police, ambulance, and fire have the foresight to plan for the inevitable failure of the usual means of communication. A failure not necessarily based upon a natural disaster and for which there may be no prior warning. Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu ------------------------------ From: David Newman Subject: Re: Fax/Phone Switch Information Wanted Date: 10 Jun 91 18:17:02 GMT Reply-To: David Vincent Newman Organization: MCC Austin, Texas Ranier Technologies TB-150 Voice-Data Switch: 17950 NE 65th St. Redmond, WA., 98052 (206) 881-5182 It ran about $100 as I recall, and it seems to work pretty well. I've had it about a year. I'm just a satisfied customer, nothing more. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 00:55:23 -0400 From: Rich Szabo Subject: Re: Easy Fax to ASCII? Reply-To: ac220@cleveland.freenet.edu adamg@world.std.com writes: > we're looking at replacing the [fax] machine with a computer and fax > board. Our computer gurus have found some software that will turn a > fax message into a PCX or TIFF file and another program that will > convert THAT into ASCII, and want to write a batch file to transmit > that into our main system. The problem is this has to be done for > each individual fax, because the software they want to use (ReadRight > is one of the programs) apparently can't be automated. I've used Desqview from Quarterdeck to automate a stubborn program. DV runs your program(s) as a shell and will feed it any keystrokes you wish. I believe it has a complete macro language. It can multitask the programs. As an aside, I bet a lot of the faxes we all send could be just as well done thru E-Mail. Your problem would then already be solved. Rich Szabo Cleveland, Ohio USA +1 216 662 1112 internet:ac220@cleveland.freenet.edu and presenting!: rszabo@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: William Vajk Subject: Re: Easy Fax to ASCII? Reply-To: William Vajk Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1991 01:29:37 GMT In article Claudio Nieder writes: > We are looking for a solution which can be implemented without any > costly program development etc. The best solution would be if there > already exists some product which would make the fax machine appear > to the program like a local printer, so that no change to the existing > software is necessary. Fax utilizes a specific bit mapped format, each line of dots encoded with padding "0's" as necessary. Fax also talks in several parallel 2400 baud modulated signals to achieve the 9600 throughput. As if that weren't enough, several messages are exchanged first in a Bell 103 mode (like at 300 baud, man) to establish the protocols which will be used. The new machines are backwards compatable with the old fashioned optically scanned rotary drum, seven minutes per page machines from the 1960's. And in the Bell 103 mode they also exchange names and addresses before they shift into the mode which transmits the data you really want. There was another fax related message here the other day, and I was in process of responding when the computer went bye-bye. It was a request for an easy conversion to ascii from fax. Because of the graphic nature of fax, and the fact that there is no assurance of the style and pitch of type received, one would actually have to be at the edge of some serious AI to achieve the goal requested. Anyone who has used an optical scanner and worked to convert a long document to ascii from typed sheets can attest to the difficulties of accurate conversion given only one character set to decipher. On the other hand, to convert from ascii to fax is relatively easy, but certainly not easy enough to make a fax machine into a computer peripheral. Bill Vajk ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 06:37:21 PDT From: Marty the Droid Subject: Re: The President's Analyst For those who have seen the film "The President's Analyst", did anyone notice Cliff Robertson playing the part of the 'droid at TPC? I almost bust a gut the first time I saw him enter in that grey suit in an AT&T commercial. It was nice to know that "TCP" still had the same leadership. :-) (I wondered if the folks at the ad agency or AT&T ever saw the movie.) Marty 'The Droid' Brenneis ...!uupsi!kerner!droid Industrial Magician droid@kerner.sf.ca.us (415)258-2105 ------------------------------ Organization: Ryerson - Academic Computing Services Date: Monday, 10 Jun 1991 10:19:20 EST From: Richard Jules Subject: Information on v.22 biz Protocol Wanted Hi, I am attempting to implement a modem in software using a DSP board (motorolla 56001 with (A/D/A) facilities). I am looking for documentation on the v.22 bis standard. - 1200 and 2400 BPS - Does anyone have *ANY* information on this subject which they could pass on? Thanks. Roger Smith ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #445 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02902; 11 Jun 91 2:09 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19911; 11 Jun 91 0:34 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab27341; 10 Jun 91 23:27 CDT Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 22:51:23 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #446 BCC: Message-ID: <9106102251.ab25077@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 10 Jun 91 22:51:06 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 446 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Why Are *Telephone Keypads* Built Upside Down [William Vajk] Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell [Robert Jacobson] Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) [Steve Forrette] Re: Service Overlap [Kevin Brown] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor [Bud Couch] Concerning Phone Company Overcharges [Dr. Tanner Andrews] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William Vajk Subject: Re: Why Are *Telephone Keypads* Built Upside Down Reply-To: William Vajk Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1991 05:30:41 GMT In article Jeremy Grodberg writes: > The real question is why are *Adding Machine* keypads built upside > down? Since we read left-to-right and top-to-bottom, and count > low-to-high, the telephone keypad would be the obvious choice for > layout. Blaise Pascal built his wheeled adding machine in 1642. Perhaps an early model for the rotary dial :-) It is my understanding that the earliest push button adding machines were created circa 1850. In the case of the adding machine, 0 really is a placeholder at the beginning of the decade and is next to the number 1 for any given decade. The direction taken by the layout, bottom 0 to top 9 d oubtless had to do simplification of the mechanical design. Of course there might be some holdover from the abacus in the design, as beads are moved up to change state, eg to add. Bottom up calculation was in. And even now, standard office practice is to work the pile of paper from the bottom (the oldest) upwards. We read, in the west, top to bottom, left to right. But we don't do everything that way, and we don't always think or plan in that direction either. In the phone system as we know it today, the 0 is really a 10. In terms of rotary (pulse) dialing, ten interruptions to the circuit are sent for the digit 0. And of course we have 11 and 12 with touchtone phones as well, though they're disguised as * and #. Note the disabling of call waiting is *70 on touch tone, or 1170 on rotary dialers. Given the transition from pulse to tone dialing, it wasn't really necessary to retain the concept that 0 is 10. In fact, numerical correlations to make connections are now unnecessary. We have a computer select the lines to connect. We no longer have a series of mechanical steppers physically moving things about, which land at particular grid locations, and there make the desired connection. I see more and more sources for programmable autodialers. Many of us tend to call mostly some finite list of people. We're creatures of habit. We don't usually number these people, although with the rapid-dial services offered by some telecos it does happen that way too. But when we buy an autodialer, each colleague, associate, or friend ends up owning one of the buttons on the autodialer. In a the sea of numbers we call civilization, we can get rid of another d*mn (long live Bill Blue) number and get back to dealing with people without being required to use a number to get to them. I really like having to deal with only a single hieroglyph in order to etablish contact, instead of all those numbers. Now that we don't have to learn and remember all those numbers, I wonder what folks are going to be doing with all that freed up brain space. Bill Vajk ------------------------------ From: Robert Jacobson Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Organization: Human Interface Technology Lab, Univ. of Wash., Seattle Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1991 02:01:17 GMT I'm not a guy who naturally sides with the RBOCs, having dueled with Pac*Bell for years on the issue of introducing new services in a fair way. But also having experienced the reluctance of the competitive market to develop and introduce new telecommunications services that make a difference to most of us, I'm inclined to say, give 'em a chance. Reinstating the antitrust provisions, if the RBOCs abuse their position, is a lot less difficult than prevailing on the competitors to produce services with value for the little guy. This is NOT an argument for deregulation of the RBOCs. It is merely a call for the RBOCs to be able to put their considerable resources at the disposal of the market and possibly add to the limited supply of technology now available to us "little guys." Bob Jacobson (These opinions are mine alone and not necessariy those of my employer or colleagues.) ------------------------------ From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: How do You Deal With Central Office Problems? Date: 11 Jun 91 02:03:45 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) writes: > This recording, by the way, comes from KDD, the international carrier, > after doing an SS7 lookup to the telco (NTT) and discovering the > number is not in service. It is in English and Japanese. IDC, one of the other international carriers, has many nice little features too. Usually you dial 0061 to access IDC. But you can also dial 0062, make your call, and after it is over the IDC billing computer will call you back and tell you the length and cost of your call -- free! There are other 006X prefixes that do things like third party billing. IDC also sends you monthly itemized bills if you want them, and they are bilingual. I've never been disappointed with their service, and, unlike KDD, they seem to be using all digital cables (including the new pacific fiber cables) with no satellite links at all. The connections are totally crystal clear. I call my mom in North Carolina from Tokyo and she thinks I'm at the gas station around the corner. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 02:50:22 -0700 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Pet Peeve About Newer Modems (was Telephone Keypads) Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Greg Andrews writes: > In article forrette@cory.berkeley.edu > (Steve Forrette) writes: >> This reminds me of a "pet peeve" (sic?) that I have with the newer >> modems. Both the Hayes 9600 V-series and the $74 2400 card-modem I >> have won't accept an ATS11 value (DTMF duration) of less than 50ms. > Hmmm. You want your modem to use 36 ms instead of 50? [stuff deleted] > How many switches in this country (and the world) can reliably handle > DTMF tones faster than 50 ms? How many can handle them even that > fast? The point is not how many switches can handle what, but what MY switch can handle. I believe that the telco published minimum (i.e. what they guarantee) is 50ms, so the 100ms default of the modem is plenty to allow for customers to not have problems. By changing the default, I am telling the modem that I don't want the default used, but want my own value used instead. > In my humble opinion, it's a little silly to get upset over such a > small amount of time. Of course, I happen to work for Telebit > technical support, so that may explain my viewpoint a little bit... Greg, I think that I can live with the .2 seconds extra. The point is that this attitude on the part of the manufacturer is all too common in the telecom industry today. It's this attitude that causes the Bay Area cellular carriers to require a "1" before dialing a long distance number, and not allowing the area code for local numbers. Just like the 36ms dialing, both of these once worked just fine, but now have been changed. Since all of these worked just fine at one time, there's no technical reason not to allow them. The attitude of "Sir, why do you need this?" gets really old after awhile. What good reason can you give for making these changes? It doesn't improve the service for those that follow the instructions and use the defaults, but makes things more difficult and annoying for those that know a little more and like to use the more obscure features. Here's another example: I recently ordered new phone service from Pacific Bell because of a move. I wanted a line with regular call waiting and busy transfer to my other number. I was told by the Business Office that this combination was not tariffed, and was even read a quote from the Handbook stating that call waiting cannot be on a line with either busy or no-answer transfer. I had exactly that setup a couple of years ago from US West in Seattle. Call waiting kicked in first, then a third call would busy transfer to the other number. And if I was dialing out on the modem and invoked cancel call waiting, the first incoming call would busy transfer. Is someone going to tell me that US West's 1AESS's and DMS-100's can to this, but Pacific Bell's cannot? Of course they can. But somebody decided "Nobody will need this, and it may be confusing anyway." So, I could not purchase this no matter how well I understood it. I was willing to pay for all these features, but they wouldn't take my money because somebody decided that this isn't what I really needed, and/or that I wouldn't understand it. I complained, and tracked somebody down in the department that makes the marketing decisions for Custom Calling features. First they tried to give me the line that it was not technically possible. Once that was dismissed, the complication and lack of need was brought up. Do you see the danger of this attitude? In article Dave Levenson writes: > Call*Return does not do its work by continually redialing, but by > queueing a request in a database common to your switch and the called > switch. This does not result in network blockage from busy attempts, > as CPE rapid-dialing does. Oh, but it does! When queueing a call, the calling switch sends a request every so often (around 30 to 45 seconds) over the SS7 network to the destination switch, asking it if the destination line is idle. If it is, then the caller is rung, and upon answer, a "fresh" call attempt is made (which could reach busy if the destination started another call in the meantime). It does NOT work by queueing a request at the destination switch. Why this is, I don't know. I've read several journal articles about SS7 and the implementation of the CLASS features, and they never mentioned the rationale behind this, but did clearly explain that this is the way it works. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu [Moderator's Note: A funny story about automatic redial here in Chicago: I used my phone to dial my own number, and of course I got a busy signal, not a call-waiting tone. I disconnected and dialed *66. The recording told me the number I had dialed was busy, but that it if became free in the next thirty minutes, I would be called back 'with a special ring'. Well of course a few seconds after disconnecting a second time, my line was observed to be 'free', so I got the special ring (two short and one long). When I answered, after a couple seconds of silence the recording advised me 'the number you are calling was free, but it has become busy again ... we will continue trying.' I hang up, a few seconds later I get the special ring, and the same routine. Apparently this would have gone on for some time -- 30 minutes probably, since that is the time limit it originally said it would use to try and get through -- but I dialed *86 and 'cancelled my repeat dialing and automatic callback requests.' :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: brownK@batman.moravian.edu (Kevin Brown) Subject: Re: Service Overlap Date: 9 Jun 91 13:25:56 GMT Organization: Moravian College, Bethlehem, PA In article , rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes: > I have recently moved from an apartment to a house half a block away, > on the same (aerial) cable. When I called TPC to get my phone > changed, they offered to provide service at both locations for a > while. > They had this all set up within two hours of my call to them. I was > How is this physically done in the CO? Is it just software in the > switch (mine is a 1AESS)? What would happen if I picked up phones in > both houses at the same time? I may try this just to see. If they did this within two hours, most likely it was done via a half tap in the CO. They took your office equipment (oe) and connected two cable pairs two it. One was dedicated to your old location and the other was dedicated to your new location. This will work just like having an extension in your home. If you pick up a phone at one house, the other house will have no dial tone. Kevin Brown Box 72 Moravian College, Bethlehem PA 18018 CSNET/INTERNET: brownK@moravian.edu UUCP: rutgers!liberty!batman!brownK ------------------------------ From: Bud Couch Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor Organization: Kentrox Industries, Inc. Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1991 20:54:30 GMT In article Marc Unangst writes: > I recently had one modem in the middle of a 15-line hunt group go out. > Not wanting to move the rest of the modems up a line each, I did some > investigation with a VOM and a telephone, and discovered that plugging > a 270 ohm resistor into the phone line (across tip and ring) should > have almost the exact same effect as an off-hook telephone does -- > thus busying out the line. Now, my question is, is there anything > wrong with doing something like this? Will a 1/2W resistor be enough? > Is this an "accepted" way of busying out a phone line? The "accepted" way of busying out a line is to call your LEC and ask them to disconnect the service; they'll even stop charging you for it! Seriously, unless you have access to the CO switch internals, there is no clean way of busying a two-way loop-start subscriber line. _IF_ you have an incoming only line, what you have done should be kosher. With a two-way line, however, what you have done is to go off-hook, which the switch interprets as a request for service. When you do not provide any outgoing signaling, it will time out, and pull the cut-off relay, or the maintenence relay, or (in the case of old SXS) do nothing. Then the line just sits there, dissipating heat - in your resistor, the wires to you, and whatever relay or sensor is used in your serving CO. For a temporary thing this is not too bad, but it may also generated maintenence requests, etc, if left on for an extended period. If this line is a measured service line, you will be charged for all the time that you leave this on -- see my first paragraph. For what I perceive as a request for techno-weenie assistance: use your VOM as a milliammeter, and adjust the size of your resistor to pull 20 mA from the line. The rating (in watts) required will then be 0.0004 times the value of the resistor (in ohms). This is enough current to keep the line marked as off-hook, but minimizes the power wasted. Some of the newer CO's will show a pretty constant 30 mA for lower values of resistance. Keep raising the value until it goes down to 20 mA. Current lower than 20 mA may not work, so don't go lower. Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies ------------------------------ Subject: Concerning Phone Company Overcharges Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 9:16:26 EDT From: "Dr. Tanner Andrews" Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand The recent articles about phone companies charging more than is allowed by tariff, or operating beyond what is permitted, are interesting. They advise caution and watchfulness to those of us where the phone company isn't yet trying the particular stunts. However, in order to achieve maximum good, I urge people to write a short letter to the editor of the local paper. Even the very liberal _Snooze-Urinal_ occasionally carries letters about such things. A letter, moderate in tone, alerting people to such excessive charges or out-of-bounds operations is not unlikely to be published. {bikini.cis.ufl.edu allegra uunet!cdin-1}!ki4pv!tanner ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #446 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09969; 12 Jun 91 1:38 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa22365; 12 Jun 91 0:03 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa19012; 11 Jun 91 22:56 CDT Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 22:50:21 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #447 BCC: Message-ID: <9106112250.ab22656@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 11 Jun 91 22:50:12 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 447 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: The Usual Overflow [TELECOM Moderator] 'Sick' Omaha Information Center [Jack Winslade] Knock, Knock! [San Jose Mercury-News via Ed Greenberg] Pay Phone Mayhem [Newsday via Dave Niebuhr] United Telephone of Pannsylvania [Steve Gaarder] Competition From Regulated Monopolies (was Hollings / Pac*Bell) [J. Higdon] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 22:07:27 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: The Usual Overflow Today I had to toss out about two hundred messages in the queue which: 1) Had been around several days still unused. 2) Were 're' messages on topics more than a week old. 3) Were so long they would require a complete issue for themselves. 4) Contained huge amounts of quoted text versus little new text. I had to dump most of the remaining 'hollings /pac*bell' replies. They were extremely long and generally redundant, and there were two dozen of them. The queue is cleaned out as of tonight. If you have not seen your message here by Wednesday morning, it had to be sacrified in the interest of getting up to date. *Please do not re-subnit it*. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 20:50:57 CST From: Jack Winslade Subject: 'Sick' Omaha Information Center Reply-to: ivgate!drbbs!jsw@uunet.uu.net Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha, Ne. 402-896-3537 (From various sources, including {Omaha World-Herald}, WOWT TV, and a personal conversation.} Since last weekend, directory assistance operators in Omaha have been stricken with headaches, sneezing attacks, nausea, vomiting, etc. while working at the information center at 78th and Girard Streets in Omaha. On Friday, fire units from Omaha and Irvington were dispatched, as a natural gas leak was suspected. Utility crews found no leak. On Saturday, their union (CWA) instructed their members to stay off work until the situation was stabilized. Management workers reported similar symptoms on Saturday. According to the {World-Herald}, 'Officials from the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Douglas County Health Department were investigating ... and an environmental testing firm from Minneapolis.' WOWT TV showed a picture of a trailer being installed outside the facility to provide a temporary safe environment. As of Monday morning, all tests were inconclusive. I spoke to an employee of a firm which did some tests on the building over the weekend. He stated that '... everyone is totally stumped.' Tests for chlorine, natural gas, monoxide, and biological agents were performed. As of this minute, a followup is on the 10:00pm news on WOWT at this time. They show temporary ducts that were rigged to increase the air flow. They reported that some symptoms still persist for those working in the building. US West announced that moderate delays with DA calls could be expected. Good Day! JSW ------------------------------ From: Ed Greenberg Subject: Knock, Knock! Date: Sat, 8 Jun 91 14:58:15 PDT This is quoted from Action Line, a write-in column of the {San Jose Mercury News}. The paper was dated 8-Jun-1991. "Q: The other day, I was visited by a representative of Heritage Cable, stating he was here to investigate the purchase of an illegal de-scrambler that he said I bought in 1987. He also stated that he had every right to inspect the line that went into our household. I felt outraged to be woken up -- I work nights -- for such a rediculous and demeaning experience. I've had cable at this address since 1986. Does the Heritage Cable representative have the right to inspect inside our house? "A: They do, says Mark Solins, Heritage's director of field service. Solin says the cable company receives lists from the Federal Bureau of Investigation every so often with names of people who bought de-scramblers for the purpose of obtaining a cable station without paying the cable company for the right to the air waves. The FBI doesn't monitor all de-scrambler sales, but does get involved if it learns of illegal activity. Solins says the contract you signed when you signed up for cable allows a company rep the right to inspect the cable service and line. Solins says your name popped up on a recent list the FBI sent to Heritage. Solins says no illegal de-scrambler was found in your home. Evidently, someone who used to live in the rear of your property ordered the de-scrambler, under your name and address and used it to pick up cable waves without subscribing to the service." Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0184 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | CIS: 76703,1070 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | WB2GOH @ N6LDL.CA.USA [Moderator's Note: While it is true that their contract, like the telco, allows them access to inspect their wires and instruments, they have to be reasonable in the time they show up. Since the writer works nights, he had every right to tell them to come back later by appointment. The local cable guys came to my door about a year ago wanting to inspect their wires ... but I don't subscribe to any cable at all! After all, with twelve over-the-air channels here filled with trash 24 hours per day, why should I pay for cable channels? They said the wires on the outside of the building 'appeared to enter the building via the wall to my apartment'. I told them that may be the case, but not being a subscriber, they had no contract with me so why not be nice guys and get lost? They made their usual threats but I heard no more from them. I guess they cut the wire at the pole if in fact it was live ... I don't really know. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1991 11:23:01 EDT From: "Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093" Subject: Pay Phone Mayhem In the business section of today's {Newsday} there is an article about "Pay Phone Mayhem" with the subhead of "Private owners give public service, but high prices and baffling rules stir anger among some users". It starts out by telling of a Brooklyn Law School student who ran up bills for over $30 for three calls lasting four minutes total while using pay phones and having the charges put onto his telephone bill. It further stated that if NY Tel handled the calls the charge would have been $1.65. The body of the article goes on to relate how the AOS' are trying to defend their high charges by claiming everything under the sun. Some of the rules in effect as of now are: "Local calls paid with coins cannot cost more than the $.25 that NY Tel charges for the first three minutes; No charge can be made for directory assistance unless a directory is available. As of July 3, 1991, no charge under any circumstance for directory assistance; All 911 emergency calls mustr be handled without charge; The pay phone must post certain information: 1) The identity of the person or company that provides the phone; 2) Toll free number to obtain rate information; 3) Toll free number for billing or service disputes; 4) Toll free number for the PSC for complaints; 5) Identity of the AOS and instructions for obtaining others; 6) Amount of surcharges that the owner of the premises places on calls from his/her premises. (Note: This is one of the few times that the PSC has backed the consumer; usually it's the utility.) The article concludes by telling about a Long Island resident who used a pay phone owned by an AOS. It seems that when he dialed 0+, there was no bong so he tried 1-0-ATT-0 and got a recording that didn't help. Finally, he went back to 0+ and DEMANDED (emphasis mine) that he be connected with an ATT operator and was put through. Dave Niebuhr Brookhaven National Laboratory BITnet: niebuhr@bnl.bitnet; Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 02:16:15 EDT From: gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us Subject: United Telephone of Pannsylvania While I was in college in Carlisle, Pa., United Telephone replaced their Kellogg K-60 switch with a North (not Northern) Electric NX-1E mega-whizz-bang. A recent posting mentioned that North has cut its business back to just power systems. The NX-1E may be part of the reason why. This was -- brace yourself -- a computer-controlled crossbar switch. That's right, one foot in the future and one in the past. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that North took an existing crossbar design and glommed on computers so they could have a computerized switch quick. This beast had four computers, two to run the switch, and two for backup. It brought with it touch-tone service, call forwarding, et. al., (no call waiting, though) and some quirks of its own. It was clear that the software had gone through far less testing than that of, say, a 1AESS. If you were making a call, it would occasionally drop you into the middle of someone else's conversation. It also had a distressing tendency to go down. When they gave a public tour of the new facility, I asked one of their craftsmen how long it would take to reboot in the event of a crash, and he replied "20 minutes." There were several occasions when all phone service in the entire town was out for 20 minutes. Even weirder was the following: if you dialed any Canadian area code (without the leading "1"), the switch would take the next four digits and send them out a long-distance trunk. This didn't accomplish anything interesting, EXCEPT if you dialed the first four digits of a number served by a step-by-step switch (within the area code). Then, the distant switch would accept the digits and politely wait for more. All you had to do was dial them using a rotary dial. The reason this worked ties in with the recent thread on single- frequency (2600 Hz) signaling. Basically, when a long-distance trunk was idle, it had a steady 2600 Hz tone on it. To seize the trunk, the originating end would remove the tone; to end the call, it would restore it. Thus the tone is analogous to opening the DC path on a standard POTS line. To complete the analogy, pulse dialing was done by sending pulses of 2600. This is a woefully slow method of interexchange signaling, but it was (is?) widely used with stepper equipment. So the Carlisle switch translated the dial pulses to 2600 pulses, which operated the distant step switch just fine. I note from one of Sean Williams' articles that Carlisle is now equipped with a DMS-100. When did that go into service? The NX-1E was put in in 1974. It seems that the US telephone system (except for GTE fiefdoms) is going to be totally 5ESS and DMS-100. Good switches by all accounts, but I'll miss the fun of quirk-hunting. Steve Gaarder gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us gaarder@theory.tc.cornell.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 02:49 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Competition from Regulated Monopolies (was Hollings and Pac*Bell) Jim Redelfs writes: > [Disclaimer: I am an 18+ year employee of US WEST Communications - JR] On my first reading of your article, I missed the disclaimer. But going through my mind was "this guy must work for some LEC". > US WEST Communications began offering "Business Voice Messaging" quite > a while ago, and it has been in the residential market for some > months. All is going well, it is being well accepted and subscribed > to. No doubt. Do you think that a few months is enough time for all of the independents to go away? It will be even more accepted and subscribed to when it is all there is. > I have not checked, so I cannot dispute your claim, but what's wrong > with charging less than your competition - even in this case? Because someone somewhere is making up the difference. You do not get something for nothing. If the telco charges the independent more to connect his system to the network than the telco charges to provide the complete service to an end user, who is subsidizing what? Hint: telco's funds come from its captive ratepayers. > Given that exagerated scenerio, you should be the first on your block, > possibly state, to appear during their rate hearings and request that > Pac*Bell charge MORE for their service! No, I will be the first on my block to ask that it be prevented from offering service on equipment that was capitalized on the backs of its regulated ratepayers--service that is unregulated and designed to compete in a supposedly level marketplace. Who capitalizes the equipment of an independent provider? > I hope not. In fact, this concern may cause me to write my FIRST > letter to my elected representatives - in SUPPORT of the bill. Be sure to mention that you work for a telco and have a vested interest in the matter. I am just a lowly ratepayer who must shell out each month for my telephone. Somehow it galls me to realize that I am paying for equipment that Pac*Bell can use to make money in a totally separate arena. > I think it is time for a little SUBSIDY of my local service! And how do you propose that? Especially in light of the fact that the money you pay for local service actually subsidizes that wonderful voicemail and other things like Centrex. > And if > the little guy can't hack the competition (REAL competition) that is > SLOWLY entering his domain after an absence of almost EIGHT years, so > be it. So your definition of REAL competition is that which comes from a company that has its up-front expenses paid for by a captive ratebase and doesn't have to answer to investors or stockholders (because the capital did not come from them in the first place)? > The Bell Operating Companies have a great potential - a LOT of which > was hogtied by Judge Harold Greene. This is right out of the promotional handbook and is complete and utter rot. Name one (just one) technical innovation that has come to us from an operating company. The Bell Operating Companies have had to get off their collectively stogy butts due to competition (the genuine kind, financed by pioneers and forward-thinking investors). This "great potential" is a myth that was spawned in the PR think-tanks of the RBOC holding companies. > I think the time is LONG OVERDUE > that they be allowed to ENDOW us lowly ratepayers with some of this > FABULOUS technology that, until now, had been either in development, > legally KEPT from us, or available or AFFORDABLE only to business > customers! Like what? All the fabulous technology that I am aware of has come about from outside vendors. There is nothing magic about a telephone company. It is a business. It is a utility. It is a monopoly. It has people doing their jobs. It is not magic. There is no reason that an RBOC holding company manufacturing equipment would be more likely to endow the lowly ratepayer with technology than any other manufacturer. But there sure is a greater chance (and probability) of questionable dealings. > I am not advocating, and would certainly resist, a return to the good, > old days when the phone company was the only show in town. (Remember > when they OWNED the wire and jacks in your home, as well as everything > that was plugged into the system?) Well, if they start making those jacks again (as you advocate), then at the least we will get some kind of line about how the phone service in your home cannot be guaranteed if you use Brand X jacks. Be sure to buy genuine Pac*Bell jacks. Problem with your phone? No wonder; it isn't Genuine Pac*Bell. > The BOCs have concentrated their efforts since deregulation on those > areas where they were legally allowed (with the odd exception > [blush]), and the time has come to see what they can do in their other > areas of expertise. Balderdash! They have been actively fighting for a return to those thrilling days of yesteryear. Much of YOUR money has been spent lobbying and promoting to get into equipment, information providing, voicemail, teleconferencing, video production, cable TV, cellular, and just about every other lucrative communications-related enterprize. I realize you work for a telco, but please do not check your brain at the door when you go to work. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: There are many, many replies on this topic waiting in the queue, but regretfully most of them say nothing new, and with space at a premium, I have to pass on using them. Thanks to all who responded. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #447 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12892; 12 Jun 91 2:41 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa30078; 12 Jun 91 1:09 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab22365; 12 Jun 91 0:04 CDT Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 23:34:48 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #448 BCC: Message-ID: <9106112334.ab21617@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 11 Jun 91 23:34:38 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 448 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Len Rose Sent to Prison [Bill Berbenich] Legalities of European Phone Interfacing [Dave Mc Mahan] Change in Dialing in NPA 206 [David Barts] Question About Crackling on Phone Circuits [Jeff Millar] German Telephone Unification [Linc Madison] 213 / 310 Split [David Gast] ISDN Forum Announcement: You Are Invited! [Tom Kutz] One-Stop Bell Shop [Jim Gottlieb] Street Address Wanted For 619/259 CO [Rick Farris] SaudiNet Update: Mail to the Gulf *Still* Wanted [Ken McVay] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bill@baldric.eedsp.gatech.edu Subject: Len Rose Sent To Prison Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 19:35:39 EDT Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu I found the following on the Associated Press financial wire. ALL INACCURACIES ARE AP's. -------- APf 06/11 1536 Hacker Sentenced BALTIMORE (AP) -- A computer hacker has been sentenced to a year and a day in prison for stealing information from American Telephone & Telegraph and its subsidiary Bell Laboratories. Leonard Rose Jr., 32, an unemployed computer consultant, pleaded guilty in March to one count of sending AT&T source codes via computer to a hacker in Illinois, and a similar wire fraud charge involving a Chicago hacker. Rose was once a member of a nationwide hackers' group called the Legion of Doom. He originally was indicted on charges of computer fraud and interstate transportation of stolen property, but those charges were dropped under a plea agreement. U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz on Monday ordered Rose to sell his computer equipment, which was seized last year in a raid on his home in Middletown, and to tell potential employers of his conviction. He is to begin serving his sentence July 10. The judge did not order restitution to AT&T because Rose has what one of his attornies called "a negative net worth." Bill Berbenich, School of EE, DSP Lab | Telephone: +1-404-894-3134 Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 | uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill | Group 3 fax: +1-404-894-8363 Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu | or: +1-404-853-9171 [Moderator's Note: Len Rose's involvement in activities which brought him to the attention of federal authorities was first reported on Usenet here in TELECOM Digest over a year ago. Mr. Rose was active for several years in Usenet and the internet. His site, 'netsys' was known to many users. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Dave Mc Mahan Subject: Legalities of European Phone Interfacing Organization: Dave McMahan @ NetCom Services Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1991 06:31:15 GMT I have been given the task of figuring out how to connect our latest product to the European phone system. The device I'd like to connect is the receiver end of a simple 10 Baud modem. The other end is a transmit-only box that sends 64 bits of data. The tone protocol is meant to be quick and dirty, as it needs to be decoded via software control. It doesn't have to be fast, just reliable. I am in the process of getting our European representative to send me a phone to modify. My approach is to disconnect the handset, place my receiving device in parallel electrically with the earphone, and use it. Is this legal? The transmitters can be located at any point in Europe, but are most likely to be located in England and Germany. These are the acoustically coupled units and I see no problems with the local phone police about connection to their networks. The receiving end will be in Brussels, Belgium. I have been told by our rep that as long as we don't actually connect to the wall directly, but instead make the connection after the isolation provided by the base unit of the phone, we will be ok. What I need to find out is: 1. What are the legalities of connecting my receive-only unit in parallel with the earphone? Is this acceptable as long as I do it AFTER the base unit isolates me and provides protection? Are there other legalities I need to worry about? If so, who are the governing bodies that may cause me problems and what countries are they located in? 2. I want to make the connection using an isolation transformer to protect me from any wierd ground loops between the computer doing the receiving and the telephone system. What impedance is the earphone most commonly used in Europe? 3. When I get the phone sent to me, I need to hook it up and play with it to make sure it will work. What kind of DC current does such a phone need to operate? Is it similar to a US phone? I plan to get a power supply and set up my own little test network external to any phone company, but would really like to interface the phone to a real phone system (hiding behind the shield of our local company PBX to protect myself, of course). Does this sound feasible? 4. Any other helpful info you can tell me or point me toward. I have completed the US version of the receiver. We got a tape recorder interface down at Radio Shack that allows us to tap into the phone line and still be isolated. It's even FCC certified, which I thought wasn't possible for something that provides direct electrical access to the signal (after the isolation transformer) for who-knows-what kind of application. It's a great little gizmo, and well worth the $25. I wanted to get the equivilent thing for our European version, but was told that this is not possible. I can make an acoustic connection with the receiver, but would like to avoid this approach if I can help it. Direct electrical connection is MUCH less noisy and doesn't provide the distortion introduced by having to go thru the headphone/microphone of the local end. Thanks for your help. Please e-mail me directly by sending stuff to: mcmahan@netcom.com Dave McMahan mcmahan@netcom.com {apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!mcmahan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 22:53:25 pdt From: David Barts Subject: Change in Dialing in NPA 206 I just noticed the following on page A21 of the Seattle White Pages, and thought I'd pass it on to the Digest. My apologies if this has been posted already (our mail feed has been spotty recently). [begin quote] DIALING CHANGES BEGIN JANUARY 12, 1992. Washington's traditional 1 + seven digit dialing within the 206 area code will be phased out beginning in late 1991. Between October 6, 1991, and January 12, 1992, customers will need to begin dialing 1 + 206 + seven digits for all long distance calls within the 206 area code. This change is necessary because of telephone growth in Washington. The new dialing pattern will allow these [sic] numbers currently reserved for area codes to be used for local prefixes, thus making available more combinations for use when assigning telephone numbers. It will also allow customers to continue to know on which calls a charge applies. [Unmeasured service is the norm here - DWB.] After January 12, 1992, you will get a recording telling you how to dial if you have not dialed 1 + 206 + seven digits on long distance calls within the 206 area code. Simply follow the instructions in order to get your call connected. Local calls are not affected by this change. [end quote] I find it interesting that the feature of allowing customers to know if a call is long-distance was one of the reasons for going to 1+206 dialing. I am going to mark these dates down on my calendar and try to be awake the evenings when this takes place (I want to be the last person in NPA 206 to make a 1+7D call and the first to make a 1+206+7D call). Naturally, I'll report the results to the Digest. David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ From: Jeff Millar Subject: Question About Crackling on Phone Circuits Date: 10 Jun 91 17:59:40 GMT Organization: Lockheed Sanders Inc. Some of my phones are starting to crackle ... which causes data connections to generate more and more frequent errors. First, it was only one branch within the house ... any phone connected to that one outlet would crackle, hiss and generally not work acceptably. Then I had to check the line coming into the house (by disconnecting the modular jack in the external telco box) and now all the phones in the house have the crackle. I'm an Elec Eng and should know this stuff ... but all my checks of connections, wiring, show no visible problems. Hopefully someone with experience will know what to do. Thanks in advance. Jeff Millar millar@rocket.sanders.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 02:56:27 PDT From: Linc Madison Subject: German Telephone Unification Well, the June, 1991 Oakland phone book has hit the streets, with a few notable things in it. First off, the expanded local calling area is covered, although they still distinguish between Zone 1 and Zone 2, even though the rates are identical. Second, the surcharge on calling card calls from payphones, which went into effect well before the April 1 cutoff date on the directory, is not mentioned in any way in the section about prices for calling card calls. In fact, in two different places, there are two different figures given for the surcharge; both are wrong if you're at a payphone. But anyhoo, the other thing I noticed is that in the International calling section, they still list "German Democratic Republic" and "Germany, Federal Republic of" as separate countries. (I forgot to check to see if "Wales" and "Tasmania" are still independent nations.) First of all, I think that Pacific Bell has had more than enough notice of the reunification of Germany that they could have made some mention of Germany and then listed "the area formerly the G.D.R." or something like that. Beyond that, though, what are the plans for bringing Germany under a single country code? Have the plans been finalized and a date set, or is it all still up in the air? It seems clearly unacceptable to have Berlin a united city in a unified German nation, but with two country codes. [apologies if this has been covered recently] Linc Madison = linc@tongue1.berkeley.edu = ucbvax!tongue1!linc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 03:28:42 -0700 From: David Gast Subject: 213 / 310 Split Carl Moore writes that: > I should also mention there is a West Los Angeles exchange which is > not to be confused with Los Angeles, as West Los Angeles is being put > in 310. West LA is just a GTE invention. GTE thinks that I live in West Los Angeles, but I live in LA. I pay LA taxes on my phone bill. 10%, in fact, on the entire bill including out of state calls. (The neighborhood is called West Los Angeles, but it is as much a part of LA as midtown is a part of Manhattan. There must be hundreds of the these areas in LA). The dividing line between 213 and 310 on the West side was supposed to La Cienega Blvd. If you lived on the East Side of LCB, you would stay in 213; if you lived on the West Side of LCB, you would switch to 310. Perhaps they have changed their minds. David ------------------------------ From: Tom Kutz Subject: ISDN Forum Announcement: You Are Invited! Date: 11 Jun 91 11:41:11 GMT Reply-To: 1-800-992-ISDN@cs.umd.edu Organization: Comcorps National ISDN Is Here! For Info call 1-800-992-ISDN ISDN FORUM: (first of its type) End-User Equipment and Applications July 9 & 10 Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington D.C. ---------- Organized by the Regional Bell Operating Companies: Ameritech, Bell Atlantic, BellSouth, NYNEX, Pacific Bell, Southwestern Bell, and US WEST; and Bellcore. ---------- Covers : ISDN deployment plans Tariffs Definition of "National ISDN-1" Description of Network Interface and Terminal Guidelines ISDN Applications Programming Interfaces (APIs) Powering, wiring, and extensions Testing and certification Transition issues ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: One-Stop Bell Shop Date: 11 Jun 91 21:11:59 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles In the latest issue of Bell of Pennsylvania's {Centrex Update}, I read: "On January 1, 1991, Bell Atlantic announced the integration of the sales forces of the Bell Atlantic Telephone Company and Bell Atlanticom Systems, Inc., our Customer Premises Equipment Company. By combining these sales forces, business customers now have a single source for network services and equipment needs..." And sure enough, this newsletter is hawking the sales of a certain key telephone system marketed as "a power packed Centrex enhancement." Umm, can they do this? Wasn't the MFJ executed to prevent this sort of thing? Now maybe I could understand it if this newsletter came from some unregulated side of Bell Atlantic. But it doesn't. This is direct from Bell of Pennsylvania. This sure doesn't seem fair. ------------------------------ From: Rick Farris Subject: Street Address Wanted For 619/259 CO Organization: RF Engineering, Del Mar, California Date: Sun, 09 Jun 91 08:59:24 GMT I may be moving my office soon, and because I entertain fantasies of my own leased line connection to the Internet, I'd like to move right next door to my CO. Easier said than done. I live in a small (5k) suburb of San Diego, and I *know* that I have a CO inside the town limits. I even know it's a 1AESS. (619/259) For some reason or other, TPC considers the physical location of its plants to be some kind of top secret information -- probably so that saboteurs won't come ashore and blow them up. I used to think I knew approximately where the CO was, but there's been a fair amount of building in the last five years, and the other day when I went to hunt it down (after the business office wouldn't tell me where it is) I couldn't find it. I tried following lines, but Del Mar is about half underground and half above ground, so everytime I thought the wires looked like they were getting fat, they would dive underground. Not only that, people were looking at me funny as I drove my motorcycle down the street gazing into the sky. After the third near miss I decided to call it a day. So, is there some physical clue (besides fat wires) that I could look for? I know to look for short fat brick buildings. Anything else? Does someone archive addresses of CO's? Rick Farris RF Engineering POB M Del Mar, CA 92014 voice (619) 259-6793 rfarris@rfengr.com ...!ucsd!serene!rfarris serenity bbs 259-7757 [Moderator's Note: And wouldn't it be a pity if after all the time you spent looking you found there was no space available for rent anywhere within a close distance, or the rent was too high, etc. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: kmcvay@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca (Ken McVay) Subject: SaudiNet Update: Mail to the Gulf *Still* Wanted! Organization: 1B Systems Management Limited Date: Sun, 09 Jun 91 06:02:21 GMT SaudiNet is alive and well, and soliciting mail to servicemen and women in the Persian Gulf theatre ... The following addresses are valid for reaching service members in the Gulf theatre: For Army and Air Force people: Any Service Member Operation Desert Storm APO New York 09848-0006 For Marines and Navy people: Any Service Member Operation Desert Storm APO New York 09866-0006 My son, who just returned from the Gulf, where he served with the Marine 2nd. LAI Btn., told me that mail addressed to "Any Marine" was avidly devoured, and passed from hand to hand ... it REALLY made a difference in morale then, and it really makes a difference NOW. PLEASE take a few moments out of your busy day and send a note to a serviceman or woman in the Gulf - the war's over, but our sons and daughters are still there, still lonely, and still delighted to hear from folks back home.... To send mail to the above addresses, address your UUCP mail to: saudinet@oneb.wimsey.bc.ca (Do NOT use the address on the header of this message - it will delay delivery.) Then, at the top left corner of the message TEXT, insert the address in the format shown above. "Any Soldier", "Any Marine," etc. will also work.... I'd love to see a few hundred messages a day passing through our Saudi gateway -- help us make it happen! 1B Systems Management Limited - FrontDoor/TosScan VAR +1-604-754-7423 | Nanaimo, British Columbia, CANADA ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #448 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16567; 12 Jun 91 3:59 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24146; 12 Jun 91 2:15 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab30078; 12 Jun 91 1:09 CDT Date: Wed, 12 Jun 91 0:37:39 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #449 BCC: Message-ID: <9106120037.ab23046@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 12 Jun 91 00:37:32 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 449 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Can You Identify These Mystery Boxes? [Jason Galanter] What Was the Real Reason for Change in AT&T Cards? [Ken Abrams] Useless Phone Books [Jim Rees] Military Telecom Museum Well Worth a Visit [Nigel Allen] NPA 201 Turned Off For 908 [Carl Moore] Help!! E1 Test Equipment Needed! [Tim Monk] More Information on Dialing Changes in 206 [David Barts] Email FTP Access to Archives [Scott Barman] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jason Galanter Subject: Can You Identify These Mystery Boxes? Date: 11 Jun 91 03:30:42 GMT Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh -- Panther Amateur Radio Club I have a couple of boxes that I have absolutely no clue on their use. I am sure someone out there knows what they do and I would appreciate any help that might be availiable, I assume they are long distance carrier access boxes pre-dial-1 service. They are TELTRONICS (division of brand-rex) AD350-DW issue 5 boxes and that is all the info I have ... anyone have any clues? Second, is there a good place to get second hand Merlin equipment? Thanks in advance! Jason Galanter / N3HNR | n3hnr@hpb.cis.pitt.edu 157 Oakview Ave. | galanter@unix.cis.pitt.edu Edgewood, PA 15218-1507 | Jason%cca.uucp@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (412)371-2038 | * How's that for an information-only .sig? [Moderator's Note: Just fine, thank you. I wish all .signatures appended to articles here were as nicely done as yours. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: What Was the Real Reason For Change in AT&T Cards? Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 13:44:32 CDT From: Ken Abrams I think that this latest move on the part of AT&T will lose them an important competetive advangage, that is having the same card number for both local and LD use. In my case, it is certainly making me think long and hard about contacting one of the other companies, not only for credit card service but for 1+ service at home too. Another marketing coup in the mill. Wonder if some other carrier is paying AT&T employees to do these dumb things ... nah, probably would be a waste of money. Additionally I am upset by the misrepresentation of the reason for the changes in the AT&T card numbers. I am no lawyer and I may not know the whole story but I think that the statement something to the affect that the change is being made because of "government rules" is so misleading that it borders on an outright lie. I think the "government rule" that they are referring to is one that simply states "the RBOC must make available to the OCCs the database used for credit card verification and (here comes the important part) the OCC must ***PAY*** the RBOC for using that database." I believe that the main reason for the change is a cost cutting move on the part of AT&T. Simple as that; they don't want to pay the RBOC to share numbers anymore. Anybody at AT&T care to refute or clarify this "government rule" for me. I hope they save big bucks because they will probably lose me as a customer. ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Useless Phone Books Reply-To: rees@citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 20:14:20 GMT Around here, everyone gets two phone books, one from the phone company and one from some sleazy fly-by-night outfit. Everyone I know immediately burns the sleazy book. But the regular book isn't that great either. It seems to have three different sections, each one with pages sequentially numbered from one. This makes it pretty hard to find anything. Let's see, is that page 14 in the Info Pages or page 14 in the Customer Guide Pages? In addition, at one time the book told you when was the cheap time to make a long distance call, and how to make an international call. It doesn't any more. Yes, I know why it doesn't, but it's still annoying. Is it 011 or 01 for operator assisted? I can't ever remember and the book is no help. Are there actually any long-distance carriers that don't use the same access codes as AT&T? If so, why? Well, that's my petty complaining for today. ------------------------------ From: Nigel Allen Subject: Military Telecom Museum Well Worth a Visit Date: 10 Jun 91 19:27:38 If you have an interest in the history of military telecommunications, you qmay want to visit the Canadian Forces Communications and Electronics Museum (formerly the Royal Canadian Signals Museum) at the Vimy Barracks in Kingston, Ontario. Summer hours are 10 am - 4 pm daily; during the rest of the year the hours are 8 am to 4 pm Monday to Friday. The phone number is 613-541-5395, and the mailing address is: Canadian Forces Communicatons and Electronics Museum Vimy Barracks CFB Kingston Kingston, Ontario Canada K7K 5L0 The following information is taken from a museum brochure. I haven't visited the museum yet, and I have no affiliation with the Canadian military. The Royal Canadian Signals Museum was founded in December, 1961 as an archive for history of signalling. In November, 1976 the name was changed to The Canadian Forces Communications and Electronics Museum. Today the Museum has a mandate to display the history of the Canadian Forces Communications and Electronics Branch and all aspects of military communications. Displays range from satellites and modern technology to primitive early radios and momentos recording the many trials and accomplishments of those who wear the "Jimmy" (the Corps of Signals badge, which depicts the Greek god Mercury). This museum is maintained by military personnel of the Canadian Forces School of Communications and Electronics and by many friends of the Museum, both civilian and miliary. The displays will be of interest to all who visit Kingston and would like to take a pleasant strol through history. Perchance a photo will show the face of a friend or relative. While in Kingston be sure to visit the Museum and any of the fifteen museums and galleries open to the public. Brochures and additional information are available on request. (description of rooms within the museum) Air Force Room. Records the contribution of the Royal Canadian Air Force. Items from Clinton, radar statons and airfields. Burtt Room. Line displays in Line Training Building B-15. World War I Room. Items depicting the efforts of the Signalmen of 1914-18. Items include a switchboard dugout and the original model for the Vimy Ridge Memorial. The Corps Room. Momentos of the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals, including Ermintrude, the Corps' Mascot of the 19330's. Early Classroom. Visit an early classroom which depicts lige in 1920's Camp Borden, the original home of the Signal Corps. Between the Wars. See the early efforts in mobile radio detachments and the "Alberta" radio station. World War II Room. Pictures and items tell the story of the war. See the suitcase radio and intercept equipment used by the "Intrepid" men, 1945 German surrender documents and equipment used right up to 1970. Museum Kit Shop. Also the Curator's office. Many Branch and gift items available. Telecommunications. Items range from one of the best telephone colections in the world to cable layers and radioteletype. Main Entrance. Display cases show equipment used and special items of Major Bruce Carruthers, a founder of the Canadian Signal Corps. Uniform Room. Many orders of dress. Pictures of early Signal Corps basic training troops and Apprentice soldiers. Satellites. The Canadian involvement. Northwest Territories and Yukon Room. Canada's original communications in the north provided by the military. An account of the "Mad Trapper of Rat River" by one who was present and many station logs. Supplementary Radio System. The military communications research effort since the 1930's. German Room. Items captured in two wars. See the flags that flew on England's doorstep for four years. UN and NATO. Canada's efforts to promote world peace and to fight aggression. Items from the Congo, Egypt, Korea, Cyprus, Vietnam and Iran. US Signal Corps. Items that were presented by our colleagues to the south. Technology Hall. Demonstrating milestones in military communication this display area is always in a state of change. The Book of Remembrance. Located at the Main Entrance to the Building. Also radar antennas, in McNaughton Barracks these Pinetree - Cadin Line items are adjacent to the proposed new site for the Museum. Directions: Follow Highway 2 east for one mile from Kingston to the Vimy Gate. Turn right at the gate and follow the signs to the rear of the Forde Building. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 14:13:46 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: NPA 201 Turned Off For 908 Times are Eastern Daylight: I was able to test the full cutover of 908 by calling the Great Adventure recording at 928-1821. It still worked with area code 201 at around 4 AM last Saturday. But 201 had been turned off when I tried it again at around midnight between Monday and Tuesday. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 14:47:46 CDT From: Tim Monk Subject: Help!! E1 Test Equipment Needed! I am in desperate need of a CEPT (E1) 'drop and insert pod'. This 'pod' would allow me to drop an E1 channel to a serial and insert serial data into an E1 channel. I've been told by several people that such a device exists but nobody has been able to direct me to the company that makes them. If you have any information, please e-mail me ASAP!!! Thanks! Tim Monk INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation timmo@i88.isc.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 9 Jun 91 23:13:40 pdt From: David Barts Subject: More Information on Dialing Changes in 206 Just after I submitted my excerpt from the White Pages, I decided to try placing a 1+206 LD call to the recording at the Kent Cinemas: 859-0000 (note the last four digits -- I wonder how much arguing the theatre had to do to get *that* number). It worked! The last time I tried placing an LD call this way (several months ago; I don't exactly remember when), I got a recording saying I had misdialed. Both calls were placed from my home phone (in NE Seattle and served by the EMerson CO). David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jun 91 12:35:19 EDT From: Scott Barman Subject: Email FTP Access to Archives Patrick, We discussed once before trying to get those of us with uucp-only access to be able to get to the Telecom Archives. Well, if someone hasn't informed you yet, I found something in one of the comp.unix.* newsgroups. I got the following by sending a message with only "help" in the body to ftpmail@decwrl.dec.com: >Date: Wed, 5 Jun 91 14:36:54 -0700 >From: crdgw1!Decwrl.dec.com!nobody (ftpmail daemon on uucp-gw-1.pa.dec.com) >To: scott@nbc1.ge.com >Subject: your ftpmail request has been received >>>> this help file was last edited on 15-February-1991 >>>> commands are: > reply set reply addr, since headers are usually wrong > connect [HOST [USER [PASS]]] defaults to gatekeeper.dec.com, anonymous > ascii files grabbed are printable ascii > binary files grabbed are compressed or tar or both > compress compress binaries using Lempel-Ziv encoding > compact compress binaries using Huffman encoding > uuencode binary files will be mailed in uuencode format > btoa binary files will be mailed in btoa format > ls (or dir) PLACE short (long) directory listing > get FILE get a file and have it mailed to you > quit terminate script, ignore rest of mail message > (use if you have a .signature or > are a VMSMAIL user) >>>> notes: > -> you must give a "connect" command, default host is > gatekeeper.dec.com, default user is anonymous, default > password is your mail address. > -> binary files will not be compressed unless 'compress' or 'compact' > command is given; use this if at all possible, it helps a lot. > -> binary files will always be formatted into printable ASCII > with "btoa" or "uuencode" (default is "btoa"). > -> all retrieved files will be split into 60KB chunks and mailed. > -> VMS/DOS/Mac versions of uudecode, atob, compress and compact > are available, ask your LOCAL wizard about them. > > -- Ftpmail Submission Transcript -- ><<< help >>>> Help is on the way. > -- End Of Ftpmail Transcript -- I have not tried it yet (other than to get this help listing), but it looks promising! I hope this helps the telecom readers ... I'm looking forward to trying it myself. scott barman scott@nbc1.ge.com [Moderator's Note: And the other method available, recently started just for telecom readers is discussed in this earlier message: Subject: New Telecom Archives Server on Line; Current Index of Files Date: Wed, 29 May 1991 00:00:00 GMT I am pleased to announce a new mail service is available for use with the Telecom Archives. It is just in the beginning stages, and will have more and more of our files on line as time goes on. My understanding is this service is *only* for the Telecom Archives at this time. Furthermore, this service is intended for NON-INTERNET sites who would otherwise not have access via ftp. If you can use ftp lcs.mit.edu, then you are strongly encouraged to continue doing so. The program described below was written by Doug Davis so that our many readers on the commercial mail services, Fido, and similar sites (Portal and Chinet for example) can also participate. FIRST, here is a help file, prepared by Doug Davis: From: "Doug Davis at letni.lonestar.org" Subject: Help File Date: 27-May-91 23:14:40 CST (Mon) This mail server is pretty simple minded, commands are sent as a single line in the body of the message. The ``Subject:'' (if any) will be returned as the subject line from the mail off of this site. This way you can keep track of your own requests. The following commands are available. Pretend the parser is stupid and spell and space them exactly as they are listed here. Anything else in in the body of the message will be quietly ignored. Path:{rfc-976/internet/@) return address for yourself} The parameter of this command should be internet style notation for your username. If your machine is not locateable on the internet via an MX record or gethostbyname() don't bother trying this, since the returning mail will undoubtably be lost. Command:[sub-command]{parameters/filenames} Currently the only supported subcommand right now is "send" with the parameters being the filenames separated via spaces to be sent via return mail to you. For example, to get the index file, send the server a message with the line below in the body of the message. Command: send index This will cause the index of available files to be sent back to you. Also, this is a system V site (hey it was cheap) so you will have to request the file via it's short time. Some later version of the server software will work with the longer names. Oh, yeah, in the above, means the space-bar, i.e. a character with the value of 0x20 hex. Not the word itself. Mailing addresses: telecom-archive-request@letni.lonestar.org: The mail server itself telecom-archive-server@letni.lonestar.org: Returning mail to you will come from this address. Mail sent TO this address will be silently ignored. doug@letni.lonestar.org: My address. Other notes, There is a 500k (per-day) limit on messages leaving the server. If the backlog has exceeded this you will be sent a short note saying your request is acknowledged and how many requests are in the queue before yours. Also presently the back issues of the Digest are being reformatted and are not presently available, my hope is to finish them by the first part of June. doug (Mon May 27 1991) -------------- I assume by now (6-12-91) Doug has the index a little more complete in case you have not checked it out recently. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #449 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19822; 12 Jun 91 5:17 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa07078; 12 Jun 91 3:24 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab24146; 12 Jun 91 2:16 CDT Date: Wed, 12 Jun 91 1:16:13 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #450 BCC: Message-ID: <9106120116.ab06222@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 12 Jun 91 01:16:03 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 450 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: St. Louis Phone Outage, Redundancy, and Backups [Bill Berbenich] Re: St. Louis Phone Outage [Kirk Moir] Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone [John Higdon] Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor [John Higdon] Re: RBOC's Can Now Manufacture Equipment [Scott Hinckley] Re: Emergency Highway Phones [Kenton A. Hoover] Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire [Paul Wexelblat] Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? [Raymond C. Jender] Re: Easy Fax to ASCII? [Ralf Bayer] Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus [John R. Covert] Re: Transporting a Bitstream on a Video Channel [Bob Clements] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bill@baldric.eedsp.gatech.edu Subject: Re: St. Louis Phone Outage, Redundancy, and Backups Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 11:13:12 EDT Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu I just reread my recent posting to TELECOM Digest and realized that I had misstated my thoughts by 180 degrees. The first sentence in the third paragraph should read: "I believe that since they are inevitable, occasional telephone network failures are not only ACCEPTABLE [was unacceptable :-)] but unavoidable [over a period of time]." Sorry for the error. I'd guess many of you realized something was wrong. It was just tough to figure just what in the world it was that I was trying to say. It was tough for me! Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu ------------------------------ From: Kirk Moir Subject: Re: St. Louis Phone Outage Reply-To: Kirk Moir Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd. Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 21:52:08 GMT My complements to Brad on his efforts. This is an excellent account. Is it possible to supply information re the following questions: a) Who manufactured the "high capacity digital cross-connection system"? I am under the assumption that some kind of DCC switch died. Please correct me if required. b) What were the data rates of the affected 2800 services? 2.4Kbps, DS3, etc.? c) What kind of network management was in place to deal with this kind of outage? d) Did spare capacity exist? Could the trouble theoretically have been routed around or were most problems associated with non-redundant subcriber lines? Thanks in advance. Kirk Moir Voice: (604) 293-5375 MPR Teltech Ltd. FAX: (604) 293-5787 8999 Nelson Way Internet: moir@mprgate.mpr.ca Burnaby, B.C. CANADA V5A 4B5 (134.87.131.13) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Jun 91 20:53 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Rotary Dial Phones Forgotten But Not Gone Julian Macassey writes: > The voltage applied to the Tip and Ring to activate the light is > usually 90V at 100Hz. This frequency is ignored by the frequency > sensitive ringer that responds to 40 - 150V at 20 Hz. The neon is not > frequency sensitive, so it flashes for message waiting or ring > current. ITT uses a similar, but much simpler method of lighting the message waiting lamp. The System 3100 just sends 60 ipm pulses of 100VDC over the line. The direct current is completely ignored by the ringer, but lights the neon lamp. Unlike the 100Hz, there is no flow through any circuitry except for the neon lamp. In addition to being much more difficult to generate (than DC), some of the 100Hz will inevitably leak through the L/C bell network creating a bit of inefficiency. The DC supply is very simple and cheap. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 00:21 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Busying Out a Phone With a Resistor I could not RESIST adding my two cents -- plain to all of this extensive discussion about what value resistor to busy out a phone line with. For a quarter century, when it has been necessary to busy out a phone line I have simply shorted it. In the case of ground start, I have shorted it and grounded it as well. I had one trunk left this way for about a year. Came back, pulled the short and the line came right back to life. No CO switch, modern or ancient, gives a hoot or a holler about what kind of load is on a line. It is all current limited in the subscriber line equipment. The only complaint you will ever get from telco is from the act itself of busying out the line. This bugs some telcos more than others. But from all this discussion, a new product idea is emerging. How about "The Busystat". It could have an RJ11C plug on it. And it would be guaranteed to avoid drawing excessive current on the line, avoiding those expensive service calls. Phooey! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Scott Hinckley Subject: Re: RBOC's Can Now Manufacture Equipment Date: 11 Jun 91 13:56:35 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com In Ken.McVay@onebdos.oneb.wimsey.bc.ca (Ken McVay) writes: > To compare cable TV rates and illustrate the cost situation, Rogers > Cable in Toronto charged CAD$18.56 per month, including tax (or about > USD$16.90, depending on exchange rates). Com-Cast out of West Palm > Beach, FL charges well into the USD$20's/month and has plenty of local > advertising superimposed on its offerings (like CNN). Meanwhile, there > are tales of vastly reduced rates in those U.S. jurisdictions that > have allowed a competing cable company to start up business. We have competing cable companies here (Comcast and Cable Alabama). I am on Comcast (descision of the apt complex, not me) which runs $11.50/month for 34 channels including; MTV, VH-1, CNN, Headline News, TNN, TNT, and many others. HBO, Cinemax, Showtime and Disney are each $7/month. A converter (required for HBO, Cinemax, or Disney) runs $1.00/month. Cable Alabama runs $12.95/mont for 53 channels. HBO, Shotime, Cinemax, TMC, and Disney are $7.68/month each. A converter box (required for pay channels) is $4.00/month. Both companies are reported to be running at a large deficit, and have been requesting permission to merge for several years. (Brendon?) Cable has offered to buy them several times. The city council refuses to let either event happen. 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: "Kenton A. Hoover" Subject: Re: Emergency Highway Phones Date: 11 Jun 91 13:06:17 GMT In Northern California, some of the new phones are outside the main cell areas. Specifically, there are some on Highway One north of Santa Cruz and some on I-580 in the hills between Oakland and Pleasanton. On those phones, they change the usual cell phone antennas for yagis. Most of the yagis on the Santa Cruz units point dead south towards Monterey. As to security, I wouldn't worry too much about it. The usual roadside robbery scam is to put a woman in apparent distress on a deserted road, to encourage concerned motorists to stop. When someone stops and approachs the car, the woman's compatriots appear and relieve the good samaritian of his or her valuables. This scam doesn't appear too often, since one report is usually enough to get the local highway patrol or state police to pay more attention. Kenton A. Hoover Chief Engineer | shibumi@well.sf.ca.us Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link +1 415 332 4335 | shibumi%kc6sst@w6rfn.ampr.org ------------------------------ From: Paul Wexelblat Subject: Re: Looking for Inexpensive Outside Wire Reply-To: mailrus!ulowell!wex@uunet.uu.net Organization: Univ. of Lowell CS Dept. Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1991 18:01:48 GMT Additional comment about burying wire (any kind): Go to your local dump (landfill), if you have one, and collect all the old discarded garden hose (leaky is ok), and run any underground wiring through that. [national electrical code insists on physical protection near ground level, but allows direct burial... (I know you were talking about Phone, but the garden hose idea applies to any...] Anyhow, the hose provides very good protection from shovels provides a conduit for pulling/replacing wire ( if you put in an extra pull wire, you can later pull something else through. (use separate hoses for AC) Hose is easier to pull up later if necessary. It is cheap, and gets some real use out of trash!! Wex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 13:54:24 EDT From: Raymond C Jender Subject: Re: New PIN for my AT&T Card? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article gdw@gummo.att.com (Gordon D Woods) writes: > In article , by wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill > Huttig) writes: >> I was surprised that the number 253 was used as Carrier ID and not 288 >> like the PIC. It would have made more sense to use the PIC's. > What is a PIC? I've seen it several times and no one has defined it. > [Moderator's Note: His reference was to the five-digit carrier codes > which can be used at the start of a long distance dialing sequence > to route the call via a particular carrier; i.e. 10222 = MCI; 10777 > = Sprint; 10288 = AT&T. These are a few, there are many more. PAT] Pat, Just to clarify, the PIC is the Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier. It is the carrier of choice that is assigned to a subscribers line for all non-10XXX dialed interlata calls. It is the XXX portion of 10XXX. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 10:29:16 BST From: Ralf Bayer Subject: Re: Easy Fax to ASCII? In telecom 11/445 William Vajk writes: > In article Claudio Nieder writes: >> We are looking for a solution which can be implemented without any >> costly program development etc. The best solution would be if there >> already exists some product which would make the fax machine appear >> to the program like a local printer, so that no change to the existing >> software is necessary. > [stuff about the complicated fax protocol deleted] > There was another fax related message here the other day, and I was in > process of responding when the computer went bye-bye. It was a request > for an easy conversion to ascii from fax. Because of the graphic > nature of fax, and the fact that there is no assurance of the style > and pitch of type received, one would actually have to be at the edge > of some serious AI to achieve the goal requested. Anyone who has used > an optical scanner and worked to convert a long document to ascii from > typed sheets can attest to the difficulties of accurate conversion > given only one character set to decipher. Couldn't agree more. Given the looks of many faxes, humans have sometimes a hard time to figure it out, let alone computers. > On the other hand, to convert from ascii to fax is relatively easy, > but certainly not easy enough to make a fax machine into a computer > peripheral. Well, that's not quite true. There are several vendors of fax cards with associated software. These things transfer ASCII directly into fax format, and the quality of the resulting fax is much better than one printed out and scanned in. These fax cards plug into a standard PC. They are also able to receive faxes, but they only store the FAX/TIFF/whatever graphics format on disk, no conversion to ASCII provided. Setting the thing up to accept input from a serial or parallel PC port and sending it out over the fax line shouldn't be that difficult. It might be necessary to dedicate the PC to the job, though (but then again, clones are dirt cheap today, aren't they?). Ralf Bayer Motorola European Cellular Infrastructure Division .uunet!motcid!glas!bayerr Standard Disclaimers Apply. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 14:21:50 PDT From: "John R. Covert 11-Jun-1991 1710" Subject: Re: Modification of Ringback Tone by Subscriber Apparatus > I think Tom Gray was right when he said if a PBX gives you a double > ring you're paying for the call. He's wrong, at least in the case of 416 392-7715 and most other cases. > I've asked three telecom CO people this question and all agreed -- the > last CO through which the call passed passes the ringing tone. That > is true even on DID connections. If you get a double ring from a PBX > it is because the PBX returned answer supervision and is supplying its > own ring. Kath, you're simply wrong. I happen to be an expert on DID trunks and PBXs. I either know more than the CO people you talked to, or you did not ask the right questions or understand their answers. DID trunks work as follows: CO seizes the trunk and sends digits to PBX. CO cuts voice path through to PBX. What the caller hears from now on, ring, busy, or recording, comes directly from the PBX. At some point, the PBX may or may not return answer supervision. Until the PBX does so, the call is free, regardless of what sounds come out of the PBX. For this reason, AT&T, on long distance circuits, does not cut a FORWARD voice path through until answer supervision is returned. It's pretty simple. If the CO were providing ring, busy, recordings, etc., you would have to have a protocol from the PBX to the C.O. that told the C.O. whether to send a ring or a busy signal. And there would be no way that you could get no charge recordings provided by the PBX that tell you that an extension isn't valid and give you the main number. There is no such protocol in use on DID trunks. The ONLY information a DID trunk can send to the C.O. is answer supervision. There is no way for a DID trunk to tell the C.O. to provide ringing tone or busy or other responses once the digits have been sent to the PBX. As I said in an earlier reply, I called 416 392-7715 and received a double ring. I did this from a line which provides a positive indication of answer supervision. There was a double ring, and there was no answer supervision. If you choose not to believe the experts, there's not much more I can say. john ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Transporting a Bitstream on a Video Channel Date: Tue, 11 Jun 91 09:11:01 -0400 From: clements@bbn.com In article rmz@ifi.uio.no writes: > Does anyone know about existing hardware that puts a bitstream on a > video channel and let you extract the same bitstream out of the video > video signal, after it has been transmitted on standard video > transport media such as satellite links, video cassettes and cable TV > networks. > But, the Big Question is: Does this hardware exist? Devices exist to put compact-disc audio bit streams on videotape as "PCM" signals in NTSC format. Examples are the Sony PCM-501 and PCM-601. I have used them to record CD audio for storage and also to distribute it around the house on coax as a channel 3 video RF signal. This format has been used on the air in Boston to transmit audio from WGBH radio over WGBX TV (channel 44). How you get your data into the format of a CD player's digital output is a good question, though. Also, there are devices for recording on a VCR from a PC for backup. I assume (but haven't tried it) that the video signal that goes to the VCR could be shipped around by the video transport media you mention. I haven't actually used one of these things so I can't give you any better specifics. Check rec.audio for the former and the ibm-pc hardware group for the latter. Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com [Moderator's Note: As mentioned a couple issues ago, a large number of REply messages on Hollings and other worn-out threads had to be dumped out unused in order to stay current with new items. If your REply message on an existing topic did not appear in this issue, you can pretty well assume it won't appear. This would apply to ACKS sent from here prior to 1 AM, 6-12-91. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #450 ******************************